Brasileirão 2013 [R]

1- The Artigo 214 sounds pretty clear to me.

2- Heverton da Portuguesa foi expulso contra o Bahia e cumpriu suspensão automática diante da Ponte Preta. Só que ele recebeu uma outra punição, em um julgamento na sexta-feira anterior ao jogo do Grêmio, no domingo: pegou mais uma partida gancho, o que o impediria de atuar. No entanto, ele, que estava na reserva, entrou aos 32 min do segundo tempo naquela partida.
A Portuguesa sempre alegou que não foi avisada do segundo jogo de suspensão pelo advogado que a representou naquele julgamento, Osvaldo Sestário.

Looks like a lack of communication between the Portuguesa attorney (since then has been fired) and the Portuguesa coaching staff, which unfortunately is not a valid defense. And the punishment unanimously voted by all 5 STJD judges.
Is it fair? Hell no it is not fair, but THE LAW IS THE LAW.

 

http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/esport...f-vai-pedir-para-clube-esquecer-assunto.shtml

 

Horas depois do julgamento, atacante do Fluminense é hostilizado no Galeão
Na noite de segunda-feira, após o julgamento em que o STJD rebaixou a Portuguesa e salvou o Fluminense, Rafael Sóbis passou por um aperto no Rio. O atacante do Flu estava no Aeroporto do Galeão quando foi abordado de maneira agressiva por torcedores do Atlético-MG, que embarcavam para o Marrocos.
O grupo o interpelou com gritos de "vergonha" e "série B", que logo passaram a ser repetidos por outros passageiros. O atacante também foi vaiado. Rafael Sóbis teve que se retirar para uma área reservada.

http://globoesporte.globo.com/blogs...-atacante-do-flu-e-hostilizado-no-galeao.html

 

There were actually 5 Judges on the panel that resulted in a unanimous decision.
Anyway, Portuguesa can appeal further all the way to Brasilia, but this may be a waste of their money.
However, the situation does not seem to be 100% over, so it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I don't see Portuguesa being successful in appealing to higher courts for overturning the STJD Decision, especially since the venue was concluded through administrative hearings.

 

Hahahaha. Talk about getting off on a technicality. That is so ridiculous.

 

Brazil.............. lmao

 

wow thats good lmao.

 

@Mengão86 Can you elaborate on Fluminense jumping two divisions in 2000? Vickery mentioned this and also mentioned that the Brasileirao could have 24 clubs next season.

 

@Ombak regarding your post


Deal with the message, not the messenger. Vickery is plenty positive about Brazil when the news is positive.
I am dealing with the message AND the messenger and his motives, what are you talking about?! Give us an example of when he`s been positive about Brasil, come on?

The amount of games is a negative point. Ivo defended the Estaduais for example as tradition in another recent discussion. I meant to reply there but since I put it off, I'll add it here too: tradition alone is not a good reason to do anything.

Who are you to decide what is a negative point - just because its true means its a negative point right? Just concede its true if you want credibility. I never said that about tradition, what are you talking about?

All of the points above read as excuses to me.Again, these read as excuses. You want to compare Portsmouth losing 10 point AFTER they were already relegated to what happens in Brazil? You want to compare regulations that require clubs to be financially responsible with a regular culture of trying to win off the field? You want to compare the tapetão to fining a club for breaking the rules about how a powerful corporation should act with respect to player contracts ?

The comparison is about English teams going to courts at the drop of a hat just like Brasilians, so why make such a big noise when Brasil do it? `Regular culture of trying to win off the field`! What!?
All of YOUR excuses are EXCUSES and youre trying to pretend its the other way around!

Two of those things are not at all analogous and the other (Portsmouth docked points) is barely analogous and defeats your point because it did not affect the relegation.Why are we Brazilians so defensive? Vickery's point is very valid. I don't give a shit what nationality typed up the words. We can argue about attendance if we want and even about the tapetão, as bizarre as it is to see 2 people defending it (though in both cases it seems to be that the defense is "I don't like foreigners talking bad about Brazil"), but lets not throw out criticism because you don't like it when it comes from someone who doesn't have a Brazilian passport.[/quote]

The points I made are entirely analagous, you just don`t have the honesty to admit it. Vickery`s point is drivel, in return I dont give a shit what you think either, youre obviously one of these people who grovel to the foreigners and fight their battles for them. You label anyone putting a contrary viewpoint as `Defensive`, so insulting anyone with an alternative opinion to yours. Your opinions will never stop other people voicing their opinions, which is what you`re trying to do I believe.

You come across as an apologist for Vickery and extremely unpatriotic . Stop sucking up to Vickery and stand up for your country instead.

 

Vickery doesn't have to apologize, Brazilian people should start looking at themselves for the problems with our society, that's the reality.

Honestly..



and then.. complain when people point it out.

 

I don't believe that at all.

 

I will if you will.
Nothing i could say would get you to admit you`re wrong so whats the point?
I just find it strange that someone who works for this website/forum, which relies on lively debate to draw in more people and sponsors i.e. money, would try to stifle any comments or opinions he doesnt agree with, and get all hysterical if anyone dares criticise Vickery.
All i did was give you a taste of your own medicine, and criticised your puppy-like allegiance to Vickery.

 

arguments are not made for people to admit that they are wrong. They are made to persuade a person to see things from your point of view.

You hate Vickery he likes Vickery, that won't change.

But maybe he disagrees with some of the things Vickery says and you agree with some of the things Vickery says.. Vickery's opinion is not law, just because he likes 1 aspect of his opinion doesnt mean he likes all of his opinions. And same goes to you.