GPL: Match Review Panel announce decision on complaints from Gold Stars vs Hearts of Oak, three other games

Complaints lodged at the Match Review Committee Panel of the Ghana Football Association (GFA) have been heard and decisions taken, as have been announced the GFA.

Ghana Premier League side Bibiani Gold Stars and other three clubs, comprising of the National Division One League (male lower tier division) and the Women’s Premier League, lodged complaints at the Match Review Committee, seeking redress concerning officiating, where the agrieved clubs felt unfairly treated by officiating in their games. The Panel have heard the four complaints from the four clubs, and have announced their decisions as follows, as published by the GFA:

“Below are the decisions of the Review panel on the respective complaints:

1. BIBIANI GOLDSTARS VRS. HEARTS OF OAK (MATCH DAY 12)
   1. Per the video watched, regarding the 32^nd to 33^rd minute complaint, the Panel observed that player No. 20 of Hearts of Oak initiated a scissor kick and player No. 20 of Bibiani Goldstars also attempted to head the ball. It is clear from the video that player No. 20 of Bibiani Goldstars attempt to head the ball was dangerous and should have been penalized by an in-direct freekick (Playing in a dangerous manner) since there was no contact.
   2. Per the 30^th minute complaint, the video watched showed player No. 8 of Hearts of Oak in an offside position at the time the player No. 29 of Hearts of Oak delivered a kick which resulted into the only goal scored. The video also showed clearly that player No. 8 of Hearts of Oak was not only offside but made a slight move which placed him at an angle that due to the distance between him and the keeper could not impede the defending goalkeeper’s line of vision.
   3. In the 57^th minute of the game, it was alleged there was a hand ball situation, but per the video watched the ball hit the back of the defending player No. 7 and not the hand of the captain.
   Referees official responses The referee thinks that the distance of player No. 8 in the offside position did not impact so much on the goalkeeper line of vision. He also admits that the referees need more training regarding their movement on the field of play. DECISION(S) The Panel commends the referee for many of the right decisions he took during the game but also encourage him to work hard to improve his officiating.
2. BERRY LADIES VRS. FAITH LADIES (MATCH DAY 3)

Per the video watched it was observed that the referee rightly issued her cards. Player No. 5 of Faithful Ladies had a yellow card for tackling from behind and second yellow card for yet another offence on an opponent after stepping on the foot and pushing her which constitute an unsporting behaviour and resultant expulsion.

DECISION(S)

The referee is commended for right decisions taken throughout her game. She is however, encouraged to improve on her physical fitness.

3. ASHTOWN LADIES VRS. PEARLPIA LADIES (MATCH DAY 4)

Per the video watched, the goal scored by player No. 11 of Pearlpia Ladies in the second half of the game was an offside goal. The decision of the match officials was right.

The 81^st minute penalty awarded by the referee was wrong because the defender played the ball before contacting the attacker of Ashtown Ladies. It was however observed that the referee was far away from the incident hence her inability to analysis properly.

Referees official responses

The Panel contacted the referee and sent her the video. After watching the video, the referee accepted her error and promised to do better next time.

DECISION(S)

Referee Audrey Awalama Atampagbire is therefore suspended for two (2) match days effective from the date of communication.

4.SKYY FC VS. SOCCER INTELLECTUALS FC (MATCH DAY 4)

1. Per the video watched, player No. 10 of Soccer Intellectuals FC kicked the ball against player No. 30 of Skyy FC at a close range but player No. 30’s hand was not seen extended even though the ball hit his hand.
2. The 40^th minute allegation that a goal was scored after a foul was committed, the video did not show any foul or offside positioning of the opponent even though the Assistant One and the Referee both signaled for an offside.
3. The video was watched thoroughly and there was no hand ball situation in the 48^th minute as alleged in the complaint.

Referees official responses

All attempts made to contact the referee on phone failed even though the calls went through he failed to pick up. The assistant one (Isaac Pinto), however tried to explain that the bright sunshine prevented him from seeing clearly.

DECISION(S)

The referees are exonerated from the complaints.

NB:

Teams that wish to protest decisions taken against them in their matches should endeavor to get their facts and time setting right before writing their complaints”.