Paris and OM whistle truce against Canal + – Sports.fr

The boycott against Canal + has ended. At least until the end of the season side Paris Saint-Germain and Marseille are satisfied that the promises of the LFP and one of the Ligue 1 broadcasters to preserve the privacy of the players around the locker room.

The radio silence decided by the PSG (and OM) against Canal + has ended on the side of the capital. This is what the double champion title in France announced early evening Monday. “ PSG, satisfied with the will of the LFP to clarify the conditions under which will now be exploited images of the players at the exit of the land, suspends freeze relations with the Canal Plus Group .” PSG explains his position that the League has clearly provided guarantees on change “ next season conditions in which the images of the players will be taken at the time of entry into the locker room s “and that this constituted” a breakthrough for professional clubs . “

This boycott was born from the sanction of four matches (reduced to three after the opinion of the National Committee French Olympic and Sports) Zlatan Ibrahimovic for his comments filmed in the paddock Chaban-Delmas on 15 March after Bordeaux-PSG (3-2). “ The CNOSF himself acknowledged that the footage shot at the time of entry in the locker room ” received publicity “ which strongly influenced the views of the Disciplinary Committee , “the statement said. And as PSG, OM ended Monday evening to boycott instituted against Canal +. “ Following the decision of the Professional Football League to bring the suspension imposed on Dimitri Payet from two to one match, Olympique Marseille waives any restrictive measures against the teams in charge of the Canal + Group ensure coverage of his meetings , “the club Marseille.

Also the image of Parisian rival, OM is based on the advisory opinion in this case , the French National Olympic and Sports Committee. “ OM welcomes the LFP has chosen to follow the recommendations of the CNOSF who acknowledged that the facts alleged in Marseille player had been ” in the absence of the arbitral body n ‘could take cognizance only through a television broadcast of footage while the player did not know to be filmed and recorded “,” the statement said.