On Thursday, FAČR chairman Petr Fousek testified at a court in Pilsen as a witness in the trial of former union vice-chairman Roman Berber. The editor of Sport.cz was there and watched as Berbra’s defense attorney Michal Sýkora began to ask Fouska about the events surrounding the referees. Sýkora asked Fouska whether there had been a meeting between him, Tvrdík and Příhoda. At first, Fousek answered evasively, until judge Vladimír Žák called on him to express himself clearly. “Yes,” admitted the tallest man in Czech football.
Sýkora then gradually asked him whether the owner of Baník Ostrava Václav Brabec, the vice-chairman of Sparta František Čupr or the head of Viktoria Plzeň Adolf Šádek were present at the aforementioned meeting. Fousek replied “No” three times.
The topic of referees is very sensitive in Czech football, so speculations immediately started, what it meant, whether this meeting resulted in Příhod’s resignation, and other questions. Stakeholders responded.
Slavia will not let its name be tarnished
The meeting between the chairman of the FAČR, the chairman of the FAČR referees’ commission and the chairman of the board of directors of SK Slavia Praha was in accordance with football rules and regulations, including ethical ones. She was official. She was in a public place. Chairman of the FAČR Referee Commission after…
— SK Slavia Prague (@slaviaofficial) October 20, 2023
“There was no ‘secret’ meeting as speculated. The meeting took place on June 2, i.e. a week after the end of the league, during a regular working lunch in a restaurant, i.e. in a public space, and was therefore completely official. The meeting took place at the request of SK Slavia Praha, whose chairman Jaroslav Tvrdík was, according to the rules of the time, a person authorized to communicate on behalf of SKS (each club appoints one authorized person authorized to communicate with the chairman of the FAČR Referee Commission),” the football association explained in its statement.
The deadline of June 2 is also confirmed by Slavia in its opinion on the whole matter. Stitchers also refer to the fact that Tvrdík is the man who has the right to communicate with the chairman of the referees’ commission on behalf of the club.
Photo: SK Slavia Prague
The head of football Slavia Jaroslav Tvrdík at a meeting with journalists before the match with Pilsen.
“Given that our club was a critic of the functioning of the FAČR referees’ commission under the leadership of Radek Příhoda in the final part of the FORTUNA:LIGA 2022/2023, Jaroslav Tvrdík, as the authorized person for communication with the FAČR KR chairman, requested FAČR chairman Petr Fousko as an independent party about organizing and participating in an official working meeting, where the club communicated its objections directly to the chairman of the KR FAČR. According to the regulations, all other professional football clubs have the same right,” wrote Slavia.
At the meeting, Tvrdík reproached Příhod for what Slavia did not like at the end of the season. He then presented his views at a meeting with high representatives of other strong clubs, i.e. Sparta, Viktoria Plzeň and Baník Ostrava, or at the League Committee on June 21, after which the head of the League Football Association, Dušan Svoboda, presented the club’s appeal that the FAČR Referee Commission and the entire Football Association of the Czech Republic strained their strength in the matter of referees. Subsequently, the Executive Committee of the FAČR met. Příhoda resigned from the post of head of judges only later, specifically on July 3. He was replaced in the position by Libor Kovařík, who was vice-chairman of the referees’ committee until then.
Back to the meeting of Tvrdík, Příhoda and Fousko. “The meeting was not secret. It was convened officially by the chairman of the FAČR. It took place in a public place of the restaurant in the presence of other guests. The club subsequently informed the representatives of AC Sparta Prague, FC Viktoria Plzeň and FC Baník Ostrava about this meeting and its content at a joint meeting. Namely František Čupr, Adolf Šádek and Václav Brabec,” said Slavia.
According to the statement of its vice-chairman František Čupr, Sparta was initially surprised and, according to him, did not know about the meeting. When more detailed information emerged during the day, Tomáš Křivda, general manager of Letenských, added a supplement on the social network X (formerly Twitter).
“Yesterday (Thursday) we were approached by the newspaper Blesk in response to the discussion of the football case at the court in Pilsen, asking if we knew about the meeting that preceded the resignation of the chairman of the referees’ commission, Radek Příhoda. František Čupr truthfully answered that we do not know and we are surprised. Ultimately, however, it appears that no such meeting took place immediately prior to the resignation. We were informed about the meeting at the beginning of June, i.e. a month before the resignation of Radek Příhoda. At that time, the League committee was being prepared, in which he was supposed to participate, and there was no indication of his resignation,” wrote Křivda.
František Čupr truthfully answered that we do not know and we are surprised. Ultimately, however, it appears that no such meeting took place immediately prior to the resignation. We were informed about the meeting at the beginning of June, i.e. a month before the resignation of Radek Příhoda. 2/3
— Tomas Krivda (@tomkrivda) October 20, 2023
Two other strong clubs also responded to Sport.cz’s questions. “We were informed about the mentioned meeting, both by Jaroslav Tvrdík and Petr Fousko. It happened long before the resignation of Mr. Příhoda. Considering that we were informed about its content and contents, I do not consider it to be anything out of the ordinary,” said Baník head Václav Brabec.
West Bohemians speak similarly. “We were informed about the meeting, which is now the topic, and at the same time we were introduced to its content both by Mr. Jaroslav Tvrdík and by the chairman of FAČR, Mr. Petr Fousko. From this point of view, we do not find anything unusual about it. If there was another one, after which Mr. Příhoda would have resigned immediately, we do not know anything, and it is a question whether any such thing took place at all,” said Viktoria Plzeň.
