The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Joshua version: "I did not spit." Hapoel Beer Sheva is preparing to defend the player - Walla! sport

2021-02-02T10:29:09.670Z


The Portuguese denies that he spat on Avi Rikan, his team will argue in the disciplinary hearing that if the screen judge examined the incident and decided that there is no place to call the central judge, the association prosecutor should not intervene. The association will claim that the bylaws do not refer to the VAR judges at all


  • sport

  • Israeli soccer

  • Super League

Joshua version: "I did not spit."

Hapoel Beer Sheva is preparing to defend the player

The Portuguese denies that he spat on Avi Rikan, his team will argue in the disciplinary hearing that if the screen judge examined the incident and decided that there is no place to call the central judge, the association prosecutor should not intervene.

The association will claim that the bylaws do not refer to the VAR judges at all

Tags

  • Joshua

  • Hapoel Beer Sheva

Yaniv Tuchman

Tuesday, 02 February 2021, 12:14

  • Share on Facebook

  • Share on WhatsApp

  • Share on general

  • Share on general

  • Share on Twitter

  • Share on Email

0 comments

  • Summary: Rayo Vallecano - Barcelona 2: 1

  • Summary: Bnei Yehuda - Hapoel Haifa 2: 0

  • Summary: All the Premier League goals from the 21st round

  • Summary: Maccabi Haifa - Hapoel Kfar Saba 0: 3

  • Summary: Inter Milan 1: 2

  • Summary: Bnei Sakhnin - Hapoel Hadera 2: 0

  • Summary: Betar Jerusalem - Hapoel Tel Aviv 1: 0

  • Hapoel Tel Aviv player Yam Madar

  • Summary: Hapoel Tel Aviv - Kiryat Shmona 1: 1

  • Summary: Alcoiano - Real Madrid 1: 2

Summary: Hapoel Beer Sheva - Maccabi Tel Aviv 1: 0 (Sport 1)

Hapoel Beer Sheva is preparing to defend Joshua tomorrow (Wednesday) in court after the player gave his version this morning before the team's training and claimed that he did not spit on Avi Rikan in the loss to Maccabi Tel Aviv (1: 0).

Team manager Assi Rahamim spoke with the Portuguese midfielder and asked to hear his version. Joshua denies the spitting, although the Football Association prosecutor decided to prosecute him following what the TV cameras recorded. As



for the plaintiff's authority, in Be'er Sheva they will claim that if screen judge David Foxman examined the incident and decided that there was no place to call the central referee, as published here earlier, there was no room for the plaintiff to intervene and rule otherwise.On this point, lawyer Nir Reshef said that the Football Association's disciplinary regulations do not refer to the VAR referees at all. , And since Leibowitz saw did not see the case, the plaintiff may intervene.

More on Walla!

NEWS

Joshua will stand trial: "contemptuous and degrading action"

To the full article

Will his claims be accepted?

Joshua (Photo: Danny Maron)

More on Walla!

NEWS

  • Joshua will be prosecuted for spitting: "Especially severe in the Corona period"

  • Andy Herzog among Barkat's candidates.

    Will Joshua's spit affect his future at the club?

  • Tal Ben-Haim: "Joshua? Spitting on a man is the worst thing you can do"

  • Health reaches you all the way home - the benefits of frozen fruits and vegetables and where to get them

Hapoel Beer Sheva's legal adviser, attorney Ido Bar Natan, has submitted a request to the Football Association's legal department to represent Joshua tomorrow.

It is still unclear whether in Be'er Sheva they will ask for a postponement of the hearing.



By the way, the interim coach Aliniv Barda will also come to court tomorrow, who will stand trial for the incident with referee Nael Odeh in the game against Hapoel Hadera.

  • Share on Facebook

  • Share on WhatsApp

  • Share on general

  • Share on general

  • Share on Twitter

  • Share on Email

0 comments

Source: walla

All sports articles on 2021-02-02

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.