FORMER ATHLONE TOWN goalkeeper Igors Labuts has today won an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to dismiss charges of match-fixing imposed by the FAI.
The FAI handed Labuts a one-year ban from all football-related activity on 7 September 2017, after suspicious betting patterns were noticed surrounding a League of Ireland first division game between Athlone and Longford Town on 29 April 2017.
Labuts played in goal in that game, which Athlone lost 3-1, and the FAI charged him with breaching rules pertaining to bringing the game into disrepute, manipulating matches, and betting/gambling.
Labuts maintained his innocence, but lost an appeal to the FAI Appeals Committee, and lost again when he challenged their decision.
He then took his case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland, where he was represented by PFAI solicitor Stuart Gilhooly; Stephen McGuinness and Ollie Cahill, Secretary and Player Executive of the PFAI respectively; and barristers Patrick Marron and Paul McGarry.
A hearing took place in Lausanne, Switzerland, where a three-person CAS panel listened to submissions of evidence from both sides and reviewed video footage of goals conceded by Labuts in the game.
“I thought this day would never come,” Labuts says in a statement this evening. “It is hard to explain how personally devastating the last three years have been for me and my family.
“I came to Ireland with the intention of making it to the Premier Division and I hoped to put myself in the shop window with Athlone Town. I am not the best goalkeeper in the world but I thought with the right training and experience, I could improve my consistency levels and have a reasonable career in the League of Ireland.
“This was taken away from me by the FAI. I understand completely that they had to investigate the match and I cooperated in full. It was hugely disappointing to me that I was implicated without any evidence of wrongdoing. I was guilty only of making a mistake which some of the best goalkeepers in the world have made, or worse in some cases.
Advertisement
“To be crystal clear, I did not manipulate, have not manipulatedand never would be involved in manipulating a football match. Integrity in football is the most important element of the game. Without that, we have nothing. My name has been dragged through the mud by the FAI when it was clear from the outset that there was never enough evidence to maintain a prosecution.
“Since the conviction and consequent ban, I have been unable to obtain a professional contract. A footballer’s career is short and the FAI took away three years from me. I will never forgive them for that.”
Uefa’s s Betting Fraud Detection system had alerted the FAI to irregular betting patterns around the Athlone/Longford game in question on three specific markets: that there would be at least two goals scored in the first half, that four goals would be scored in total, and that Athlone would lose by two clear goals.
Part of the FAI’s case against Labuts rested on video footage of goals conceded by Labuts in the 40th and 93rd minutes of the game, the first of which was a direct free-kick and the second a shot from open play.
Labuts argued that the errors committed in conceding these goals were not deliberate, and that he had done everything in his power to prevent the ball going into the back of the net.
Among the FAI’s pieces of evidence was a witness statement by Damien Richardson, dated 27 June 2017, which provided expert testimony on Labuts’ and Athlone’s performance.
CAS ruled that this statement did not prove malicious intent on Labuts’ part, and did not prove Labuts’ was solely responsible for the concession of the game’s final goal in injury time.
CAS cited the following excerpt from Richardson’s statement in support of their decision.
“It is my opinion that due to the distinctly poor quality of coaching and management allied to the inferior individual proficiency on behalf of the players, it is quite difficult to ascertain whether the many errors committed in the latter stages of the games concerned are deliberate and malicious or of merely manifestations of inadequacy and fatigue…The final goal at Longford is one that proved most controversial.
“I would have a better idea of the truth in this moment if the camera had been on the other side of the pitch therefore giving a more open picture of the player’s body movements.
“Giving the lack of technical merit in the game itself, it is hard to define accurately the reasoning behind the player’s actions.
“But I would question why he did not simply head, rather than try to volley, a ball at such height. The Athlone Town back four do not play as a unit and the two centre-halves are like ships passing in the night, while the full-backs would at times require a mobile phone to instigate verbal contact with their own centre-halves.”
The CAS panel ruled that they were not satisfied the evidence presented proved Labuts was involved in manipulating the result, saying his errors showed “no sufficient proof to suggest that he was deliberately inadequate in order to influence the match in a certain way.”
Citing the initial report from Uefa’s Betting Fraud Detection System, the panel did rule that the result of the game was manipulated.
CAS upheld Labuts’ appeal, and set aside the sanction imposed by the FAI in November 2018.
The FAI have been ordered to pay 3,000 Swiss Francs to contribute to Labuts’ legal costs.
“From the point of view of the player and the PFAI, this is a vindication after nearly three years of fighting and three defeats at FAI level”, said solicitor Stuart Gilhooly.
A PFAI statement, meanwhile, reads: “Had this outrageous conviction been allowed to stand, it would have had a chilling effect on all footballers worldwide. Every time suspicious betting patterns surrounded a match, players would have been looking over their shoulder worrying that their poor performance would be reason to destroy their careers without any further evidence.
“This result means that fear is no longer there.”
A statement this evening from the FAI ‘noted’ and accepted the ruling, adding:
“The FAI also notes that CAS upheld the Association’s original findings of manipulation around the Longford Town v Athlone Town fixture on April 29th, 2017.
“The FAI remains committed to the fight against match-fixing.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Close
5 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic.
Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy
here
before taking part.
Former Athlone goalkeeper wins CAS appeal against FAI ban for alleged match-fixing
LAST UPDATE | 17 Jul 2020
FORMER ATHLONE TOWN goalkeeper Igors Labuts has today won an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to dismiss charges of match-fixing imposed by the FAI.
The FAI handed Labuts a one-year ban from all football-related activity on 7 September 2017, after suspicious betting patterns were noticed surrounding a League of Ireland first division game between Athlone and Longford Town on 29 April 2017.
Labuts played in goal in that game, which Athlone lost 3-1, and the FAI charged him with breaching rules pertaining to bringing the game into disrepute, manipulating matches, and betting/gambling.
Labuts maintained his innocence, but lost an appeal to the FAI Appeals Committee, and lost again when he challenged their decision.
He then took his case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland, where he was represented by PFAI solicitor Stuart Gilhooly; Stephen McGuinness and Ollie Cahill, Secretary and Player Executive of the PFAI respectively; and barristers Patrick Marron and Paul McGarry.
A hearing took place in Lausanne, Switzerland, where a three-person CAS panel listened to submissions of evidence from both sides and reviewed video footage of goals conceded by Labuts in the game.
“I thought this day would never come,” Labuts says in a statement this evening. “It is hard to explain how personally devastating the last three years have been for me and my family.
“I came to Ireland with the intention of making it to the Premier Division and I hoped to put myself in the shop window with Athlone Town. I am not the best goalkeeper in the world but I thought with the right training and experience, I could improve my consistency levels and have a reasonable career in the League of Ireland.
“This was taken away from me by the FAI. I understand completely that they had to investigate the match and I cooperated in full. It was hugely disappointing to me that I was implicated without any evidence of wrongdoing. I was guilty only of making a mistake which some of the best goalkeepers in the world have made, or worse in some cases.
“To be crystal clear, I did not manipulate, have not manipulatedand never would be involved in manipulating a football match. Integrity in football is the most important element of the game. Without that, we have nothing. My name has been dragged through the mud by the FAI when it was clear from the outset that there was never enough evidence to maintain a prosecution.
Uefa’s s Betting Fraud Detection system had alerted the FAI to irregular betting patterns around the Athlone/Longford game in question on three specific markets: that there would be at least two goals scored in the first half, that four goals would be scored in total, and that Athlone would lose by two clear goals.
Part of the FAI’s case against Labuts rested on video footage of goals conceded by Labuts in the 40th and 93rd minutes of the game, the first of which was a direct free-kick and the second a shot from open play.
Labuts argued that the errors committed in conceding these goals were not deliberate, and that he had done everything in his power to prevent the ball going into the back of the net.
Among the FAI’s pieces of evidence was a witness statement by Damien Richardson, dated 27 June 2017, which provided expert testimony on Labuts’ and Athlone’s performance.
CAS ruled that this statement did not prove malicious intent on Labuts’ part, and did not prove Labuts’ was solely responsible for the concession of the game’s final goal in injury time.
CAS cited the following excerpt from Richardson’s statement in support of their decision.
“It is my opinion that due to the distinctly poor quality of coaching and management allied to the inferior individual proficiency on behalf of the players, it is quite difficult to ascertain whether the many errors committed in the latter stages of the games concerned are deliberate and malicious or of merely manifestations of inadequacy and fatigue…The final goal at Longford is one that proved most controversial.
“I would have a better idea of the truth in this moment if the camera had been on the other side of the pitch therefore giving a more open picture of the player’s body movements.
“Giving the lack of technical merit in the game itself, it is hard to define accurately the reasoning behind the player’s actions.
“But I would question why he did not simply head, rather than try to volley, a ball at such height. The Athlone Town back four do not play as a unit and the two centre-halves are like ships passing in the night, while the full-backs would at times require a mobile phone to instigate verbal contact with their own centre-halves.”
The CAS panel ruled that they were not satisfied the evidence presented proved Labuts was involved in manipulating the result, saying his errors showed “no sufficient proof to suggest that he was deliberately inadequate in order to influence the match in a certain way.”
Citing the initial report from Uefa’s Betting Fraud Detection System, the panel did rule that the result of the game was manipulated.
CAS upheld Labuts’ appeal, and set aside the sanction imposed by the FAI in November 2018.
The FAI have been ordered to pay 3,000 Swiss Francs to contribute to Labuts’ legal costs.
“From the point of view of the player and the PFAI, this is a vindication after nearly three years of fighting and three defeats at FAI level”, said solicitor Stuart Gilhooly.
A PFAI statement, meanwhile, reads: “Had this outrageous conviction been allowed to stand, it would have had a chilling effect on all footballers worldwide. Every time suspicious betting patterns surrounded a match, players would have been looking over their shoulder worrying that their poor performance would be reason to destroy their careers without any further evidence.
“This result means that fear is no longer there.”
A statement this evening from the FAI ‘noted’ and accepted the ruling, adding:
“The FAI also notes that CAS upheld the Association’s original findings of manipulation around the Longford Town v Athlone Town fixture on April 29th, 2017.
“The FAI remains committed to the fight against match-fixing.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
FAI igor labuts LOI none