OL, OM, Aulas: "We don't want to pay for others"

The day after the incident which caused the end of the match between OL and OM, Jean-Michel Aulas returned for some media, including O&L, on the course of the evening, but also on the possible sanctions to come for the club. The boss of Olympique Lyonnais does not want to "pay for others".

Who asked the announcer to announce the resumption of the match?

Jean-Michel Aulas: "The person who gave the instructions to the organizer, Xavier Pierrot, is the supervisor of the delegates who was present. This was recorded by Xavier. It was passed on in the terms that have been given, namely the resumption on the condition that there are no other incidents, which was explained by the announcer.

Why did the referee change his decision?

"It's complex, but it happened in a very tense moment. I didn't participate at the beginning of the meeting, which took place in the security center, I arrived at the end of 20 minutes because I thought my presence was not necessary Mr. Buquet from the start tried to protect the health of the players, which is normal He was affected by the injury of Dimitri Payet He gave from the start , at least that's what was reported to me, the impression that he was rather in favor of quitting. Then everyone intervened and the Marseille leaders were very courteous. There were exchanges, the prefect and the DDSP (departmental directorate of public security) indicated that evacuating 56,000 people was perhaps a bit complicated. Discussions and reflections continued with in particular Xavier Pierrot and Vincent Ponsot who represented the club. Mr. Buquet said we were going to resume and that he was going to give the terms to the captains and coaches in his locker room. They were therefore received by the refereeing corps and the two delegates. At that time, the referee announced the resumption and the modalities, that is to say 10 minutes, including 7 warm-up and 3 devoted to restoring order to everyone's minds.

At the same time, there were obviously external exchanges since some time later the supervisor of the delegates, after giving the decision to resume, came back to say that Mr. Buquet wanted to see the two presidents and the prefect. In the locker room, the referee indicated that he wanted the meeting to be interrupted, recalling that he had already made this assumption during the first meeting. The prefect was surprised and reproached him for having held the first meeting for an hour only to finally change his mind. I for my part then asked the question to Mr. Buquet to find out what his motivations were for changing his mind. There was not a really precise answer, he let it be thought that it was his intimate conviction from the beginning.

"The decision was taken far too long after the incidents"

The wait around the decision to resume the match or not

"The decision was made far too long after the incidents. We should not wait 1h or 1h30 to choose whether to resume or if we stop, and on this point, I agree with the League and the presenters. But in the meantime, I think there were a number of outside interventions, even if since I wasn't there, I can't say exactly what happened. some Marseille players, in particular an Argentinian (Spanish, it was Álvaro González) who banged on the door and shouted insults Steve Mandanda, who has always been exemplary in correctness since he was replacing Dimitri, took note of the decision. The Phocaeans came to demand that Ruddy Buquet go see Payet before resuming the match. This is what created the incidents and probably changed the direction of history.

The match OM - OL in September 2015

"There were no diatribes as there were perhaps a few years ago when Mathieu Valbuena returned to Marseille, where this time it was not bottles in plastic, but beer cans. Moreover, Mr. Buquet was already the referee, so he knew what was at stake since the prefect of police at the time had imposed a resumption of the match to avoid a certain number of incidents. ."

"It's a measure that we will of course accept"

The sanction of general closed session as a precaution

"I think that from the moment there was an incident that we cannot deny, the League is completely entitled, especially following the surreal intervention of the Minister of Sports ( Roxana Maracineanu), to take, at least for the form, a decision of principle. This one marks the spirits, will penalize us. But by putting myself in the place of the LFP and under the pressure of events, it is a extent that of course we will accept. It was unfortunately foreseeable in the media context which is ours. I wanted to remind you that we are here in the context of a serious concern, we apologized for it and we assume our responsibility, but which concerns an individual who has been arrested, without there having been an invasion of the pitch. The individual is directly pointed out by the groups of supporters who condemn this act. From there, we will wait for the decisions of the justice.

You should know that when the League is fighting against the Ministry of Justice and that of Sports to try to enforce a certain number of decisions on the public highway, we are here in much the same situation and taking into account extremely sophisticated installations of OL, in particular in terms of video and cameras, the individual was caught in the act. It is up to the courts to punish. We proposed very clearly to write him off for life, but we don't have the right to do so. So since we are being given lessons from the outside, and on Tuesday I will be at Place Beauvau (Ministry of the Interior) to also explain that we apply the rules, the instructions, it is now up to justice to intervene. That the League suspends, while waiting for the instruction, the entirety of the stadium, it is not economically totally justified, but we completely admit, content of the impact that must be given to this affair, and especially measures that must be found for football to regain this form of serenity. But we must not confuse things because what happened on Sunday has nothing to do with pitch invasions or fights between supporters."

Should points be taken away from OL?

"I think you have to be in bad faith to compare the events of Nice - Marseille, Montpellier - OM or Lens - Lille because we are in invasions of the field and fights. A certain number of "coaches and assistants went to the police themselves. I remain in favor of the fact that there are severe sanctions, including in terms of points, because it is the only decision that can stop the groups of supporters [...] Yes, we can be in favor of drastic sanctions, and in particular deducting points when there are invasions of the field and fights. Do we deserve to have one point less, I I'm not sure. Now, if it helps to advance all of the case law in terms of safety... but then we'll have to look at what has happened since the start of the season, and what This is not a point that should be taken away from the perpetrators of a number of acts which are totally different from those of Sunday.

"We are going to defend greater rigor on the part of the authorities"

Are you afraid of a heavy sanction?

"I don't know what you mean by heavy sanction, but it is already immense when it arrives on a television like Amazon, on Sunday evening, for a meeting which must be the top of the championship, obviously that we fear of sanctions. My role is to tell the truth and since Sunday it has not been said, and moreover, I will file a complaint against those who have said inaccurate things and which have been easily verified, with in particular the press release of the Prefecture. We are going to defend greater rigor on the part of the authorities, but we do not want to pay for others. If there is to be a strong sanction against OL, there will have to be retroactively coherent ones like those that will be applied to us. If there had been a history in Lyon, we would have known about it and we would have possibly been sanctioned with a suspended sentence, which is not the case since it is the first time."

What about the OL-OM game?

"I can't imagine that we don't replay this match, look at what happened in Nice. The match was replayed on neutral ground."

What are you going to do for the public

"We have to wait for the decisions to find solutions adapted to the new configuration. But we will, as always, listen to people who were kind enough to pay sometimes substantial sums because the prices were high for this gala."

"We have the possibility of putting nets on the bends"

Is the idea of ​​installing nets mentioned?

"Of course. We had at one point, following the famous European Cup match, a certain number of nets, but in the negotiations with the groups of supporters, we had removed them, because they are responsible. We have the possibility of putting some in the turns. I remind you that during the first meeting, Ruddy Buquet was asked to put 4 shields in each of the corners, which we did."

Vincent Labrune said that we had to "turn the table", do you think that everyone should pull in the same direction on these issues concerning supporters?

"I am completely in solidarity with Vincent on this subject. If we have to overturn the table, everyone has to do it, out of fairness and jurisprudence. But I agree that it should not to renew itself. We know very well that between the ideas that can ripen on a night of disaster and the reality of everyday life, there is a big step. I don't think that's in the interest of the League of stop all matches.

The LFP press release

"There was probably contact between the League and the people who participated. It's not OL because by default, it had no interest, so I let you imagine who could have shared information which is wrong."