Player gets 50-year ban after attack

[Phil E]

A Switzerland-based amateur footballer has been banned for 50 years after kicking a ball in the referee's face and spraying him with water.
Portugal Futebol Clube defender Ricardo Ferreira has already served a 45-game ban for assaulting opposition players.
"I had expected one or two years maximum. But 50 years? Football's my life," Ferreira, 28, said.
The fourth-tier league's lawyer Robert Breiter said: "We do not want such a player in our league."
Speaking to Swiss newspaper Blick (in German), (external) Breiter continued: "Unfortunately we encounter such cases about once a year."
Ferreira had been an unused substitute in his team's match against SC Worb in the Bern league when he attacked the referee after the final whistle.
Ferreira will be free to return to footballing activity on 5 June 2064, by which time he will be 78.

 

[The Fat]

Ferreira will be free to return to footballing activity on 5 June 2064, by which time he will be 78.

Staying motivated could be a challenge:wink:

 

[winchesterref]

As could beding down to get his boots on!

 

[Ian_Cook]

A 50 year ban is a bit meaningless isn't it? Why not just ban him for life and be done with it.

 

[Daftmedic]

European law.
Tou can't give whole life sentences.

- - - Updated - - -

European law.
Tou can't give whole life sentences.

 

[SimonSmith]

That's incorrect as the the English and Wales Courts of Appeal, as well as the Supreme Court, have laid down. There are enough prisoners doing whole life terms to demonstrate that fact.

This is from February:
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/feb/18/whole-life-sentences-can-continue-appeal-court-rules

There was another ruling either last week or the week before that as well.

 

[crossref]

what the UK have had to change (I think I am right here) is the old practice of judges giving 'at her majesties plesure' which led to home secetaries having the power to decide who should serve whole-life and who should get out.
as a result of interventions from europe it's now (I think , quite rightly) a wholly judicial process with judges passing sentences and parole boards and the like performing reviews. Not politicians.

 

[Browner]

what the UK have had to change (I think I am right here) is the old practice of judges giving 'at her majesties plesure' which led to home secetaries having the power to decide who should serve whole-life and who should get out.
as a result of interventions from europe it's now (I think , quite rightly) a wholly judicial process with judges passing sentences and parole boards and the like performing reviews. Not politicians.

As if 'politicians' cant influence parole board decisions :sarc:

Chris Huhne served a mammoth 8 weeks of his 8 month 'ptcoj' sentence .

PS... "Life" can mean as 'little' as 7 years in the UK.