SOCCER: Rio Ferdinand could take the Football Association to the high court in an attempt to have his eight-month ban for failing to take a drugs test overturned.
The England central defender, who plans to lodge an appeal against the punishment in the New Year, will fight the case as an individual in order to avoid Manchester United receiving swingeing penalties from FIFA.
Yesterday Sepp Blatter, the president of world football's governing body, warned that any challenge by the club to the ruling by an FA disciplinary panel could see them expelled from the Champions League.
Under FIFA rules, the decisions of national associations cannot be challenged by clubs in the courts. Article 63 of FIFA's statutes states: "Recourse to ordinary courts of law is not permitted. Clubs and members . . . should be required to submit any disagreement to the jurisdiction of the national association."
In the past, FIFA have dealt harshly with clubs who have attempted to overturn their rulings. The Paraguayan club Olimpia were banned from international competition in 2001 after challenging a FIFA ruling on a player transfer in the courts.
Old Trafford sources said yesterday there was no question of the club seeking legal redress on Ferdinand's part: "This has always been Rio's case. The individual was charged, not the club." However, Ferdinand continues to have the full support of United. He was represented at last week's two-day hearing by Maurice Watkins, a director at Old Trafford and a partner at the Manchester law firm James Chapman and co. It is understood the firm will continue to represent Ferdinand.
In the first instance Ferdinand will appeal to the FA. This week he will receive a written explanation of the decision and will then have 14 working days in which to lodge his appeal.
The appeal will be heard by a three-man panel chaired by an independent QC. The other two members will be drawn from the FA council. In an indication of the seriousness with which the FA views the case, the FA chairman Geoff Thompson, a disciplinary expert, will be one of them.
Until the appeal is heard, Ferdinand will be free to continue to play for United but will not be selected by England. The FA hope to hear the appeal before the end of next month.
Ferdinand's appeal will be based on alleged procedural errors by the doping control officers who attended United's Carrington training complex on September 23rd, and will also draw attention to the precedent of Christian Negouai, the Manchester City player fined £2,000 for the same offence.
Yesterday Alex Ferguson also drew comparisons with the cases of Edgar Davids and Jaap Stam, who were banned for only five months for testing positive for nandrolone.
However, under FA regulations, a failure to provide a drugs test is seen as the equivalent of a positive test, and by that measure, Ferdinand's penalty would appear less draconian. Mark Bosnich was banned for nine months after testing positive for cocaine, a month more than Ferdinand received for a commensurate offence. If the appeal fails, Ferdinand can seek redress at the Court of Arbitration in Sport.
The problem with both these avenues is that they are bound to follow the regulations. Ferdinand's legal team appear to have been adopting the strategy of challenging such regulations, something they can only achieve in courts of law.
One avenue is to challenge the ban in the high court under European human rights legislation. Ferdinand could claim the ban is so unreasonable that it represents an unfair restraint of his right to work.
Whatever the outcome of the cases, it may be that Ferdinand can continue to play simply by continuing the legal process.
Meanwhile, a leading sports lawyer has claimed that Ferdinand is set to lose several key sponsors, and with them hundreds of thousands of pounds, as a result of his ban.
The player is in the first 12 months of a three-year deal worth £270,000 with the sportswear company Nike. He also has a deal with the clothing brand Ben Sherman.
Nike previously stated their intention to stand by Ferdinand but Mel Goldberg believes sponsors will now look closely at the small print of their contracts. "Most sponsorship deals have clauses relating to good behaviour and companies have the right to terminate them in the event of bad behaviour," Goldberg said.