A Barcelona-based lawyer has accused FIFA of coming down hard on Luis Suarez because of Press reaction to his biting of Giorgio Chiellini.
Roman Gomez Ponti has been interviewed by AS regarding Suarez’s four-month ban from all football as Barca wait to confirm the signing of the Liverpool forward.
He added that since the official reports on the match make little or no mention of the incident, FIFA can only have acted based on Press reports which, he claims, is a violation of the rules on punishments.
“From the beginning I’ve had the impression that the members of [FIFA’s] Disciplinary Committee acted from the media impact of different images at the end of the match,” Gomez Ponti said.
“[That is based on] how they arrived at the punishment, after all the noise that followed the action of Suarez on Chiellini. From reading the sanction I’m surprised to see the basis of punishment is the subjective judgements of members of the Committee.
“The heads of the Disciplinary Committee followed the protocol established in this type of situation. Just after the game and the next day and checking what happened on the replay, the reports of the referee and others were requested.
“They found nothing. None of the official match documents expressed in writing the actions [of Suarez], hence what I was saying, the punishment is purely down to the reporting.
“The penalty is a clear violation of the presumption of innocence. It’s disproportionate to the demonstrated behaviour and is humiliating, undermines the dignity of the game and makes no sense.”
Suarez and Uruguay have already had one appeal against the ban rejected and are to take their case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Barca are backing Suarez and Gomez Ponti praised the club’s actions, but stressed that they aren’t officially involved in the case.
He also said that Barca’s transfer ban appeal with FIFA doesn’t come into the equation for Suarez’s case.
“From my point of view Barca are doing well. Just keep in mind they aren’t a party,” Gomez Ponti said.
“They would be disadvantaged, momentarily [by the ban].
“But [the transfer case] is completely different. The solution of one, good or bad, will not determine the solution of the other.”
