"A Dangerous Opening": Hapoel Tel Aviv’s Main Points in Its Appeal

The group has completed its arguments: "The decision creates extreme consequences". Sport 5 Published: 10.06.26, 21:16 (Ellen Schieber) | Photo: Sport 5

The saga of the first game between Hapoel Tel Aviv and Hapoel Jerusalem is not over yet, following the Tel Aviv club’s appeal after the court ruled that the game would be resumed from a 0:0 score, and that Hapoel Jerusalem would not be handed a technical defeat. This evening (Wednesday), Hapoel Tel Aviv published the main points of its appeal.

In the document sent by Hapoel Tel Aviv, it was written, among other things: "Section 22 of the disciplinary regulations states that the punishment for a team that does not appear for a game is a technical defeat, but the court may, in special circumstances, order a replay," it said. "In our case, there are no ‘special circumstances’ in the regulatory sense that justify deviating from the rule of a technical defeat. The trigger for the incident that led to the game not being resumed was Hapoel Jerusalem’s refusal to return to the court." The team further wrote: "Moreover, if those ‘special circumstances’ are the security situation itself, then this does not align with its own findings, according to which in recent years we have been living in an ongoing security reality, and the teams and the association are required to act according to Home Front Command guidelines as part of the routine of activity. If that is the state of affairs, then in any event this is not a ‘special’ circumstance, in the sense that justifies deviation from the regulations. And if the special circumstances are not the security situation, then the ruling does not state what those special circumstances are, and in any event does not provide a sufficient basis for deviation from the prescribed regulatory outcome."

"The court erred in relying on the Holon case," the team continued laying out its arguments. "In that case it was determined that ‘in this case there was a real contribution by Gilboa to the occurrence,’ and from there the decision to hold a replay followed. This case is not similar to ours, since Hapoel Tel Aviv had no contribution whatsoever to the occurrence. Hapoel Jerusalem is the only party that was brought to trial and convicted, yet it is Hapoel Tel Aviv that ‘won’ the punishment."

The club continued: "The circumstances in our case are not logistical and external circumstances that justify ordering a replay, but rather, as the disciplinary court determined, circumstances that unfortunately are frequent in the State of Israel." "The difficulty is not only local but systemic, the decision creates extreme consequences and undermines the status of the refereeing teams and the authorized bodies," it said. "Most seriously, it sends a message that even when a team refuses to resume a game, it will be possible to bypass the regulatory outcome through retrospective claims. Such a precedent may open a dangerous opening for any team, in convenient circumstances, to seek to justify not resuming a game with one pretext or another. A replay is not a neutral solution, but in practice erases a sporting advantage. The ruling gives it another chance and imposes the cost precisely on the team that acted in accordance with the instructions."

In conclusion, it was written: "As for that ‘lenient side’ to which the court referred, it too was not defined, not explained, and not anchored in the regulations. By contrast, the supposedly ‘strict side’ is clear: the regulations set out a clear outcome of a technical defeat. Deviation without any real justification, and without identifying genuine special circumstances, is not a proportionate mitigation but a direct violation of the principle of legality, the principle of equality, and the professionalism of the sport. Failure to enforce the regulations in clear cases of this kind may turn competitive basketball from a professional framework governed by clear rules into a framework in which outcomes are no longer determined by law and the game, but by changing and unpredictable considerations."

Premier League basketball. Did you find a language error?