Interviews

Q&A WTH ARMENTEROS

26 Jul 2020
The legal advisor of the club, Antonio Armenteros, conceded an interview to newspaper La Opiniůn A CoruŮa. He talked of the legal strategy of the club towards the current situation with the suspended game with FC Fuenlabrada.

Q: As the days go by and more facts are discovered, are they carrying more reasons?
A: It is so. Currently there are two different routes. One itís to re-play the last matchday, because we understand that the competition was adulterated, and another the complaint against Fuenlabrada for all the facts that are being known. When all this started, we did it because we thought we were right, especially in the first one, but without data or information. The basis was to assert our rights, but what has been appearing every minute tells us that a series of irregularities and irresponsible things were committed.

Q: Is this irresponsibility part of the club's strategy to claim?
A: Thatís the front that we have open, it can carry very strong sanctions. Apart from economic sanctions, they can lead to the loss of the match and the loss of the place in the league.

Q: Do complaints from other organizations, such as the City Council, could give more strength to your claims?
A: This shows that reason is with us, that what we are asking is for justice, otherwise people wouldnít turn into the streets as they are turning, even the institutions. If they do so, it is because they believe that reason is with us, not for any other reason. Thatís more than evident and we appreciate it.

Q: How can you get 24 teams on next season at Segunda Division?
A: That, logically, is a decision that must be agreed upon. We have already shown this, and not only us, but also in many other areas. We believe that it seems as the only solution or the only honorable way out of all this mess that has arisen and that each day that passes seems to be more severe. If you put a little common sense, it is the most logical way out.

Q: Have you asked for that possibility at the Federation?
A: Those who decide on that have said nothing. We know that everyone is working in their field, because there are three who have to solve the problem: La Liga, the Federation and the CSD. With us, of course, no one has contacted to ask for that or other options.

Q: There are those who censure that Deportivo is taking advantage of the circumstances in which Fuenlabrada is at this moment, this trying by all means to save the league and avoid relegation to Segunda B...
A: That isnít true. Itís more than verified that at 21.06 hours, when six minutes of the games had been played, and before it couldnít be, because we didnít have official confirmation at any time, we sent an email to La Liga, the Federation and the CSD in which we stated that we were strongly opposed to the celebration of the matchday, because the competition was violated. We considered that the unified schedule is established to not adulterate the tournament and, since the rest of games were going to be played, it was adulterated regardless of the results. Now we are the losers, but if the results had been others the losers would be other teams, with which the adulteration would be exactly the same. I oppose this criticism because before knowing the results we said that the competition was adulterated.

Q: How do you find out that the match against Fuenlabrada could not be played?
A: Everything is through the media. The first thing we knew is the press release they send about the postponement of the match. The official note, the first we received from the three organizations, because it is true that they decide by mutual agreement, is at 21:46, at the break. Everything else is through the media and in view of the evidence that Fuenlabrada didnít arrive to the stadium.

Q: Does all this lack of information that Fernando VŠzquez also denounced influence when you can now claim in the different instances of the Federation?
A: Clearly yes. We were left at the feet of the horses. We didnít know how to act, but at that moment we already realized that the competition was adulterated, and we made it clear. We didnít want to wait until the end of the matchday to say what we are saying now.

Q: In the case of been forced to go to ordinary justice, would the strategy that you propose be the same that they have brought to the disciplinary bodies of the Federation?
A: I would go the same way. Aside from the fact that ordinary justice can ask for precautionary measures, we know that this takes more time and that all this should be resolved sooner. Those who have to decide, which are La Liga, the Federation and the Superior Council of Sports (CSD), if they realize the repercussion and the seriousness that the whole matter is taking, should have a little margin and waist to solve this question. We have to continue on our path, which is to inform the authorities, in this case sports, of our demands. For their part, La Liga and the Federation and the CSD, what they have to do is face the problem and solve it.

ARCHIVE NEWS JUL/20

ZAPPING


Back to Interviews