The reasons that the sporting ruling bodies exist, are to regulate their respective sports, and to punish behaviors and instances where the rules have not been kept. When their decisions appear not to be the same for every club or athlete involved, meaning preferential treatment, then the general public cannot have trust. And if there is no trust there is no basis for either the normal fans, or to any other person or entity in the chain of the industry, like the top Asian or European bookmakers, to abide by those same rules, is there?
Olympique Lyonnais scandal is effectively accepted
Just three weeks ago, the French La Direction Nationale du Contrôle de Gestion (DNCG), announced a decision to punish Olympique Lyonnais for their financial misconduct that resulted in a deficit in excess of 175 million Euros. And there lies the first disagreement with the procedure that DNCG followed. They found out about the infringement in November and should have punished the club right then. There are countless cases where in such occurrences, clubs of other countries with lesser leagues, where immediately punished.
In contrast, Lyon was given eight months to take steps to rectify the situation. In fairness, owner John Textor, did implement measures to that direction. However, on Jun 28, the board decided that they were not enough, therefore, the club should be relegated to Ligue 2. At the time, Lyon appealed the decision and it was announced a few days ago, that they actually won it and they will play both at the Europa League and the French Ligue 1. Effectively, that decision, ratified the misconduct. Even if something was done, if it indeed was not enough, then the original decision should have stood.
There’s still a significant deficit
At the time of the relegation, the word was that the amount of 175 million was just the tip of the iceberg. The actual amount could be as high as 500 million. The basis of the decision was that while steps were taken, there still was no balance between income and expenses and, therefore, there was still a negative ratio that would lead to further increase of the deficit. So, what could the further explanations that the club gave during the appeal provide, to make the ruling body change its mind?
The additional actions that Olympique Lyonnais took, were to change the board of directors, with John Textor submitting his resignation as president of the club, the sale of three players, and the infusion of 83 million Euros from the parent company, Eagle Football Group. So, we have to assume, that these were enough to convince the board to allow the club to compete to Ligue 1.
Why was it even allowed?
What we have here, is a warning to rectify a wrongdoing instead of a direct punishment, the granting of an unreasonably long period of time to comply with the warning, a decision to relegate, and then all of it just thrown under the carpet. As aforementioned, this is not the procedure that was followed in other similar cases and with far smaller amounts of deficit.
So, what’s the point of having rules when those that are responsible for enforcing those rules just disregard them? How can it build trust so that people who open accounts at the best betting software, can be sure that their wagers are not influenced by outside factors? Esepcially when those factors have to do with those that are supposed to uphold justice?
