Sometimes I read a news snippet and think I'm in some surreal painting by Salvador Dali. A dreamscape all gone wrong. 

A Maltese footballer was found guilty of match-fixing and suspended for ten years. That's not yet the surreal stuff. But what the president of the MFA said a day or two after the suspension was announced did perplex me. 

First of all he said that it appeared that more players were involved in this scandal.  Still not too surreal I admit. But he also said that a player can be guilty of match-fixing even if he plays a few minutes, is kept on the bench or if he doesn't play at all. I'm no logic guy and I also have little knowledge of legalities and of football, but do these statements make any sense?

The most unbelievably surreal part is still to come. Kevin Sammut, the player found guilty, couldn't afford the ticket to go to the UEFA meeting during which his case was heard. So the MFA paid for him. Isn't that funny? The footballer was representing Malta in a match and was accused of colluding with an illegal betting ring and rigging the match. And MFA sponsored his flight and accommodation? Were the legal brains behind his defence also paid by the MFA?

I know, as some bright spark pointed out to me, we do go by the dictum that one is presumed innocent until proved guilty. But I find this hilarious.

While alive Dali should have dallied a bit here in Malta with his paint brushes.