AEK vindicated by the decision for Iliopoulos and Loucheskou, questions about the penalty for PAOK

The sting has fallen hard on Razvan Lucescu and members of his staff as they have been handed four-month bans from the pitch and dressing room for what happened in the OPAP Arena car park after the first quarter-final of the Cup and AEK feel vindicated by her decision EPO Disciplinary Committee.

The justification of the people of the Union moves along two axes, but there is one… but. The first reason that in her ranks AEK there is satisfaction because the rumors about Mario Iliopoulos’ “du” in the PAOK locker room after the end of the match were dismissed. The owner of the Union was simply reprimanded because he was in these areas of the stadium without accreditation! According to the decision, what Iliopoulos did was to approach Lucescu after the match to talk to himin fact in the presence of the observers of the match and after first informing the people of PAOK. Therefore, he neither forced his way into the locker room of the North’s bicep nor issued threats.

The second reason they feel justified in AEK is the very harsh punishment meted out to Razvan Lucescu. It is not the first time the Romanian manager has been punished for his conduct at the OPAP Arena, having already received a 23-day ban in the first derby of this year’s Stoiximan Super League double-header. In the “yellow and black” camp they felt the need not to leave Lucescu’s provocative behavior unanswered, in an attempt to represent her fans who were the main recipients.

However, as pointed out, there is also a “but”, which concerns the non-punishment of PAOK’s headquarters. A bell and in fact heavily received both o Lucescu as well as team officials, but the penalty imposed on the team was simply a fine. In AEK they wonder how it is that thousands of fans keep paying for the recklessness of one and the organization is punished behind closed doors, but no corresponding punishment is imposed when the people of the team themselves are to blame. Something, which of course does not exist only in the case of the Union, since several teams have shouldered the burden for the throwing of a firecracker by a fan, already in an away game.