Why Conmebol disqualified Independiente | OneFootball

The verdict was decisive: disqualification from the South American Cup, a seven-match suspension for the home crowd and another seven for the away crowd, and a fine of 250,000 dollars to be deducted from television rights and sponsorship. This is the penalty that Conmebol imposed on Independiente for the incidents against Universidad de Chile. La U, on the other hand, will play the quarterfinals of the international competition against Alianza Lima, their fans will be banned from attending the stadium for international tournaments for the same number of matches as El Rojo and the club will have to pay 120,000 dollars.

The measure sparked debate and was objected to by Independiente. "Football lost, the violent ones won," the club from Avellaneda posted on its social networks, in a clear sign of dissatisfaction. The decision was taken unanimously by three members of the Disciplinary Committee: Paraguayan Eduardo Gross Brown, Brazilian Lucas Ribeiro, and Venezuelan Amarilis Belisario. Argentine Jorge Ignacio Moreno and Chilean Cristóbal Valdés did not participate in the vote, given the origin of the clubs involved.

What were the arguments of the entity that governs South American football to justify the sentence? The sanction was based on the application of various articles of the Security Regulations, as stated in the Disciplinary Code and the Club Manual.

Firstly, they considered that Independiente violated two points of Article 22: the presence of bladed weapons and also of firecrackers inside the stadium was recorded. Section 8.2 explains that "Member Associations and clubs are responsible for security and order both inside and in the vicinity of the stadium, before, during and after the match they host. This responsibility extends to all incidents of any nature that may occur." It should be noted that it was the Chilean fans who entered with these prohibited items.

That regulation also violated three other points of section 12.1, which indicates that organizers must assess "the level of risk posed by the organization of matches and indicate to Conmebol those that pose a risk to normal development", in addition to "complying and applying existing safety standards and taking all those safety measures required by circumstances that occur in the stadium and its surroundings before, during and after the match". The entity also clarifies that the host club must "ensure order in the stadiums and their surroundings, as well as the correct organization of the matches". In Luque, they believe that Independiente was at fault in all these aspects.

It was also argued the violation of four points of Article 12.2, which refers to "invasion or attempted invasion of the pitch; throwing of objects; collective aggression, fight or tumult and lack of order or discipline committed in the stadium or its surroundings before, during and at the end of a match".

Finally, Independiente was accused of not complying with section 5.1.11 of the Club Manual. It states that "the interruption, suspension, abandonment or cancellation of the match are extreme measures that should only be taken in clear threats to the safety of players, officials or the public. In these cases, the Conmebol crisis management protocol should be followed, involving all those responsible for making decisions". At Conmebol, they believe that Independiente has greater responsibility in the outcome of the cancellation of the match for having been the host.

The board, led by Néstor Grindetti, is considering appealing the ban on attendance at stadiums for Independiente's public and the economic sanction, but the disqualification is already a fait accompli. In Avellaneda, they also know that, in case of recurrence in the future, the sanctions could be much more severe.

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇪🇸 here.