READER’S VIEW: PSL doesn’t know its own rules Posted: 7 August 2013 Time: 09:11 pm I watched, with dismay, when Kaizer Chiefs lodged a protest against the fielding of Mabhudi Khenyeza by Black Aces in their PSL fixture on Friday, 2 August. It was quite perplexing that a club of Amakhosi’s calibre, a seasoned campaigner in the PSL, would be ignorant of the League’s rules and bring the game into disrepute. Yes, bring the game into disrepute by lodging a frivolous protest. Amazayoni are within their rights to field Khenyeza until his appeal that is pending before SAFA’s Appeals Board is finalised. The PSL rules are clear on this and it is shocking that the PSL Chief Executive Officer expressed dismay over the fielding of Khenyeza and had warned Amazayoni against fielding the player against Amakhosi. By way of background, Khenyeza was found guilty of spitting at a match official by the PSL Disciplinary Committee DC. The DC imposed a 12-month ban on Khenyeza from playing football under the auspices of the PSL. Dissatisfied with the sanction, the player filed an appeal to the SAFA Appeals Board against the sanction. Amazayoni were aware of the fact that Khenyeza is facing a 12-month ban when they signed him, but they must have done their homework very well. The obvious conclusion is that Amazayoni were well aware of the PSL rules and that they can field Khenyeza until the appeal is finalised. Rule 58.1 of the PSL rules clearly provides that: “Penalties or orders imposed by the Disciplinary Committee or other body of the the (sic) League or SAFA will only become effective when the internal remedies available to the party/parties so sentenced have been exhausted, or when the prescribed time limit to exercise the next available internal remedy has expired.” A quick look at the rule shows that neither Amazayoni nor Khenyeza did anything wrong when he played against Amakhosi on Friday night. The sanction does not become effective until the party so sanctioned has exhausted internal remedies available to him. Khenyeza has not exhausted the remedies; therefore the sanction is yet to become effective. The PSL CEO is reportedly quoted as having said “…Mpumalanga Black Aces was advised in writing prior to the kick-off that Khenyeza was under suspension, and that, according to our understanding of the SAFA Disciplinary Code, the effect of lodging an appeal does not cause the disciplinary sanction to be suspended pending the appeal.” A similar statement was also posted on the PSL official website. The statement reveals that the PSL is not well apprised of its own rules. Rule 58.1 as quoted above is unambiguous and one wonders where the PSL would get its “… understanding of the SAFA Disciplinary Code…” Khenyeza was found guilty in terms of the PSL rules, not the SAFA Disciplinary Code. Even in terms of the SAFA rules, a party may request that the SAFA DC suspends the effect the sanction on application by the party so sanctioned where the party seeks to make use its internal remedies. Be that as it may, Khenyeza’s rights in relation to the sanction are found in the PSL rule and not the SAFA Disciplinary Code as the PSL CEO ‘understands’. The approach by the PSL may be nothing but an attempt to hide what appears to be a contradiction between the PSL rules and the SAFA Disciplinary Code. To begin with, even though an appeal to the SAFA Appeals Board is made in terms of the SAFA Constitution, it must be made clear that disciplinary proceedings before the PSL are dealt with in terms of the PSL rules not the SAFA Disciplinary Code. Article 21 of the PSL Constitution gives parties a right of appeal to the SAFA Appeals Board. That, however, does not mean that the SAFA Disciplinary Code becomes applicable to the PSL matter after the fact. In terms of article 41.2 of the PSL Constitution, when dealing with PSL matters one only resorts to the provisions of the SAFA, CAF and FIFA if the PSL Constitution and rules are silent on a certain matter. In this case, the PSL rules clearly provide that the sanction only becomes effective after a party has exhausted all the internal remedies available to him. Khenyeza’s appeal is pending before the SAFA Appeals Board and the sanction, contrary to media reports, is not yet effective. Khenyeza is not, though sentenced to a 12-month suspension, under suspension until his appeal (and possibly arbitration) has been finalised. The so-called “… understanding of the SAFA Disciplinary Code” by the PSL is, in my view, nothing than an attempt by the PSL to confront what some may call ‘loopholes’ in the PSL rules that Khenyeza and Amazayoni have spotted and put to use. READ: Aces to keep using Mabhuti Khenyeza If Amazayoni intend to field Khenyeza in all their fixtures before his appeal is finalised, there is no bar to their doing so. In terms of rule 58.1 of the PSL rules, Khenyeza is not under suspension. The suspension will only become effective after the internal remedies available to him have been exhausted. Dr Godfrey Musvoto; Phd (University KwaZulu-Natal)
Posted on: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 19:51:36 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015