WHERE IS THE ASCOT RULING?
25 July 2017
ACTION resumes in the Premier Soccer League tomorrow as the second half of the tightly contested season gets underway with all eyes at Mandava where FC Platinum host Dynamos in a blockbuster encounter.
With the resources at his disposal, Norman Mapeza will be under pressure to deliver for FC Platinum who have been narrowly missing out on the title ever since gaining promotion into the Premiership.
Dynamos have a threadbare squad owing to financial challenges and they have surprised even themselves by being within touching distance of the leadership in the Premiership race.
While hoping to avoid back-to-back defeats to FC Platinum, Dynamos will also be dreaming of topping the league standings with victory in Zvishavane while other results go their way.
But we would not be in this situation had the Premier Soccer League’s disciplinary committee concluded the case of Dynamos’ abandoned match against Chapungu, which was called off at Ascot with the visitors leading 4-0 some 11 minutes into the second half.
It was a ‘watershed case’, which found the Premiership authorities at sixes and sevens, scrambling for statutes that govern the abandonment of a match due to the collapse of goalposts.
After days of digging, it was resolved to haul Chapungu before the disciplinary committee on a charge of failing to provide a reserve goalpost.
This was done at the end of last month. However, for some strange reason, the outcome of that disciplinary hearing has not been made public and this week we reach a full month since the hearing was conducted and still no ruling, at least for the public.
We did not expect there to be further consultations once the hearing was held and such a delay is not good for any justice process. It also creates unnecessary room for theories in a league race that promises to be the tightest in recent years with as many as EIGHT teams standing a good chance of winning the title at the end of the campaign.
Dynamos happen to be part of that mix and this case has a strong bearing on the race, at least as things stand.
Releasing whatever ruling timeously at this stage will not create any issues yet delaying rulings by over a month will prompt conspiracy theories as we head towards the finish line and it will, in the process, tarnish many brands.
The sponsor’s name will be brought into disrepute among many other casualties and yet this can easily be avoided by releasing rulings timeously once a hearing has been held and before the race reaches critical stages were even boardroom decisions become crucial.
The other problem is lack of updates from the league on the status of the case and communication is an area that needs attention.