AEK is trying to demolish the main argument that led to the – negative for the same – first instance decision for the postponed match with Atromitos.
Specifically, in the appeal held on Friday (24/2), the executive of the “Union”, Elli Rizoustated that there is agreement between the Municipality of Peristeri and Atromito for the use of the Municipal Stadium by PAE. In fact, he notes that the concession period is 12 years, specifically from 1/8/2012 until 31/7/2024.
Therefore, the “yellow and black” argue that not only is it not true that Atromitos is not to blame for the stadium, but instead he has been fully responsible since August 2012. A crisis, moreover, which they characterized dangerous since, as they explained, no PAE of the Stoiximan Super League has its own stadium.
In fact, they also mentioned relevant examples, like that of AEK with OAKA, but also the European game of PAS where Atromitos himself had granted the stadium and not the Municipality. Ms. Rizu closed by speaking about contradictions in the decision.
Part of Rizu’s statement:
“Atromitos did not appeal the referee’s decision. The decision is final. The part of the decision that has been handed down is that Intrepid is not at fault for the pitch. This assumption is not only unfounded and untrue, it was dangerous because it catalyzes the concept of objective responsibility.
No Super League club has its own stadium. They belong either to the amateur or to the municipalities. This judgment of the decision that Atromitos is not at fault since the stadium belongs to the Municipality is particularly dangerous.
There is a decision for OAKA where AEK was punished and not GGA where the stadium belongs.
We read in the decision something that had not been said, that every Sunday Atromitos receives the stadium six hours before the match, from the Municipality. This is a fabrication of the decision never aired. And the decision concludes that the responsibility rests with the Municipality. This claim is refuted by public documents.
There is an agreement between the municipality and PAE Atromitos on August 10. There it is stated that the stadium is granted to PAE, its use. And he continues that PAE undertakes the costs for the maintenance of the stadium exclusively. The duration of the concession is 12 years from 1/8/2012 and ends on 31/7/2024.
The municipality has no responsibility for issuing a license for the stadium, the agreement states, among other things. Atromitos had full responsibility for the stadium since August 2012.
For the match between PAE Ioannina and a European team there is a document that Atromitos grants. Not only does he have the responsibility of the pitch but he also gives it to other teams. What can we say about the former’s admission that she entered the stadium six hours before the game but is not responsible.
The resulting decision blames the observer for not inspecting the field. Atromitos had plenty of time from the reception for the regularity of the field. He took over the stadium, even if we accept it, he didn’t inspect it, he didn’t take care of it, he didn’t fix it.
The mayor of Peristeri, Mr. Pachaturidis, said that he is not responsible for the stadium’s facilities. No laser measurements were taken by the municipality. PAE provided measurements a day later, according to which the beams were normal!
The decision has strong contradictions. At one point he admits that both goals were illegal, then PAE made efforts and one goal was corrected. You saw the videos that they dug the goalpost, the decision says that this was not done because it was not written on the match sheet. How did he raise one goal since he does not accept that no works were done. In this decision, the contradictions are so chained that it resulted in the abolition of strict liability. If there is no responsibility, there are no regulations. I ask that the completely wrong decision disappear».
Afterwards, Elli Rizou also responded to the position of Alexis Kougia through which Atromitos requests the rejection of AEK’s objection: “AEK had also objected to the case with PAOK that Savvidis had entered with a gun. The appeal was tried, PAOK was punished and there was a decision of the Court of Appeals which summoned AEK and which duly attended the Court of Appeals».
Source: Sport Fm
I am currently a news writer for News Bulletin247 where I mostly cover sports news. I have always been interested in writing and it is something I am very passionate about. In my spare time, I enjoy reading and spending time with my family and friends.
