The GFA Disciplinary Committee has dismissed Great Olympics’ protest against Elmina Sharks in respect of their Ghana Premier League Match day 28 game.
SUMMARY OF FACTS CASE OF ACCRA GREAT OLYMPICS FC
Accra Great Olympics FC (the Petitioner) on Wednesday, October 11, 2017 lodged a protest against Accra Elmina Sharks FC (the Respondent) for allegedly fielding two unqualified players in their Ghana Premier League match played at Nduom Stadium, Elmina on Sunday, October 8, 2017 in contravention of Articles 29(1)(e), 29(2)(a), 34(1)(e) and 34(5)(a) of the General Regulations of the GFA.
The Petitioner alleged that Elmina Sharks FC fielded two players – Samuel Arthur (jersey No. 19) and Farouk Mohammed (jersey No. 8) in the match when the players were unqualified to play in the match and the club had been communicated to on all the caution statements.
The Petitioner argued that at the time of the match in question, Samuel Arthur (jersey No. 19)
of the Respondent had received cautions on Matchdays 1, 4, 5 and ought to have sat out on Matchday 6 against Berekum Chelsea FC.
The Petitioner also argued that Samuel Arthur (jersey No. 19) of the Respondent had also received cautions on Matchdays 12, 15, 22 and ought to have sat out on Matchday 23.
According to the Petitioner, Elmina Sharks FC fielded the player on Match day 23 and the player received another caution in the said match.
The Petitioner further contended that Elmina Sharks FC should suffer punishment of forfeiture for Match day 23 by the application of the Appeals Committee decision dated August 9, 2016 between Bofoakwa Tano FC and Steadfast FC and quoted a portion of the said decision.
On player Farouk Mohammed, the Petitioner argued that the player of the Respondent was cautioned on Matchday 5 and 22 of the Ghana Premier League and in the MTN FA Cup round of 32 and ought to have sat out on Matchday 23 but did not.
The Petitioner also argued that since the Respondent had not suffered the punishment, the match suspension follows the players in line with the interpretation of the Appeal’s Committee decision.
The Petitioner subsequently prayed that Elmina Sharks FC should suffer the punishments under Articles 34(1)(e) and 34(5)(a) of the GFA General Regulations.
DEFENCE OF ELMINA SHARKS FC
The Respondent in their Statement of Defence to the protest, urged the Committee to dismiss the protest arguing that the club played the match with only qualified players in accordance with the GFA General Regulations.
The Respondent stated that the two players were qualified to play in the Match day 28 match against Accra Great Olympics FC.
According to Elmina Sharks FC, Samuel Arthur (jersey No. 19) sat out on Match day 6 after receiving cautions on PLB Match days 1, 4 and 5 and also sat out in the MTN FA Cup Round of 32 match after receiving cautions on Match days 10, 12 and 15. The
that the player Samuel Arthur was therefore qualified to play in the match in question on Match day 28 having received only cautions on Match days 22 and 23.
Elmina Sharks FC stated that the GFA erred on April 7, 2017 when Bolga All Stars FC was
rather notified on the caution received by player Samuel Arthur on Matchday 10. The
Respondent stated that the match reports of the Referee and the Match Commissioner
vindicate the claim of the club (Attached a caution statement showing that Samuel Arthur
received caution but was sent as a player of Bolga All Stars FC player).
On player Farouk Mohammed, Elmina Sharks FC stated that the player was cautioned on Match day 5, FA Cup Round of 32 and Matchday 22. The Respondent stated that the player had missed the next official match (Ashantigold FC vrs Elmina Sharks FC at Obuasi on July 2017) of the Ghana Premier League.
The Respondent consequently urged the Disciplinary Committee to dismiss the protest.
REPLY TO DEFENCE BY ACCRA GREAT OLYMPICS FC
In the Reply to the Statement of Defence, the Petitioner did not make any statements on player Farouk Mohammed but concentrated on the notification to Bolga All Stars FC on the cautioned received by player Samuel Arthur by the GFA.
On player Samuel Arthur, Accra Great Olympics FC quoted Article 39(9)(a) of the GFA
General Regulations about cautions and expulsions being kept in the computer systems of the GFA and communication to the clubs.
The Petitioner contended that Elmina Sharks FC had 24 hours to correct the records if they had detected any error and that by not doing same, estoppel must operate to stop the Respondent for acquiescing in the failure to correct the facts on the caution statement for 6 months.
The Petitioner argued that the Respondent failed to make the necessary correction within 24 hours upon the GFA notification to another club of the caution of Samuel Arthur. The Petitioner further argued that the player was therefore unqualified to play in Match day 28.
Click here for the decision: /userfiles/files/Decision – Protest CASE 98 -2017 – PLB –