Overview:
The defaulting club shall lose the match by forfeiture and shall be docked three (3) points and three (3) goals from those already accumulated or to be accumulated in event that the defaulting club is the away club
After more than four months of waiting, the Fufa Disciplinary panel finally made a ruling on the game between Kitara and Vipers that was never played.
Vipers, in writing on October 2, refused to honour the game slated for October 4, 2025 stating that they were not part of the league in a format that Fufa had proposed.
“Vipers Sports Club informs its stakeholders, football fans, and the general public that the club will not take part in the new double-header format game against Kitara,” the statement reads in part.
Despite so, Fufa remained adamant and Kitara showed up, did all the match day rituals as directed by referee Shamira Nabadda and then a decision was left to the UPL, Fufa and its judicial bodies.
A few days later, Fufa rescinded the decision on the three-phase league format reverting to the traditional round robin format and at this stage, Vipers joined the fray although the rest of the teams had already played and the results from those matches stood. No club protested the decision despite a revert.
The question then remained on what happens to the game between Kitara and Vipers with many expecting a reschedule.
However, the ruling from the FDP on Thursday stated that Vipers loses the match by forfeiture.
“Vipers Sports Club is found guilty of failing to honour a scheduled fixture in breach of Article 16 of the Fufa Ethics and Disciplinary Code.
“The match is declared lost by Vipers by forfeiture,” read part of the ruling.
By doing so, Vipers is literally punished for breaking article 24 of the FUFA Competitions rules establishes that, “A club failing to turn up for any league/competition match shall submit a written explanation to the TOC within forty-eight hours from the date of the match.
But in this regard, whether Vipers wrote or it, the explanation was rejected based on the decision and thus; on top of losing the match by forfeiture, they would have lost 3 points and as many goals from those already accumulated as per article 24 par.10 of the rules which states that “…the defaulting club shall lose the match by forfeiture and shall be docked three (3) points and three (3) goals from those already accumulated or to be accumulated in event that the defaulting club is the away club.”
In disregarding this, Fufa suspended its own rules in making the ruling as Vipers accumulated points were untouched.
This rule was last revoked in 2019 against Police when they didn’t turn for their match against Onduparaka while they were away in the EAPCCO games.
In explaining their decision, the Fufa Disciplinary Panel stated; “the panel relying on discretion provided under article 5 of the Fufa Ethics and Disciplinary Code will not impose additional sanctions of docking three points and three goals from those already accumulated or to be accumulated.”
Kitara vs KCCA case in regards to fielding Patrick Kaddu
Meanwhile, the ruling in this case also left a lot to be desired after Kitara fielded Patrick Kaddu in the 1-1 draw in September despite the player not being eligible at the time.
“It would be unjust to impose a disciplinary action a club for a technical error that was beyond their control,” read part of the judgement.
However, many clubs have in the past been punished for the same error that is beyond their control.
What are some of other Fufa decisions in the past that are awkward?
Fufa sanctions Sadam Juma move to KCCA outside of window (May 2017)
- Decision: Ibrahim Sadam Juma was released by Fufa to join KCCA from Express in May 2017, outside of the transfer window.
- Outcome: The player could neither feature for either club domestically or on the continent until the next registration window.
Fufa Disciplinary Panel orders replay between Ondu and KCCA (Dec 2021)
- Decision: Contrary to article 10 of the Fufa Competitions Rules about Hooliganism, section (b), the FA Disciplinary Panel ordered for a replay of the abandoned game between Onduparaka and KCCA.
- The game had ended prematurely in Arua after home fans stormed the pitch in protest of a late penalty awarded to KCCA
- Outcome: Each club was given 2.5 million by Fufa to cater for expenses of the replay played at neutral Bombo.
Fufa orders replay of abandoned Uganda Cup final between KCCA and SC Villa (June 2015)
- What: KCCA players walked off the pitch protesting atrocious refereeing decisions by Donney in the final at Ntungamo as Villa led 1-0.
- Decision: Fufa, through President Moses Magogo ordered a replay of the whole match at Namboole but upheld all bookings and send-offs from the abandoned match with KCCA missing up to four players who were sent off in the match. Only Hakim Ssenkumba was shown a red card but Donney included three more in his report which was carried over.
- Outcome: Both teams accepted a replay, officiated by Kenyan match officials with KCCA losing 3-0 in the match played at Namboole on June 16.
Fufa orders replay of BUL vs SC Villa in the Uganda Cup (Feb 2023)
- What: Villa lost 1-0 to BUL in the Uganda Cup quarter finals in 2023 but had a goal wrongly disallowed in the match and they protested.
- Decision: A replay was set with the Fufa Disciplinary Panel stating that in the match report, the Fufa Referees Disciplinary Panel revealed assistant ref Khalid Muyanga errored in cancelling the Villa goal.
- Outcome: The match was replayed with Villa still losing the match to BUL.
KCCA sanction for use of Gavin Kizito in a league game against Mbarara City [December 2024]
- What: KCCA fielded Gavin Kizito in a 2-0 win to Mbarara City after the referee’s report showed he had not been booked for what would be a third yellow card that makes him miss the next game.
- Decision: KCCA lost the game for fielding Kizito and referee Oloya punished for six for neglecting his duties.
- Implication: With violation to competition rules by both the Fufa Disciplinary Panel (FCDP) and the Appeals Committee, it is now evident that club records (right or wrong) supersede the official match records at the registry given the ruling.