Soccer

Former Athlone goalkeeper waiting on match-fixing appeal verdict

Igor Labuts has served his 12-month ban for role in match against Longford in April 2017

Former Athlone goalkeeper Igor Labuts is waiting to hear the verdict of his appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Photo: Oisin Keniry/Inpho

Emmet Malone's face
Emmet Malone
Thu Oct 3 2019 - 17:19

Former Athlone Town goalkeeper Igor Labuts is expected to hear within three weeks whether the Court of Arbitration for Sport has upheld his appeal against a ban imposed by the FAI for his part in the fixing of a First Division game against Longford Town in April 2017.

The now 29-year-old has served the 12 month suspension but with the backing of players’ union, the PFAI, took the case to CAS, where his appeal was heard on Thursday, in the hope of clearing his name as he has been unable to get a club since returning to the game.

Former Under-21 international goalkeeper Dan Connor, Pat Dolan and Richard Sadlier all gave evidence at the CAS hearing on his behalf while Damien Richardson and former UCD captain Tony McDonnell testified for the association.

Both had, along with Don O’Riordan, been part of the panel of experts put together by the FAI to decide whether Labuts’ performance included deliberate mistakes aimed at influencing the outcome of the match. Those testifying on his behalf were essentially saying that there was nothing in his display that could not reasonably be explained on the basis of a First Division goalkeeper having a very bad day.

READ MORE

The PFAI, backed by international union Fifpro, which paid the €38,300 cost of lodging the appeal, has continued to fight the case in large part because of its objections to the procedures used with the organisation having repeatedly argued that asking former players to express an opinion on whether a given incident in a game was a mistake or a deliberate act intended to alter the result should be relied upon as firm evidence of wrongdoing.

It feared, it has said, that the Labuts case would set a precedent for future cases in which its members were charged with similar offences.

In a scathing opening statement the union, which was represented by its solicitor Stuart Gilhooley, as well as Paul McGarry SC and Patrick Marron BL, described the association’s case against Labuts as “a shambles from the outset”.

An organisation itself “mired in scandal,” it was said, had produced “no sign of any incriminating phone records, (no) proof by reference to bank accounts (and) nothing at all to even hint that Mr Labuts benefitted financially from the enterprise.”

The association, it was claimed, was under pressure from the media to act but; “the disciplinary investigation here proceeded on the basis of the opinions of three people; no more.

“Opinions about what though? The mistakes made by Mr Lubuts on the pitch that day. Nothing else. These three experts were selected by the FAI, which was of course the prosecuting body. Worse, the disciplinary body was also established by the FAI.”

The association has always claimed the procedures, which followed reports of highly irregular betting patterns on the game in question, were fair. It was represented by Competitions Director Fran Gavin plus Patrick Leonard SC and Louise Reilly BL. The hearing itself was all heard over the course of Thursday. The final cost of the entire process is unknown at this stage but expected to comfortably break the six figures barrier.