Tripple B pay the price

0
469

Zifa needs to urgently adopt new rules and regulations for football justice to prevail.

This is Muchadeyi Masunda and Justice Gubbay’s conclusion after finalising the Hardbody and Tripple B case yesterday which saw the former being granted Premiership status after three months of hearings.

Part of their judgment reads: “The Central Region is encouraged to pass its own rules and regulations and in the interim to employ the 1996 Zifa Rules and Regulations, like the other regions are doing. At the same time, as this appeal so starkly reveals, it is imperative that the Zifa Assembly should adopt its draft rules and regulations without an unnecessary delay.”

It was evidently clear from documents made available in the case that started in the Central Region last year that Hardbody were in the wrong because the player in question, Tatenda Chingara had no proper registration papers after playing in Namibia.

He played in 14 matches and Tripple B only made a complaint at the end of the season, which was one of their major downfalls.

In other leagues, complaints are registered within 48 hours and anything after that will not be accepted. A recent case arose before the start of the 2012 Africa Cup of Nations finals where Namibia protested in the case of one Burkina Faso player Herve Zengue.

Zengue was not qualified to play for Burkina Faso but Namibia made a complaint three months after the conclusion of the qualifiers, meaning they while their had a genuine case, they were beaten by a technicality. The same goes for Tripple B: Chingarah had no reverse ITC, but the appeal was late and the rules of the Central Region are heavily skewed.

Masunda and Gubbay clarified the case: “The Central Region Rules mention invalid registrations. This is not specifically the same as the use of an unregistered player. There is a difference between an unregistered player and a player whose registration is a result of false information.

“When Tatenda Simon Chingara played for the Appellant, he was a registered player. The offence is not in fielding him. It is having him registered on the basis of false information. His registration papers were duly processed by Zifa.

“He was duly issued with a licence. He was accordingly fielded to play and he indeed played 14 matches for the Appellant. When he so played, he had been registered by the Central Region to play.
The penalty for fielding an unregistered player is clear. It is the forfeiture of three (3) points for every match that the unregistered player plays.For a player who is registered through false information there is no prescribed punishment. The committee a quo, in our opinion, erroneously tied the two offences and treated them as one.

“If at the relevant time the Central Region, which is an affiliate of Zifa, has its own rules and regulations, and was not using ZIFA’s draft rules and regulations, the above reasoning would be unassailable.

“However, as has been made clear in the recent judgment of the Appeals Committee in the matter of Raymond Mugandani v Central Region Soccer League (dated 21 February 2012), such is not the case.

“One would naturally feel pity for Tripple B.”