“The hospital report, the report that the doctor would have written.”

The countdown to a judicial clarification of what happened on Sunday evening at G. Karaiskakis begins next Thursday with Olympiacos summoned to apologize by the Super League 1 Disciplinary Committee.

The fact that Panathinaikos was not included in the indictment is interpreted to mean that the judge initially took into account the objective fault of the home team for injuring Juancar due to the thrown firecrackers and stopping the match, and that there was no reprehensible participation of Panathinaikos or the player on leave. From there, he will decide the amount of the penalty, based on the match sheet prepared by the referee, the doctor’s opinion, the observer’s report and the police, but obviously also the forensic report of the hospital.

Regardless of the peculiarities involved in sports law, it is clear that common sense has succeeded in this particular matter. The league referee, who is the regular, will examine the positions of the “red and white” and will decide either on their punishment (possible cancellation of the match and awarding the match to Panathinaikos, deduction of points and a large fine), or what is better. It is a case for them to continue the match from the 49th minute, where it stopped.

Naturally, it should be noted that apart from the basic penalty, Olympiacos can appeal to the EPO Appeals Committee as well as to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
But it seems that the specific incident is what the Cape sports legislator did not expect, in the event of a suspension due to injury, and relates to the objective and subjective criteria that are taken into account when making the decision.

“K” requested the opinion of the famous jurist Giorgos Vitas, PAE PAS Ioannina’s lawyer for several years, who dealt with dozens of cases that unfolded inside and outside the stadiums.

He does not hide that the obvious guilt involved in the misconduct of Olympiacos fans by throwing fireworks is only one side of the coin.
“This specific case will make it particularly difficult for the judge who will be handling the matter so far, as Panathinaikos will not be among the calls, because he has attributed the blame to Olympiacos. This as a subjective is involved with the objective element. If you want my personal opinion, it has been reported that the Panathinaikos player He suffered a temporary loss of hearing and an attack of dizziness, the hospital reported, after firecrackers exploded near him but also behind him, that is, without him being prepared and apparently caused a fire. Shock at the same time. However, there were no clinical findings. There were no obvious wounds and penetrations that constitute indisputable physical damage visible to the eye and on-site examination, at least on the field. Therefore, the other party or any other person with an interest can claim that the player at the time of the injury was lying and pretending. This is a fact that you cannot evaluate in the field. “The beginning. Especially since the doctor, as he stated in his opinion, did not have the appropriate medical equipment in the dressing room in order to make an accurate diagnosis.”

If one embraces the first version, Olympiacos’ guilt is indisputable. In the second version, can the claim that Panathinaikos refuse to continue the match and pretend the footballer was injured be relied upon?

He added: “I do not think, as far as I have information from the hospital report, at least it was leaked to the media. The fact that only Olympiacos is included in the indictment means that from everything that happened and especially from the opinion of the hospital, to which the player went for further monitoring It is assumed that in the first place there was an injury to the athlete and more than that. That he is responsible for the injury of the footballer’s owner and that he is accused of it. Basically, the hospital’s opinion is the opinion that the match doctor would have written if he had had the appropriate tools to examine the player in the dressing room. But this is not possible in most cases. It is possible that in Article 15 of suspension for throwing objects and injury, which is called Olympiacos, an amendment will be made for causing physical injuries that are not visible to the naked eye, in terms of when the match sheet is closed and whether the The arbitrator waited for the opinion. Then he was transferred to the nearest hospital to conduct more tests and the opinion of the doctors there is the solution.”