An analysis of the most famous cases in which the field result was changed by court decisions in Brazilian football.
The term “tapetão” is a popular expression in Brazilian football to describe situations in which results achieved on the field are changed in the courts. Historically, several disputes over relegation, access or titles ended up in the Superior Court of Sports Justice (STJD) or even in the common courts, generating controversies that marked championships. This article recalls the cases in which teams escaped relegation through court decisions, analyzing the context and rules that allowed these turnarounds.
What is ‘turning the tables’ in football?
The “turning of the tables” or the “tapetão” dispute occurs when a club resorts to legal bodies to reverse a punishment or a sporting result. Generally, the reason is the alleged violation of competition regulations by an opponent. The most common allegation is the irregular lineup of athletes, whether due to problems with registration, documentation or compliance with automatic suspension.
The legal basis for these punishments is the Brazilian Code of Sports Justice (CBJD). Article 214, for example, provides for the loss of points for the team that fields an athlete in an irregular condition. The standard punishment is the loss of three points, plus the points won in the match in question, which in practice results in the loss of four points in the case of a win and three in the case of a draw.
Remember the most emblematic cases of relegation on the carpet
Throughout the history of the Brazilian Championship, several episodes of relegation decided in court have become notorious. Below, we detail the most significant ones.
- Fluminense Case (1996): After finishing the 1996 Brasileirão in second-to-last place, Fluminense was relegated to Series B. However, a result-fixing scandal involving the president of the CBF arbitration committee, Ivens Mendes, and the presidents of Corinthians and Athletico-PR, came to light. Amidst the credibility crisis, the CBF decided to annul that year’s relegation system, saving Fluminense and Bragantino from falling.
- Sandro Hiroshi case (1999): Botafogo was one of the beneficiaries of a court decision in 1999. The club escaped relegation after São Paulo was punished with the loss of points for the irregular lineup of striker Sandro Hiroshi, who had a “cat” (age adulteration). The punishment for the São Paulo club changed the table and saved Botafogo, relegating Gama in its place. The confusion generated by this case led to the creation of the João Havelange Cup the following year.
- Gama Case (2000): Unsatisfied with the 1999 relegation, Gama appealed to the common courts and obtained an injunction to compete in the first division in 2000. The court decision prevented the CBF from organizing the championship, leading Clube dos 13 to create the Copa João Havelange. The tournament featured 116 teams divided into modules, and its formula allowed Fluminense, which was in Series C, and Bahia, in Series B, to reach the final stage and return to the elite of national football.
- Héverton Case (2013): One of the most recent and controversial cases involved Portuguesa. In the last round of the 2013 Brasileirão, the club selected midfielder Héverton in the second half of the match against Grêmio. The player, however, should serve an automatic suspension for having been sent off in a previous game. Denounced at the STJD, Portuguesa was punished with the loss of four points, which made it fall to the relegation zone and saved Fluminense, which had finished the championship in the last four. In the same round, Flamengo also selected an irregular player (André Santos), was punished with the loss of points, but was not relegated due to having a greater margin in the table.
The regulation and role of the STJD
The Superior Court of Sports Justice (STJD) is the highest body of sports justice in Brazil, responsible for ultimately judging disciplinary infractions and disputes that occur in national competitions. Its decisions are based on the Brazilian Code of Sports Justice (CBJD), which establishes the rules and sanctions for clubs, athletes, managers and referees.
The role of the court is to ensure that the regulations are complied with by all participants, ensuring equality and the legality of the competition. Although the decisions are often seen as interfering with the result on the field, they represent the application of the rules that the clubs themselves agreed to follow when registering for the championship. The controversy arises when the punishment for an administrative error has a greater sporting impact than the team’s own technical performance over 38 rounds.
The STJD’s decisions that change relegations are a controversial and recurring chapter in Brazilian football. These episodes demonstrate the complex relationship between the result obtained in the field and the strict application of regulations in the courts. Cases such as those of Portuguesa, Fluminense and Gama are frequently cited in debates about sporting justice, fair play and the need for administrative professionalization of clubs, serving as a permanent reminder that, in Brazil, the championship does not always end with the final whistle.
