The case involves Ion Viorel, a Romanian football coach, appealing against sanctions imposed by the Romanian Football Federation (RFF) for alleged involvement in match-fixing. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) addressed procedural and substantive issues, ultimately upholding the sanctions. The dispute centered around several matches involving FC Gloria Buzau during the 2014-2015 Liga 2 season, which were flagged by Sportradar's Betting Fraud Detection System (BFDS) for suspicious betting patterns indicating manipulation. The RFF's Disciplinary and Ethics Committee (DEC) and Recourse Committee (RC) found Viorel and others guilty, imposing a two-year ban from football-related activities and a fine of 200,000 lei.
Viorel's appeal to CAS raised multiple objections, including procedural fairness, the impartiality of RFF disciplinary bodies, retroactive application of disciplinary regulations, and the proportionality of sanctions. The CAS Sole Arbitrator dismissed these claims, emphasizing that the RFF's disciplinary process was lawful and complied with procedural requirements. The Arbitrator noted that the 2016 RFF Disciplinary Regulations, applied retroactively, were more favorable to Viorel, aligning with the principle of lex mitior. The sanctions were deemed proportionate, as the two-year ban did not prevent Viorel from pursuing other professions, and the fine was set at the minimum mandatory amount.
Regarding the match-fixing allegations, the Arbitrator upheld the DEC and RC findings, which detailed extensive evidence of manipulation, including unusual betting patterns, testimonies from players and coaches, and financial irregularities within the club. While Viorel argued that six of the nine matches under investigation were time-barred, the Arbitrator clarified that match manipulation offenses were not subject to the six-month limitation period, as they fell under a five-year or no limitation due to their severity. The DEC's decision meticulously outlined the evidence, demonstrating Viorel's involvement in orchestrating the manipulation, even if players' prior knowledge was not conclusively proven.
The CAS proceedings also addressed procedural matters, such as the admissibility of witness testimony and document translations. The Arbitrator ruled that late submissions and uncertified translations did not disadvantage Viorel, as he and his counsel were fluent in Romanian. Witness testimonies, including those from former RFF officials and Sportradar representatives, were deemed admissible, with their credibility assessed based on the overall evidence.
Ultimately, the CAS dismissed Viorel's appeal, confirming the RFF's sanctions. The decision underscored the importance of combating match-fixing and upholding disciplinary measures to preserve the integrity of football. The Arbitrator affirmed the independence and impartiality of the RFF's disciplinary bodies, rejecting Viorel's claims of bias. The ruling highlighted the thoroughness of the investigative process and the gravity of the offenses, concluding that the sanctions were justified and legally sound. The case serves as a reminder of the stringent measures in place to address corruption in sports and the limited scope for overturning well-founded disciplinary decisions.