Petros Kausiyo and Lovemore Dube
HIGHLANDERS have been found guilty of causing the abandonment of their Chibuku Super Cup quarter-final clash against Simba Bhora at Wadzanai Stadium in Shamva.
They were hit with a US$6 000 fine and had the result of the abortive September 22 tie awarded to Simba Bhora on a 3-0 scoreline.
Bosso will effectively pay US$2 000 after US$4 000 was suspended.
The Bulawayo giants confirmed receiving a copy of the ruling and said the executive would discuss the contents of the judgment at their regular meeting this week.
“We have received the judgment, but we will only have a look at it next week at our meeting. We are aware that we cannot appeal against the decision according to the tournament rules,” said Highlanders secretary-general Morgan Dube.
Simba Bhora were awarded a penalty in the 79th minute following a Peter Muduhwa foul on Tinashe Balakasi, which video replays later confirmed had been committed outside the box.
Referee of the day Cecil Gwezera and his assistant Zondzi Ngosana awarded a penalty. Highlanders protested the call, resulting in the abandonment of the match.
A three-member Premier Soccer League disciplinary committee gave a detailed account of the testimonies of the witnesses and Bosso before resolving that the Bulawayo giants were to blame for the abandonment of the match.
Despite protesting the awarding of the dubious penalty to Simba Bhora, Highlanders goalkeeper and skipper Ariel Sibanda and his teammates were found guilty of refusing to take their positions after a 33-minute stoppage.
The judgment read in part:
“In terms of the Regulations (Paragraph 8.8), the offence attracts a mandatory fine of not less than US$6 000 and the match is awarded to the opposing team 3-0 winning score line or more if the opposing team already reached a higher score.
“The regulations allow the DC to impose further penalties.’’
The committee noted that Gwezera and Ngosana had been pathetic, but insisted that Bosso ought to have observed the rule of law as enshrined in the tournament’s rules and regulations.
“There is no doubt that the performance of the referees was poor. They were sanctioned for their poor performance.
“Some weight has to be given to this important fact in mitigation of the sentence. Ignoring this will result in an injustice and a legal absurdity.
“We have also taken note of the fact that Highlanders FC have already been fined US$6 000 for the violent behaviour of its fans during the same match. We resolved to give additional weight to this and treat the two offences together for purposes of assessing the penalty.
“It is for these reasons that we will use our discretion to depart from the minimum mandatory sentence and not impose additional penalties.
“Having said that, we must impose a fine that sends a message to all clubs that the law of the jungle will not be tolerated. Clubs must not take the law into their own hands.
Related Stories:
“We will not trivialise the offence which, without doubt, brought the game and the sponsors into disrepute. What makes this more serious is the fact that the abandonment was not caused by supporters but by players (led by the team captain) and team officials who should know better and lead by example,’’ said the committee.
The disciplinary committee was not amused by Bosso’s attitude as an institution.
“The club has shown no contrition at all. It continues to justify this errant behaviour by its players who were clearly being urged on by members of the technical team.
“This must be condemned. Such behaviour is not expected from one of the oldest football institutions in the country. Players and officials must understand that football is a very emotional game and whatever action they take in protest of unjust decisions must at the end of day protect the integrity of the game,” the committee noted.
The disciplinary committee was made up of Doreen Gapare, the chairperson Raphael Tsivana and Washington Magaya (members).
They urged the ZIFA Referees Committee to come to the party and find lasting solutions to the seemingly endless complaints against the conduct of their match officials.
“Before we conclude this matter, we must also state that football authorities responsible for referees must take action to holistically and permanently address complaints regarding the performance of referees in a manner that restores and builds the confidence of stakeholders,” the committee said.
“These have been repeatedly raised in a number of matters that have been brought before us. While we take judicial notice of all these complaints, aggrieved parties must ensure that their grievances are resolved in terms of thorough due process and in a manner that complies with the rule of law.’’
Gapare’s committee quashed Highlanders’ plea for a replay.
“It has been strongly argued that because the referee made ‘wrongful decisions’ and awarded a ‘non-existent penalty’ the disciplinary committee must order a replay.
“Reliance was placed on the CAS decision of Federation of Burkinabe Football vs FIFA SAFA & Others 2017/A/5324. In our view, this decision is not helpful for the accused. It is clearly distinguishable from the present matter in that: –
“The match between Senegal and South Africa that was the subject of the dispute was played for the entire 90 minutes. It was not abandoned before full-time. The teams did not abandon the match over the ‘non-existent handball’ that was part of the controversy.
“It was found that the match between South Africa and Senegal had been fixed. In proceedings before the FIFA Disciplinary Committee, it was established that the match referee, Mr Lamptey, awarded a non-existent handball and in addition, and according to a betting monitoring company Sportradar Integrity Services, there was clear and overwhelming evidence that the course or result of this match was unduly influenced.
“The betting evidence produced indicated that bettors held prior knowledge of at least three goals being scored in total. Likewise, Early Warning System Gmbh provided FIFA with an alert that it detected irregular betting patterns during the match.
“This is not the case in the present matter.
“While the penalty decision appears to be unjustified and unfair, this is not, in our view, sufficient to prove a deliberate and criminal manipulation of the game. The other incidents that the accused sought to rely on were properly explained by the referee.
“For the above reasons, we find that the decision of the CAS relied on is not helpful to the accused’s defence.”
