After all, not only is there no contradiction or deviation from the match referee's report, but these things rely on the referee's report.
- In this regard, it is important to distinguish between the factual basis determined by the match referee in the referee's report, and the legal conclusion regarding the causal connection, which is given to the Association's judicial institutions.
The Supreme Court makes this distinction in a proper and fair manner, when it accepts the factual basis established by the match referee and determines the causal connection on the basis of this factual basis, and I will illustrate.
Thus, Judge Zarnakin appropriately adopts the judge's report in relation to the Sakhnin sons, and states:
"Anotherpoint that requires consideration is the decision of the Sakhnin people not to go up to the grass despite the judge's order. In my opinion, despite the subjective fears of the Bnei Sakhnin players from taking to the field, against the background of the violent behavior of the Hapoel Be'er Sheva fans, the team should have obeyed the referee's order and allowed the existence of the K. In this regard, the minority judge in the trial court was correct when he ruled that Bnei Sakhnin should be convicted because of her refusal to take the field."
Thus, Judge Zarnakin explains the legal conclusion, that the fact that Bnei Sakhnin is responsible for not holding the game due to a refusal to obey the referee's orders, does not detract from Hapoel Be'er Sheva's responsibility:
"In my opinion, the reason for the non-existence of the game stems not only from the decision of the Bnei Sakhnin players not to return to the field (which I will discuss later), but also, and mainly, to the bullying behavior of Hapoel Be'er Sheva fans, which preceded this decision." (my emphasis - G.H.).
This determination does not alter or deviate from the match referee's report, and it is based, as stated, on the factual basis well laid out in the referee's report. The conclusion of the judges regarding the existence of a causal connection between the conduct of the two teams and their fans and the non-holding of the game is a purely legal conclusion , which is within the full authority of the judicial institutions.