Is Fenerbahce Scandal a Conspiracy

Fenerbahce's match-fixing scandal is not a conspiracy. It is far from being a political issue. Fenerbahce is, by far, the richest club in Turkey and takes refuge to patriotism just like any pathetic scoundrel.

Before 2011, there was no particular law for match-fixing in Turkey. In some cases it was classified as a type of qualified fraud in football. However, there was no actual procedure or investigation as conducted under Turkish law against match-fixing, which entered into force in 2011.

Fenerbahce is the first and by far the leading club, whose officials were charged of and cnvicted for match-fixing. Nobody, including Fenerbahce officials themselves, can deny the telephone conversations or other evidence of the match-fixing. It is barely alleged that the timing of the law was a conspiracy against Fenerbahce. In FSK coach Aykut Kocaman's words "The speed limit was violated in Turkish football, but the RADAR detected us in particular!"(

At the beginning, the underground propaganda was saying Aziz Yıldırım, the president of FSK, participated in a Northern Iraqi helicopter tender in spite of the will of Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister of Turkey by then.

However this 'pulp fiction' propaganda was soon, in a few weeks, replaced by a more improved one: a religious community, with antisecular agenda, was trying to take control of Fenerbahce club, supposedly the last surviving front of secularism in Turkey. There are much more tales that can be quoted. For example pro-Fenerbahce media even alleged that Miguel Lietard Fernandez-Palacios, the Spanish discipline inspector of UEFA was trained in schools of this antisecular Islamic community (

Let's leave aside the numerous conspiracy theories and come to facts.

Fact 1- Turkish law against match-fixing was drafted by Fenerbahçe officials themselves

As the most powerful club in Turkey, FSK had a strong say in drafting of the law. FSK lawyer and director Şekip Mosturoğlu, in a TV news show, said "We demand heacy penalties for football officials in the coming match-fixing law". Under that law, he was convicted guilty of match fixing, but his sanction was decreased by 75% thanks to a subsequent parliementary action that lightened the penalties to save FSK officials.

In those days, no other club's official had such a strong say or influence in drafting of the law. There is no such media or parliementary record.

Fact 2- After The Law, 50 Fenerbahce Officials Used 400 Different Phone Lines

In the court file, it is evidenced that 50 FSK officials, having strong knowledge of and reliance to the new match-fixing law, used 400 different telephone lines in case of any tracking by the police. (

FSK president Aziz Yıldırım alone, is detected to have used 13 different phone lines during the investigation.

Why would a club lobby for heavy sanctions against match-fixing (and assure its competitors comply fully with the rules) and then use, for its own communication, 400 different telephone lines, which include the conversations that prove the match-fixing according to Turkish heavy penal court, Turkish appelate court, UEFA disciplinary committee, UEFA appeals committee and CAS tribunal.

Fact 3- Fenerbahce (or any other Turkish club) does not represent any political mainstream ideology. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the most remarkable conservative leader ever in history of Turkey, is also one of the greatest fans of Fenerbahce. (

Why Was Fenerbahçe Banned

Fenerbahçe SK was banned from European matches for 2 years from 2013 to 2015 by UEFA out of its match-fixing crimes committed in Turkish Super League of 2010-2011.

Below is a part of the UEFA Disciplinary Body's ban decision and UEFA Appeal Body's ratification of the ban decision:

The quoted pages read as follows:

DK1264 NYON 2
TELEPHONE: +41 348 39 27 27
TELEFAX: +41 348 39 27 27


Date: 25/06/2013
To: Fenerbahçe SK
This message contains 13 pages Jjnduding cover page) Dear Sirs.
Please find attached the decision passed by the Control and Disciplinary Body in its meeting held on 22 June 2013^^_
We would appreciate your taking due note o( this decision and ensuring its implementation.
Sent by fax or email
Fenerbahçe SK
Bağdat Str. Fenerbahçe Şükrü
Stadyumu Kıaltoprak 34724 KADIKÖY Turkey
Control and Disciplinary Body
Decision of 22 June 2013
Union of European Football Association* OJEF« (Claimant)
Fenerbahçe SK (Respondent)
Chairman: Thomas Parti (AUT)
Vice-Chairmen:        Jacques Antenen (SUI) Sandor 8erzi (HUN)
Gençlerbirlifli vs.   Fenerbahçe played on 7 March 2011
The Appeals Body is satisfied that the Executive Committee member of Fenerbahçe SK Mr Eksiogiu had played a direct role in fixing the match Gençlerbirligi vs. Fenerbahçe played on 7 March 2011 of the 2010/2011 Turkish Super Lig. Numerous evidentiary elements support this conclusion, notably those contained in the Police Digest, the Ethics committee report, the decision of the TFF disciplinary bodies and the decision of the 16lh High criminal court.
Fenerbahçe va.  IBB Spor played on 1 May 2011
In view of all the elements of the case file and having examined the Police digest and the 16*n High criminal court decision, '.he Appeals Body is satisfied that the President of Fenerbahçe SK, Mr Yıldırım, concluded match fixing activities in regard to the match Fenerbahçe vs. IBB Spor, played on 1 May 2011.
Karabükapor va. Fenerbahçe played on 8 May 2011
In the Appeals Body's opinion, based on the information contained in several documents, such as the Police Digest and the 16,h High criminal court decision, it is established that match fixing activities were conducted b.y representatives of the Club, i.e. Mr Yıldırım and Mr ^kşioglu, regarding the match Karabükspor v*. Fenerbahçe played on 8 May 2011.
Fenerbahçe va. Ankaragügü played on 15 May 2011
After examination all the elements of the case file, the Appeals Body is satisfied that there was an attempt to fix the match between Fenerbahçe and AnkaragUgQ played on 15 May 2011 of the 2010/2011 Turkish Super Lig. Consequently, the Appeals Body believes that the President of Fenerbahçe SK, Mr Yıldırım, a Fenerbahçe SK Executive Committee member Mr Ekşio^lu, Fenerbahçe SK Vice President Mr MosturoÇlu and Youth Division Director Mr Turhan, took an active part in these match-fixing activities.   The  evidence  submitted   provided   support   to
Session of 10 July 2013
Pedro Tomas,   Spain
Vice-Chairmen   Michael Maessan,   Netherlands Gootz Eilera,  Germany
the case
ed by Deniz Tolga Aytöre,  Attorney at  Law,   Abdullah orney at Law, Abdurrahim Erol, Attorney at Law, Ayhan Attorney at Law,  Andreas Zagklis,  Attorney at Kcidcl,   Attorney at   Law and Stephen Bock,   Atl
it Law,
represented by Miguel Lietard Fernândez-Palacios
Disciplinary Inspector,
the UEFA Control and Disciplinary Body's decision of 22 June 2013 regarding the violation of the principles of conduct (Art.   5 DR - Ed.  2008)

Fenerbahçe referred the decision to CAS. However, CAS also approved UEFA's decision. Click here for full decision of CAS on Fenerbahce's Ban.

Match-Fixing Protected by Turkish Authorities
What League is Fenerbahce in FIFA 13
Why is Fenerbahce Banned
Why is Fenerbahce not in FIFA 13
Why is Fenerbahce Not in FIFA 14

What Is The Difference Between Agreement And Contract

Contract is the legally technical term. If an offer is accepted and there is the consideration, then it is technically called a contract.

Agreement, as a legal term is as definite as contract. Every contract is an agreement since the parties consent the same thing. However, not every agreement is a contract, because there are no legally specified elements required for an agreement. An mutual recognition of wills may be an agreement.

In practice, many contracts are named agreement. This approach is not false but just fails to be sufficiently definitive. It is usually the lawyer's job to find out whether a so-called agreement is technically a contract or not.

Explicit - Implicit

The meaning of explicit: (or express)

If something is communicated clearly, without any deeper analysis necessary, then it is explicit. In some texts, the term express is used exactly in the same meaning. The term couples explicit-implicit and express-implied function exactly the same.

The meaning of implicit:

If something is not express directly and needs a deeper analysis to discover the correct meaning, then it is implicit. In some texts, the term implied is used exactly in the same meaning. Both terms derive from the verb to imply, which means to convey an idea in an indirect way.

Their adverb forms are as follows:

express -> expressly
explicit -> explicitly
implied -> implicitly
implicit -> implicitly

What Is The Difference Between Law And Act

The difference between a law and an act:

Law, derived from legis in Latin, refers to a set of rules issued in a continental jurisdiction.

Act, where it also refers to a set of rules, originally means a legislative act, issued is an Anglo-American jurisdiction.

Since continantal jurisdiction is based on statutes (and yes we will also mention the difference between a law and a statute) while Anglo-American jurisdiction is based on precedences, the way they refer to a law differs. In Anglo-American jurisdiction precedents are the primary source of code. When a legislative body issues a set of rules to fill in the legal gaps, it is referred to as an act, because it will be a secondary source of the law (did we mention the difference between the law and a law?).

The difference between a law and a statute:

A law does not necessarily appear in a written form. There are also oral laws. However, statute definitely refers to a written law.

Let us note that continental law is also called statutory law because it is mainly based on written laws as the primary source of law.

The difference between a law and a code:

This is the easiest one. A code ise defined as "a compilation of laws". Therefore, every code is a statute. Beyond that, it may include more than one law, so that it covers a whole branch of the law. For instance, there are Penal Codes (or Criminal Codes), Civil Codes, Commercial Codes etc. But there is no "Code on illegal invasion of lands" or "Code on dissolution of marriage", because that would be too limited an area for being a code.

A hint: if a branch of law is studied as a separate lesson in law schools (obligations law, penal law etc.) the legislation governing that area alone will probably be referred to as a code.

French Civil Code of 1804 

The difference between the law and a law:

Let us firstly note that this difference does not always apply perfectly. It may depend on the context. However, in most cases the law refers to the system of rules, including statutes, regulations, decrees etc. in a certain jurisdiction, whereas a law refers to a statute or an oral set of rules on a certain field of law.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...