Union Berlin is contesting a ruling made by the sports court of the German soccer federation, which awarded Bochum a 2-0 win following an incident during a Bundesliga match in December. This decision arose after Bochum’s goalkeeper was hit by a firelighter thrown from the stands.

Union’s president, Dirk Zingler, expressed his discontent, pointing out the ongoing issue of objects being thrown at events, suggesting that organizers have limited power to mitigate these acts. His comments followed the court’s ruling, which overturned the match result from a 1-1 draw to a Bochum victory.

The controversial match on December 14 had been nearing its conclusion when Bochum’s goalkeeper, Patrick Drewes, was struck by the projectile during stoppage time. The referee, Martin Petersen, halted the game and escorted both teams off the pitch while Drewes received medical assistance. Although Bochum initially didn’t want to resume play, the game restarted nearly thirty minutes later with striker Philipp Hofmann taking Drewes’ place for the final three minutes. Both teams agreed to avoid scoring during this short resumption, a factor that contributed to the court’s ruling.

Court chairman Stephan Oberholz indicated that the decision to restart under those conditions undermined the fairness typical in sporting competitions. He stated that Union Berlin bore the responsibility for the weakening of Bochum’s team, pointing to the fact that the item was thrown by a supporter of Union.

Zingler disagrees with this perspective, framing the real scandal as the conduct on the field and within the court. He accused Bochum of exaggerating the incident’s significance and argued that it should ultimately be up to the referee to decide whether a game should be continued or halted. He warned that allowing one team to claim they were weakened could lead to biased refereeing and potential subsequent exploitation, with disadvantaged parties unable to prove their claims.