Chelsea the biggest losers from VAR as rivals benefit most from video replays

first_imgCHELSEA were left ruing a disallowed goal once again on the weekend and, after six games, they have been caught out the most by VAR.Cesar Azpilicueta saw his effort chalked off because of an offside ruling against Mason Mount – albeit a correct one.3 Chelsea are coming off worst under VAR this season3 Gabriel Jesus was particularly incensed at the outcome of a VAR reviewCredit: ReutersIt was the second time the Blues’ celebrations were cut short this season after a goal by Kurt Zouma against Norwich was also dismissed for a foul by Olivier Giroud on goalkeeper Tim Krul.Chelsea are the only team to have two goals erased without a VAR decision in their favour, as revealed by ESPN.Wolves and Sheffield United are also yet to have a video review come to their rescue having lost out in a replay, the Midlands club in particular feeling hard done by after a Willy Boly handball cancelled out a potential winner at Leicester.Champions Manchester City were allowed to retake a Sergio Aguero penalty on the opening day but have also had a pair ruled out, most crucially Gabriel Jesus’ last gasp goal against Tottenham in August.Bournemouth and Brighton share a single-goal VAR deficit of-sorts, again with the decisions picked up generally agreed on as correct. Latest Football newsSILVA’S GOLDEN GIRLModel Ines Tomaz has been helping Bernardo Silva through quarantineGossipCROWD RETURNFA Cup final ‘may see 20,000 at Wembley in trial allowing some fans at games’CommentPHIL THOMASDiving and whining was never a good look and will seem worse after lockdownExclusive’I’M IN A BAD WAY’Ex-England star Kenny Sansom talks for first time since being attackedExclusiveBOURNE AGAINHowe says Cherries are stronger after lockdown with FIVE fit-again starsExclusiveSWAN THAT GOT AWAYSwansea wanted £3m Davies three years ago but couldn’t get work permitNEXT STEPJonny Hayes set to move to English Championship having been let go by CelticBAYERN 5 DUSSELDORF 0Lewa bags two as Bayern thump rivals to close on 8th straight titleBenefiting from the reviews have been West Ham, Leicester, Norwich and Liverpool – who were the recipients at Stamford Bridge on Sunday.And despite their own protestations at the narrow offside judgement that went against Son Heung-min, Spurs have come out stronger thanks to VAR.That is down to Ayoze Perez seeing his 16th minute goal past Paulo Gazzaniga chalked off and Jesus’ aforementioned handball call.The only team to have a plus-two goal difference from VAR referrals is Southampton.Goals by Oli McBurnie and Josh King were both checked and erased due to offsides, Saints going on to win 1-0 in the trip to Sheffield United as a result.3Premier League at risk of losing its integrity over VAR shambles as bosses admit they will CHANGE rules after four gameslast_img read more

Friday Roundup

first_img Elevate Your FCPA Research There are several subject matter tags in this post. However, only subscribers to FCPA Professor’s premium search feature can see and use them in research. Efficient and cost-effective FCPA research is just a click away. Odebrecht / Braskem settlement amount is significantly trimmed, a form of bribery?, quotable, deficient internal controls, and scrutiny alerts and updates. It’s all here in the Friday roundup.Odebrecht / Braskem Settlement Amount Significantly TrimmedThere was much false and misleading reporting about the FCPA settlement amount in the December 2016 FCPA enforcement action against Odebrecht / Braskem.As highlighted in this post, after accounting for various credits and deductions (including for payments to Brazil and Swiss law enforcement agencies and a claimed inability to pay) the net FCPA settlement amount (subject to potential future adjustments) was approximately $420 million. The $420 settlement amount consisted of approximately $260 million in connection with the Odebrecht criminal information and plea agreement; $94.8 million in connection with the Braskem criminal information and plea agreement; and $65 million in connection with the SEC’s related enforcement action against Braskem.Based on information in a recent DOJ filing, and confirmed by knowledgeable sources, Odebrecht is now “only” paying $93 million to the U.S. In other words, the overall Odebrecht / Braskem net FCPA settlement amount has been trimmed by $167 million and now stands at $252 million.$93 million in connection with the Odebrecht criminal information and plea agreement;$94.8 million in connection with the Braskem criminal information and plea agreement;and $65 million in connection with the SEC’s related enforcement action against Braskem.Time to update the top ten list of FCPA settlements (Odebrecht / Braskem is no longer in the top ten) and various 2016 FCPA enforcement statistics.Is This a Form of Bribery?Recently the DOJ/SEC have brought three enforcement actions (BNY Mellon, Qualcomm, and JPMorgan) based on the enforcement theory that business organizations which offer or provide internships or job opportunities to family members of certain customers or potential customers are engaged in a form of bribery.What if a business organization offers or provides internships or job opportunities to students at public universities as a way perhaps to secure sponsorship deals with those universities.Is this a form of bribery? See here for a recent Wall Street Journal article:“Companies often pay colleges for the right to sell sweatshirts or pour coffee on campus. Now, schools are increasingly looking to leverage those deals into internship slots, sponsorships for food pantries and other projects. [Recently], the University of California, Berkeley, will announce a 10-year, $8 million campuswide partnership with Peet’s Coffee & Tea under which the Bay Area chain will have retail locations and a presence in dining halls and athletic facilities. The company also must provide funds for a campus farm and garden and classes on low-cost healthy cooking. The Peet’s deal, which includes a handful of internships a year and sponsorships for graduate student travel, is part of a broader push by schools to deepen their relationships with firms doing business on campus.”QuotableIt’s hard to ignore the fact that some of the most forceful comments concerning the notion that FCPA enforcement may be a convenient cash cow for the U.S. government have come from former government enforcement attorneys. (See here for a collection of certain statements).In the latest example, James McGovern, who headed Brooklyn U.S. Attorney’s Office Criminal Division, stated: “FCPA enforcement represents a strong revenue stream for the Department of Justice.”Deficient Internal ControlsIt’s always interesting to pause and contemplate what would happen if the U.S. government were an issuer subject to the FCPA’s books and records and internal controls provisions. (See here for a prior post).The violations would be so plentiful they would be hard to track. Here would be one example. According to the New York Times:“Agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives used a secret, off-the-books bank account to rent a $21,000 suite at a Nascar race, take a trip to Las Vegas and donate money to the school of one of the agents’ children, according to records and interviews. […] The revelations highlight the lax oversight at the A.T.F. that allowed agents and informants to spend millions while avoiding the normal accounting process.”Scrutiny Alerts and UpdatesYin PleaAs highlighted in this previous post, in late 2016 the DOJ filed a superseding indictment adding Foreign Corrupt Practices Act charges to its existing 2015 enforcement action against Ng Lap Seng and Jeff Yin in connection with alleged bribery at the United Nations.Recently Yin pleaded guilty, but only to Count 7 of the superseding indictment which charged conspiracy to commit tax offenses.Royal Dutch ShellIn 2010, Royal Dutch Shell, along with several other oil and gas companies, resolved a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action regarding business conduct in Nigeria. (See this prior post for specifics of the $48 million DOJ and SEC FCPA enforcement).For a number of years, Shell has been under additional scrutiny for business conduct in Nigeria and earlier this week this scrutiny escalated with this in-depth report by BuzzFeed.According to the report:“Recent recordings and documents made public “reveals that Shell’s top executives at the time signed off on the deal [the acquisition of the exploration licence for an offshore oil block known as OPL 245] with full knowledge that the money would go to a front company connected to a former Nigerian oil minister, Dan Etete. The documents also show that Shell employees knew of – and explicitly discussed – the risk payments could be used by Etete to pay people off.”As noted in the report, “in a statement, Shell said it did not believe the company or any of its current or former colleagues had acted illegally.”For additional reporting, see here. Elevate Your Researchlast_img read more