Complaint submitted by Qingdao team for dissatisfaction with the decision and punishment: full resumption of the three referees blow and punishment
After the penalty match, there was a lot of controversy. Shandong media said: Guoxin double star team encountered a series of miscarriage of justice and miscarriage of justice in the away game, especially in the away game with Shanghai team, it was because of an obvious miscarriage of justice that lost the victory of the game. And in this game, they are in the lead, three people were sent off by the referee one after another, resulting in the final defeat. However, according to the regulations, even if the appeal is successful, the result of the game cannot be changed, but Guoxin double star team still hopes to express the purpose of pursuing fairness in the form of appeal
The following is the original announcement of CBA Alliance:
On January 2, 2020, when the competition between the nine Taiwan agricultural commercial banks and Qingdao Guoxin double star team in the 2019-2020 CBA League was held until 3:49 seconds left in the first quarter, the on-the-spot referee sentenced Adams 4 of Qingdao Guoxin double star team to foul Jones 55 of the nine Taiwan agricultural commercial banks. Adams then went to the court to ask the referee for the basis of his foul behavior. Due to the poor language communication, there was misunderstanding, so he was fined for technical foul.
At the end of the game, Adams complained about the technical foul. According to the review team of CBA leagues referee office, the referee on the spot found that Adamss technical foul was not correct and Adamss appeal was successful. According to the relevant provisions of the special provisions and interpretation of CBA League in 2019-2020, Adamss technical fouls will not be accumulated in the TUD cumulative punishment, but the penalty rules and results that have been implemented in the on-the-spot competition will not be changed.