Olivos will play the A/B playoff after the resolution of the Disciplinary Court

It was defined how the Metropolitan B Tournament after the resolution of the Disciplinary Court of the Amateur Hockey Association of Buenos Aires (AAHBA) in which it ruled that the result between Olivos and San Martín of the last date be modified. With that change, Munro’s team was third in the standings and will play the A/B Repechage with San Lorenzo. What does the resolution say and what were the defenses of those affected?

The definition date in the Metro B It was to rent balconies. On the one hand, Olivos and Ducilo had a great chance of finishing in third place of the standings and thus have the opportunity to play the playoffs against the 12th of Metro A. On the other hand, San Martín had to win to avoid direct relegation to Metro C. The truth is that Olivos ended up beating Sáenz Peña’s team 1-0 and Berazategui’s team beat Banco Nación 5-2. These results indicated that Sáenz Peña’s Tricolor dropped to ‘C’ and that The Ducileroby having more goals in favor after equaling points, games won and goal difference, surpassed Olivos in the table to take third place.

However, days later, a resolution arrived from the AAHBA indicating that the match between Olivos and San Martín should be investigated due to an alleged poor inclusion of the player Candela Cisterna of Tricolor, who appeared on the scoresheet in three matches of the day. (Fifth division, Intermediate and First). Fact that is not legally permitted (the maximum is two games). As a consequence, the delegate and the table judge of the Munro club were asked to make a presentation on the matter, in addition to having a defense from the Saénz Peña institution.

What does the resolution say? What did the clubs say?

On the side of San Martín indicated that the subdelegate stated that “The player Candela Cisterna has not played the Fifth, Intermediate and First matches that same day”. Added to this were the sayings of the table judge of the Primera match Gabriela Barrerawho plainly admitted “having made a mistake in loading the chronus of match 8 – 2/13/5”, and the table judge of the intermediate match Analía Sime who “has not provided any circumstances of interest to resolve the issue submitted to the Court for study.” Finally, the player Candela Cisterna said that “That day he did not participate in three games.”

On the other side, from Olivosthe table judge Carina Siliva Carloni declared that he informed the visiting table judge (from San Martín) that “While the scoresheet was being loaded, two errors occurred that appeared in the Cronus related to the player Cisterna and another player where the following sign appeared: ‘Player who cannot be loaded for having participated in three matches’. He stated that, despite this, “The San Martín table judge insisted on adding the player Cisterna until the system took it”. He added that “the San Martín table judge told the players more than once that they should be charged but that she gave a number of 21 players, so she requested the computer, it was given to her and she found the player that was superfluous”. Carina Silvia Carloni confirmed that “the remaining player was not Cisterna.” Finally, he explained “the problems they had in loading the First and Intermediate forms” and how “The San Martín table judge was not clear about the names on the list, the computer was given to her so that she could load the list.”

That is, two different versions of what happened. The final resolution of the Association (through the Disciplinary Court), based on the regulations as described above, was to consider Olivos won 3 to 0. the match after considering that there was “lack of other elements of evidence, which have not been contributed to the file by the San Martín club, to demonstrate what was alleged in its defense (photos, videos, etc.) and which emerge as fundamental evidence to resolve this conflict, the documentary incorporated into the record. In the official sheets (not the ‘paper’ ones that have no official value) it is noted, without a doubt, that the player Candela Cisterna participated in the Fifth, Intermediate and First matches.”

As a result of what happened, the ‘A’ squad of San Martín posted a statement on their social networks. “We regret the Association’s resolution for the A/B Playoffs. It is truly a shame that a team’s efforts and dreams are thrown away on a desk and not on the field. From our side, as a club, we acted with total truthfulness, making it clear that there was no participation of the player in three games nor were we the ones who manipulated the Cronus. I hope Fair Play is not lost”, they expressed. Sáenz Peña’s team has 10 days to appeal the decision. The decision could be upheld or reversed according to this situation.

Josefina Ibarra, a Ducilo player, also left a statement on her social networks. “Sad that the work of years and so much effort cost is taken away from you on a desk. We, with the peace of mind of knowing that we did what we had to do on the field. It is shameful that with all the tools at their disposal, they have settled for the release of two people.”said.

On the side of Olive trees They expressed on their official social media account: “What if it happens? The illusion isn’t over until it’s over.”

The situation seems isolated, but in the same bulletin, there were three other cases of bad inclusions during that last date in other divisions. Coincidentally, one of them was between San Martín B and Olivos B, the second strip of both affected teams and with an identical resolution for Munro’s team.

This Sunday, December 1, the playoffs will begin to be played in all categories (the duel between San Lorenzo and Olivos has not yet been confirmed). The second leg will be on Saturday, December 7. For each of the series, there will be home field in the second game and a sporting advantage for the teams that are in a higher division.