Juventus, what happens after the 10-point penalty in the Court of Appeal – Corriere.it

Just before Allegri’s boys went on the field to end a bad day, the new sentence on capital gains from the federal Court of Appeal arrived: Juve were penalized by 10 points and returned to 59, seventh behind Roma. The first effect that Lazio arithmetically in the Champions League.

The right discount? That’s five penalty points less compared to the previous sentence (-15) and one less than what was requested yesterday by the prosecutor Giuseppe Chin after about an hour of indictment (a higher request than the one he himself formulated in the previous January hearing at the Court of Appeal when he had indicated nine points and the judges had taken the penalty to -15). The seven former executives without signatory power, from Pavel Nedved down, are acquitted (the prosecutor had asked for an eight-month inhibition).

Follow the news of the day at the Federal Court of Appeal

Fewer executives involved, fewer penalty points. The equation holds up. The sentence demonstrates a certain balance: it accepts the appeals of the guarantee college, which had specifically asked to re-evaluate the concrete contribution of the minor managers which had not been adequately motivated in the previous sentence and, if necessary, to remodulate the penalty. On the other hand, it was not logical to expect a much greater discount because the guarantee college had, in 75 pages of reasons, reconfirmed the entire structure of the sentence, reaffirmed the system of capital gains put in place to alter the balance sheets and definitively condemned all leaders for lack of loyalty, Andrea Agnelli, Fabio Paratici, Maurizio Arrivabene and Federico Cherubini. it is clear that the weight of the top management in modulating the -15 had been greater than the managers without power of signature.

Who objects that in this way Juventus can still theoretically reach the Champions League and that therefore the penalty was not afflictive, he must however consider that, not being able to predict the future, the Court considered -10 a reasonable penalty, and precisely afflictive, considering the classification at the moment of the sentence. The defeat in Empoli, however, already makes this scenario more difficult. And it cannot be excluded that the consideration that there is also UEFA has started an independent procedure and risks excluding Juventus from the Cups.

Have we now (with difficulty) reached a fixed point? It is still not possible to say with certainty, because, as we know, there is the new sporting process on salary maneuvers which will begin – yesterday’s news – on June 15th and it is not 100% sure that a possible new penalty will be applied in the next season and not in this one. Always assuming that then you don’t get there to a plea deal before the start. From this point of view, yesterday’s ruling does not seem to preclude new discussions between the parties.

Can Juventus appeal again? In theory yes, we can go back to the Coni guarantee college: the club, in a statement, reiterates its great bitterness for sanctions that do not seem to take into account the principle of proportionality, on which the lawyers Bellacosa, Sangiorgio and Tortorella had insisted (reiterating for example that even moving from 2nd to 4th place to be considered an afflictive sentence and asking to consider the prevention model). On the other hand, the FIGC considers the sentence to be armored and the -10 in some way grave.

The controversies remain (the last Mourinho: a joke, a compromised championship) for a very complex procedure that saw the rankings change several times. But even celebrating trials after the championship was over wouldn’t have guaranteed finishing in time by the start of the next one. Unless radical reforms to sports justice are not so simple.