straw man argument.
first of all being accused of murder is different than a betting scandal. different circumstances. and yes until the evidence proves that the player did it, i would say that he is innocent. that's what evidence is there for.
second of all, being accused of something is different than being convicted for the crime. van persie was accused of sexual assault. why is he not in prison? because evidence proved that he didn't do it.
in the case of this sporting trail, the bull$#@! is that conte has to prove he is innocent. do you understand how difficult this is? especially when the judge had deemed that the word of one man is more valuable than the word of many.
third, figc has proven in the past that there is a unfairness in serving out so called punishments and trials, making them unreliable as far as prosecutors go.