SLIFA Rejects Replay, Threatens FIFA and CAS Action

0
12

By Alpha Barrie

SLIFA FC has rejected the Sierra Leone Football Association (SLFA) Appeals Committee’s decision ordering a replay of its disputed Premier League match against Bullom Stars FC, insisting that it will not participate in the rescheduled fixture.

In a press release dated August 28, SLIFA said it disagrees with the Appeals Committee’s ruling, which ordered the match to be replayed on September 6, 2026, despite the 2025/26 Premier League season having already ended.

The dispute arose after SLIFA appealed against an incorrect suspension list issued by the Premier League Board. The Appeals Committee found that the list had wrongly identified Sheka Conteh as suspended, while the player intended to be suspended was Sheka Noah Kamara.

The Committee ruled that SLIFA was not properly informed of the correction before the match and was therefore entitled to rely on the original official suspension list.

Consequently, the original match was declared null and void and its result removed from the league table. The Committee ordered the fixture to be replayed within 14 days, behind closed doors, using only players registered for the 2025/26 season.

The ruling also indicated that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by either club, but criticised the Premier League Board’s handling and communication of the suspension-list correction.

However, SLIFA has rejected the replay order, arguing that the match had already been concluded and that the appropriate sanction for fielding an ineligible player should be the award of three points and two goals to SLIFA.

The club further raised concerns over documents allegedly used during the proceedings, claiming that some may have been forged or altered. SLIFA has called for an independent investigation into the matter.

The club has also announced plans to pursue the dispute before the FIFA Disciplinary Committee, FIFA Ethics Committee and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), signaling a potentially wider legal and regulatory battle over the Appeals Committee’s decision.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here