VICTORY FOR NSINGIZINI AGAINST EFA

MBABANE – Nsingizini Hotspurs have won their case in court against the Eswatini Football Association (EFA).

The High Court, yesterday ruled that the EFA Appeals Board and Protests and Disciplinary Committee’s ruling in the matter between Hotspurs and Amalanda FC’s was unlawful. Hotspurs wanted the court to interdict the SRFA, EFA and the PLE from implementing the rulings of the appeals Board and disciplinary committee regarding Amalanda playing in the First Division in the 2020/21 season, pending its review application in the High Court. At this time, the First Division games about to begin and Hotspurs won the first leg of the playoffs 1-0 and the return leg 2-1and would have been automatically promoted to the National First Division on 3-1 aggregate. However, according to Derrick Shiba, the Director of Hotspurs, Amalanda lodged a protest against Sebenele Dlamini, whom it alleged was also registered with XI Experience FC campaigning under the Maphalaleni Promotion League.

ruled

The court ruled that the committee did not follow the provisions of the Competitions Rules in Article 9(1) when making their ruling and should hear the matter once more before they make a ruling. The protest was heard by the Protest and Disciplinary Committee on November 27, 2020 and three days later, a ruling was issued, upholding the protest in favour of Amalanda, which was awarded three points and three goals resulting in the aggregate score being 4-2 in its favour. Hotspurs appealed against the decision ruling. The appeal was heard by the EFA Appeals Board on December 8, 2020. The Board dismissed the appeal. According to Shiba, Hotspurs’ grounds of appeal were that Amalanda’s protest was allegedly not lodged in accordance with Competition Rules and Regulations, particularly Article 9(1).

protest

He said Article 9(1) provides in part that: “Any protest regarding defaulters must be lodged with the referee before the start of the match or at the time the player is introduced into the field of play. The protest must be countersigned by both captains and acknowledged by the referee otherwise it shall be null and void…” Shiba argued that the protest document that was filed by Amalanda allegedly did not comply with requirements of Article 9(1). “The protest was not lodged either before the start of the match nor at the period the player was introduced onto the field of play,” Shiba claimed. He said the player did not start the game, but was introduced in the 80th minute. He submitted that Amalanda allegedly did not lodge a protest against the player when he was introduced. He said as per the provisions of Article 9(1), no protest could be lodged afterwards. He also informed the court that even the referee’s report allegedly contained no record of any protest against Sebenele’s introduction to the game.

limbo

The start of the MTN National First Division was in limbo after Nsingizini Hotpurs FC, who were docked three points during the playoffs for allegedly fielding a double-registered player, took the chairperson of the Eswatini Football Association’s (EFA) Appeal Board and Protests and Disciplinary Committee, SRFA and the PLE, among other respondents, to court, over the manner in which it missed out on a spot in the First Division League.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: