Football It won’t be free: the severe sanctions that Marcelo Bielsa risks for his criticism of Conmebol

Marcelo Bielsa He never gave up criticizing Conmebol and the organization of the Copa América. Since Uruguay was eliminated from the competition, the Argentine coach has given multiple reasons to refer to irregularities that, according to him, ended up harming not only his team, but also others, due to different decisions and situations. I would not have to back down either. The tournament’s shortcomings persisted until the end. The definition between Argentina and Colombia ended up being a summary of the organizational shortcomings exposed by the Rosario player. As the canvas that was once dedicated to him in Argentina maintains, Time has finally proven him right . And it didn’t take long to grant it.

However, in football, speaking more than is allowed usually leads to consequences. That day, in fact, Conmebol announced the opening of a disciplinary file against the strategist. Fear of reprisals for the technical director’s remarks has now become a concrete threat The strategist, although he forgets the responsibility of his students in the origin of the embarrassment, defended the right of the footballers to protect their families in danger because of the actions of the supporters of the café, although he did so by harshly attacking the organization. The reasons, however understandable, put him in the crosshairs of the South American football authorities, with Alejandro Domínguez at the helm . This is where the main danger to your luck lies.”He who exalts himself loses part of his reason. I have reviewed everything I have said and everything I have said is true. I allow myself to affirm this, because if what I say were not true it would be a shame. What I said is true and verifiable.” said the former Chilean coach, to confirm his complaints, before entering decisively into the analysis of the match against Canada, in which the Celeste won the consolation prize: third place in the continental competition.

For now, Conmebol has announced an investigation into those involved in the disputes after the match. This is of course a threatening scenario for the Uruguayans: they risk losing 11 players for the following matches, including the qualifiers. FIFA regulations state that sanctions must be carried out in the official competition immediately following .

Anything related to Bielsa’s complaints falls under the jurisdiction of the disciplinary unit, who can act ex officio and who refers to the Disciplinary Code to determine possible sanctions . Article 14, referring to incorrect behaviour, indicates, in number 8, a possibility of sanction for the coach. “A player or official who, during a match or competition, publicly incites hatred or violence will be sanctioned in accordance with the provisions of Article 6.2 of this Code. In addition to the above, it will be considered aggravating if it is committed through social networks or mass media (such as the press, radio or television). “, slogan. Naturally, the parties’ lawyers go back and forth to question each meaning and its respective applicability.

An example of this is the sanction that Lionel Messi received after the 2019 Copa America. . After the shock in which the Albiceleste beat Chile in the definition of third place, a duel in which he was sent off for the confrontation with Gary Medel, the star launched himself against the confederation.We don’t have to be part of this corruption and disrespect that has been shown to us throughout this cup. “, Filming. The response seemed forceful, although appropriate: a three-month suspension from matches for the Argentine team and a fine of $50,000. Likewise, it can serve as a precedent for decisions that could be adopted in the Rosario case.

There is another regulation that might have greater jurisdiction in this regard: the Code of Ethics of Conmebol . Article 24 of this regulation expressly qualifies defamation as a punishable offence. In fact, the specific paragraph bears this name.Persons subject to this Code are prohibited from making defamatory statements about Conmebol, its Member Associations, members of the Board or any other person subject to this Code. “, establishes the first paragraph.

The following are the relevant sanctions: “Failure to comply with this article will be punished by the corresponding fine, the minimum amount of which will be five thousand US dollars (sic), as well as the obligation to publicly retract by means proportional to those in which the offense was committed and, in addition, may impose the sanction of prohibition from carrying out activities related to football for a maximum period of two years. she declares.

And he adds: “In the most serious cases, or in the event of a repeat offence, a ban on football-related activities could be imposed for a maximum period of five years. “. Without a doubt, the worst possible scenario for the transandine.

In any case, you have to pay attention to one detail: Bielsa’s latest statements have been much more measured than his initial performance, which, ultimately, can be seen as a mitigating circumstance. . In the worst case, even may resort to public apologies to mitigate an overly harsh punishment .