Aleksandar Tonev

It has been established from the start that Tonev knew * was an abusive word but he didn't know what it meant. Said he heard Aston Villa players using it in training.

 

Bonkers. Hope CAS rip them a new *, No wonder the sport is dying in this country with that mob running it.

 

I hope we crucify this lot and force them to quit..

 

Are you sure?

Yes, yes..


Wow that was convincing, case closed

 

The Compliance Officer in his final submissions stated that the question for the tribunal was a simple one, namely did Mr. Tonev use the words ‘black c***’. He submitted that this case was to be treated as every other case and there was no requirement for corroboration.

He submitted that Mr. Logan’s account was, on the balance of probabilities, more probable than that of Mr Tonev. He submitted that there were two competing versions of events but that the circumstantial evidence supported Mr. Logan version as being true and reliable. In his submissions he invited the tribunal to find that Mr. Logan was a reliable and credible witness. He had given his evidence in a clear fashion. He had no motive to lie.

[31] He submitted that if Mr. Logan had been unsure as to what he heard he would not have spoken to his captain, the referee and thereafter his manager. He reminded the tribunal that Mr. Logan was’ a million per cent sure’. The video footage clearly showed the interaction between the players and Mr. Logan speaking to the captain, referee and manager.

He further submitted that Mr. Logan’s demeanour supported his credibility. In conclusion, he submitted that on the balance of probabilities the case should be held as proven against Mr. Tonev.

 

Decision

The tribunal found Mr Logan to be an impressive witness. He gave his evidence in a careful and measured manner. He gave clear and unequivocal evidence that Mr Tonev had used the language complained of and that it had been targeted at him following an otherwise unremarkable on the field incident. His evidence of his immediate reaction to the comments and his subsequent action in reporting them was in all material respects consistent with the evidence of Madden, Reynolds, McInnes, and Gunn, as well as the video evidence. The tribunal had no difficulty in finding that he was both a credible and reliable witness.

[34] Any player facing an allegation such as this is bound to feel anxious when giving evidence. Nonetheless, the tribunal considered that Mr Tonev gave his evidence in a guarded and hesitant manner. His evidence amounted to a denial that the words used by him had included the phrase “black c***". His evidence on his understanding of the language said to have been used, was particularly unsatisfactory. In chief examination his evidence was to the effect that he did not know what the word "c***" meant. On cross examination he explained that he had heard the term in his time at Aston Villa but did not know what it meant. He then accepted that he was aware that it was term of abuse. The impression was of a witness giving a less than a full account of his actual understanding; and seemed to the tribunal to be an inherently improbable account. On the central issue in the case we were unable to accept him as either credible or reliable.

 

He did it because Logan says he did. Seems fair

 

I hope the Bulgarian FA get right in amongst this and take it further.

 

Appears to be good enough.

From today's ruling.

It is clear that the Disciplinary Tribunal took account of all relevant evidence, and left out of account irrelevant considerations (such as the weather conditions), in deciding whether the case had been made out on the balance of probabilities and were particularly conscious that a determination of excessive misconduct could only be made if that standard was satisfied.

But in the end the crucial finding in the case was the finding that Logan was not only a credible witness but more particularly that he was also a reliable witness. Clear and entirely adequate reasons for making that finding and for concluding on the balance of probabilities that the appellant committed the alleged misconduct are set out in the Written Reasons.

The Appellate Tribunal accordingly affirm the determination of the Disciplinary Tribunal that the appellant used offensive, insulting and abusive language of a racist nature in breach of Rule 202.

 

Two links to the notes from both hearings.

Original Hearing notes

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resourc...OctDec2014/JP Tribunal - Aleksandar Tonev.pdf

Today's Appeal Notes

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resourc...014/Appellate Tribunal - Aleksandar Tonev.pdf

 

Been a joke from the start. SFA are useless.

 

Ronny said they will take as far as they can to clear his name before, just cause one person says someone else is racist they should tarnish his reputation, * unbelievable SFA.

 

And if that Logan really felt upset about it why didn't he go to the police, this * would get thrown out of court faster than sally could eat a pie.

 

Basically they are saying anyone can accuse you of something and sfa will back them as long as it's against a Celtic player or manager.

Wonder what will happen if at the Sevco game a Celtic player accuses referee Andrew Dallas if he is the one there, of using sectarian comments aganst him.
Will the SFA back the referee or the compainant then.

 

Tonev should take Logan to the law courts for defamation and false and malicious allegations against his character.
The SFA would be * once Tonev wins and if the ban is served Celtic could take the SFA to the cleaners for the SFA deliberately denying them the use of a player jst like that wee * Farry did at signing of Jorge cadete.

 

I get your point but don't refs have microphones now?? to stop another Dougie McDonald incident.

 

Not sure but then we would have the situation that there must have been a technical fault as we didnt hear him say anything.

 

Yeah can do that only thing is will be a long court battle then and Logan & SFA would drag it out as long as possible, hopefully it won't come to it but I think that would be the last option.