Sent to Hibernians FC 104 Paola Square PLA 1260 Paola Malta Decision --- of the --- Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body on --- 09 September 2020 Chairman: Partl Thomas (AUT) Vice-Chairmen: Berzi Sándor (HUN) Hansen Jim Stjerne (DEN) Members: Wolff Joël (LUX) Barnes Bobby (ENG) Becker Julius Y. (GER) Diaconu Madalina (ROU) Disciplinary Case: 33753 - UEL - 2020/21 Incidents: Improper conduct of the team (5 players or more) - Art. 15 (4) DR Insulting players or others (Mr. Abela Jesmond) – Art. 15 (1) (a) (iv) DR Abusive language at a match official (Mr. Kristensen Bjorn) – Art. 15 (1) (b) DR Competition: 2020/21 UEFA Europa League Match: FC Vaduz vs. Hibernians FC, 27.08.2020 Referee: Luís Miguel Do Nascimento Teixeira (POR) 2 | Page I. Facts of the case 1. The elements set out below are a summary of the main relevant facts as established by the Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (“CEDB”) in the course of these proceedings on the basis of the official report produced. While the CEDB has considered all the facts and pieces of evidence in these proceedings, it refers in the present decision only to those it considers necessary to explain its reasoning. 2. Among other incidents which occurred on the occasion of the 2020/21 UEFA Europa League match between FC Vaduz and Hibernians FC (the “club”) played on 27 August 2020 (the “match”), the referee officiating at the match reported the following: Referee: “Dismissal: Kristensen Bjorn (64' Uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures) number 11 of hibernians was sent off at minute 65 as he told to referee You are awful.” 3. On 11 September 2020, the club requested to receive the grounds for the decision taken by the CEDB on 9 September 2020. In particular, the club requested “[…] the UEFA Disciplinary Services to provide us with the grounds for the decision to suspend player Bjorn Kristensen for two (2) matches in case 33753 – UEL – 2020/21. The request is limited to the grounds pertaining to the decision of Mr. Kristensen’s suspension […].” The club is accepting the other two disciplinary sanctions inflicted on the club (i.e. warning for the improper conduct of its team and suspension of one of its officials for one match for insulting players). Consequently, the following grounds are limited to the behavior of the player Bjorn Kristensen (the “player”). 4. The club did not submit any further statement in the course of these disciplinary proceedings. II. Merits of the case A. UEFA’s competence and relevant provisions applicable to the case 5. Pursuant to Articles 33(3), 52 and 57 of the UEFA Statutes, as well as Article 29(3) of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations (DR), the CEDB is competent to deal with this case. 6. Pursuant to Article 5(a) DR, the UEFA Statutes, rules and regulations, in particular the DR, are applicable to these proceedings. 7. The following relevant provisions apply to the case at hand. 8. According to Article 15(1)(b) DR, “[t]he following disciplinary suspensions apply for competition matches: […] b. suspension for two competition matches or a specified period for directing abusive language at a match official; […].” 3 | Page 9. According to Article 45 DR, “[f]acts contained in official UEFA reports are presumed to be accurate. Proof of their inaccuracy may, however, be provided.” 10. Pursuant to Article 23 DR, “1 [t]he competent disciplinary body determines the type and extent of the disciplinary measures to be imposed in accordance with the objective and subjective elements of the offence, taking account of both aggravating and mitigating circumstances. […] 3 Disciplinary measures can be reduced or increased by the competent disciplinary body on the basis of the circumstances of the specific case […].” B. The responsibility of the player for directing abusive language towards a match official 11. Article 15(1)(b) DR ought to be understood as an attempt by UEFA to protect officials who, in the context of a match, exercise a function that warrants particular respect. This primarily and obviously includes the referee and assistant referees. 12. In the present case, the CEDB notes that the official report of the referee states that in the 65th minute of the match, the player addressed the referee by saying: “You are awful.” For this behaviour, which was described by the referee as use of “offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures”, the player was dismissed from the field of play. 13. In this regard, the CEDB recalls that, according to Article 45 DR, facts contained in official UEFA reports are presumed to be accurate. Considering that neither the club nor the player have submitted any statement or evidence which could indicate a potential inaccuracy of the facts stated in the official report of the referee, such facts are to be regarded as established. 14. The CEDB stresses that, obviously, the attitude of the player as described by the referee in his report cannot be accepted at football matches. UEFA officials shall not be undermined by any person or staff member participating in a match. If UEFA were to accept such behaviour, i.e. that a player addresses the referee in such a disrespectful and abusive way, then UEFA’s core values and the general spirit in which football ought to be played would be severely undermined. 15. Consequently, the CEDB deems that the actions of the player, as described by the referee in his official report, constitutes abusive language within the meaning of Article 15(1)(b) DR and must be punished accordingly. III. The determination of the appropriate disciplinary measure 16. Pursuant to Article 23 DR, the CEDB determines the type and extent of the disciplinary measures to be imposed in accordance with the objective and subjective elements of the case, taking account of any aggravating and mitigating circumstances. 17. In this regard, the CEDB takes into account the seriousness of the offence committed, and, in this respect, notes that abusive language directed at a match official constitutes 4 | Page a serious breach of the DR and contravenes UEFA’s core values and the general rules of good conduct and sportsmanship, as well as the ethos of fair play and respect, which UEFA embodies through the sporting events it governs. Such a behaviour shows an obvious lack of discipline from the player and is particularly unacceptable, especially during a UEFA competition match. 18. In view of the circumstances of this case, recalling that the club has not submitted any evidence or arguments and that there are no mitigating circumstances which would speak in favour of the player, the CEDB does not deem it appropriate to deviate from the standard sanction stipulated in Article 15(1)(b) DR and hence decides to suspend the player for the next two UEFA club competition matches for which he would otherwise be eligible. 19. Consequently, the CEDB decides 1. To warn Hibernians FC for the improper conduct of its team. 2. To suspend the Hibernians FC official, Mr. Abela Jesmond, for a total of one (1) UEFA club competition match for which he would otherwise participate in, for insulting players or others present at the match. 3. To suspend the Hibernians FC player, Mr. Kristensen Bjorn, for a total of two (2) UEFA club competition matches for which he would be otherwise eligible, for abusive language at a match official. 4. Hibernians FC ensures the player and official are personally informed of this decision. Thomas Partl Chairman Bank details Union Bank of Switzerland CH-3001 Acc. n° 235-90 186444.6 Bank code 235 cc Malta Football Association Swift: UBS WCH ZH 80A IBAN CH30 00235235901864446 Detail address of UBS AG (Union Bank of Switzerland) - CH – 3001 BERNE VAT Number in Switzerland : CHE-116.317.087 Fiscal number in Switzerland / canton de Vaud: 21 652 5 | Page Advice as to rights of appeal This decision is open to appeal (Article 60 DR). A declaration of the intention to appeal against a decision by the Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body must be lodged with the UEFA administration, in writing, for the attention of the Appeals Body, within three days of notification of the relevant decision with grounds (Article 60 (2) DR). Within five days of the expiry of the time limit for the declaration of the intention to appeal, the appellant must file, in writing, the grounds for appeal, which must contain a legal request, an account of the facts, evidence, a list of the witnesses proposed (with a brief summary of their expected testimony) and the appellant’s conclusions (in particular on whether to conduct the appeal proceedings orally or in writing) (Article 60 (3) DR). The appeal fee is €1,000, payable on submission of the grounds for appeal at the latest (Article 60 (4) DR). Publication notice Decisions of the UEFA disciplinary bodies are published on the UEFA website in accordance with Article 52 (5) DR. A request to publish an anonymised version of the decision shall be submitted to the UEFA administration within seven days of notification of the decision with grounds..