OPINION: Who plays CAF Champions League and the last tie-breaker omitted by Rivers United and LMC

Published in local Written by  August 29 2020 font size decrease font size increase font size Media 0
Rate this item
(0 votes)

By Reliance Udoenyin

The release of the final Table for the conclusion of the 2019/2020 Nigerian Professional Football League (NPFL) season using Point Per Game (PPG) with Plateau United, Enyimba and Rivers United qualifying to represent Nigeria on the continent based on this standing would've been a cause for cheer in the quest to uplift the standard of Nigerian football, this being true since it took the League Management Company (LMC) time to come up with the table after the Nigerian Football Federation (NFF) endorsed ending the season abruptly due to Covid-19 pandemic.

 

League Table as at Match day 25 of the NPFL 2019/2020 season
NPFL 2019/2020 League Table as at Match day 25

Unfortunately or just so, it wasn't to be after Head to Head (H2H) was used as a tie breaker between Rivers united and Enyimba who were tied on the PPG table with 1.80, the argument being that the structure of the League demands double leg for H2H to be adopted.

 

NPFL 2019/2020 PPG table
NPFL 2019/2020 PPG Table

Let's put things in clear perspective, once there's a meeting between two football teams, Head to Head counts from then. Rivers United were defeated 1-0 by Enyimba at Aba on the 12th of December, 2019. Without the return leg played at the Yakubu Gowon stadium due to the Covid-19 Situation in the country, Rivers United argues that it'll be unfair to break the tie with head to head considering the nature of the league. 

How PPG was calculated
Calculation of the PPG

Is this argument sound? Yes, very sound and holds good. However, there's a force majeure situation occasioned by Covid, which is not the doing of the LMC or Enyimba.

 

That's not even the bone of the matter. Before I dive into it, let me state it here that I'm for fairness and the standard and integrity of the league being upheld. Whatever stands in this tussle between the league's governing body and the Pride of Rivers will serve as a precedent in years to come. Hence, it requires meticulousness in whatever decision is to be taken. Our league has had negativities compete to outweigh positivities. No thanks to the novel Coronavirus that ended the 2019/2020 NPFL season prematurely which saw the beginning of a new era setting in in the league in which case the LMC and the Nigerian Referees Association deserve outright commendation. This is the development we want to ride on. 

 

To the regular listeners of our sport program on radio, Today Sportslive, at times I carefully try to avoid discussing the negatives of the league we love too much but it's what it is; we must keep talking until we take our league to where we want it to be. Fellow lovers of the NPFL will understand where the deep feeling and concern are coming from. That's why all suggestions must be given, considered and what's stated be categorically and clearly stated in this case.

 

The submit of LMC's decision is the force majeure which in their letter to Rivers United dated August 4 2020, Par. 4 stated that this allows the rule book guiding the operation of the league to be set aside. The LMC in the letter noted; "it  is  very  clear  that  the  ordinary/normal  provisions  of  the NPFL  League  Rule  Book,  especially  towards  deciding  the  league  standings,  are  no  more applicable." Are they completely no more applicable?

Wikipedia writes;

 

Force majeure in any given situation is controlled by the law governing the contract, rather than general concepts of force majeure. The law of the contract often specified by a choice of law clause in the agreement, and if not is decided by a statute or principles of general law which apply to the contract. The first step to assess whether - and how - force majeure applies to any particular contract is to ascertain the law of the country which governs the contract."

 

Emphasis is on "Force Majeure in any given situation is controlled by the law governing the contract." The LAW in this case being the rule book. Hence, the LMC's rule book will govern the application of force Majeure as it is peculiar to this case. This is something Rivers united and the LMC need to come to terms with. 

 

Again, the application of force Majeure is in the interest of fairness, something the LMC acknowledges in the aforementioned letter to Rivers united with reference to clause 15.24 under matters not provided for in the NPFL rule book which states:  “Any  matter  unforeseen  or  not  provided  for  or  in  conflict  in  the interpretation  and  application  of  these  Rules,  shall  be  dealt  with by  the  LMC  as  the circumstances  require,  having  regards  to  the  interest  of  fairness,  good sportsmanship  and the overall interest  of  the game of  football”.

 

This begs the question; how fair is the application of H2H in a single leg meeting between both clubs tied in a league that mandates double leg via home and away? Remember, there's something called home advantage in football which applied to Enyimba in the first affair. Again it's called ADVANTAGE! Let the word resonate for some seconds. Again, how fair? Make no mistake about it, I'm for fairness. I'm for the standard and integrity of the league. My interest is the league and not a club.

 

The LMC took a while to prepare the final table after PPG was adopted, my thought is thinking of a fair tiebreaker. This in itself didn't help the situation. The lingering of the final table gave room to so many speculations thus orchestrating conceptual thoughts, assumptions and believes. When the final table was presented, two tables were presented; that with PPG and the other with Weighted Point Per Game (WPPG). The LMC mentioned that the tie breaker is head to head, hence what's precisely and exactly the use of the WPPG? Is WPPG a prerequisite to use Head to Head tie breaker in this case? I ask like an ignorant would because I checked and no team was tied on the WPPG Table. 

 

NPFL 2019/2020 WPPG table
NPFL 2019/2020 WPPG Table

Note that the calculation of the WPPG places Enyimba in second ahead of Rivers united. The Head to Head tie breaker favours Enyimba too to play in the CAF Champions League. If Head to Head is used then it would've been sufficient to present just the head to head tie breaker. If WPPG were to be used then it would be sufficient to used just WPPG. In all honesty, WPPG leaves no room for debate on the parts of Rivers United because it's clear. With WPPG, Rivers United should have no case! 

How WPPG was calculated
Calculation of WPPG

Enyimba weighted 68.49 in points over Rivers United with 68.23, the 0.23 being insignificant value thus below approximation. I ask again why calculate and present WPPG when Head to Head was used as a tie breaker? The table was presented on PPG with head to head as a tie breaker. I've listened to so many pundits of Nigerian Football across many Radio and TV stations. No one seems to make any reference to the WPPG. Emphasis has been on Head to Head. This renders WPPG irrelevant so you wonder why it was calculated in the first place. Is it a prerequisite for the application of Head to Head in a force majeure situation? The answer is null. So why present both and later stick to one? Remember, I'm for fairness and the standard of the league being upheld. My major interest is the integrity of the NPFL. With the calculation and presentation of the WPPG while emphasis is laid on Head to Head, logically, people might be made to think that whatever it is that favours Enyimba playing in the CAF Champions League stands. True to the script this might be or not. However, that's the picture painted. The LMC has defended why Goal difference (GD) can't be used in 6(3) of the letter where it's stated that "Goal  difference  is  only  applied  under  the  PPG principles if  the teams on  a  tie  have played  equal  number  of  matches". In 6(4), referring to Rivers United it begins "Your  position  and  proposal  clearly  does  not  meet  the  threshold  of  sporting merit  and  sporting  fairness." I'm thinking and hence suggesting the LMC Should consider all there is to consider and leave clubs involved to make a case for themselves, in which case it'll act as a mediator. Let's be objective. 

 

If it's argued that GD can't be used because all teams didn't play the same number of matches. That's in pursuit of fairness and sportsmanship, right?  Then the argument that Head to Head can't be used because Rivers United didn't host Enyimba at home is valid, sound and holds good also in pursuit of fairness and sportsmanship. In another thought, the PPG has technically leveled every teams at the same number of matches, hasn't it? That's why the PPG is fair and adopted in the first place because it bridges the gap between matches played by teams. That being true and sound as the basis, then GD can be used. If PPG has brought us leveled then goals scored for and against can be bridged such that GD can be adopted.

 

 

With average number of goals scored and goals conceded per match calculated, it can be calculated in trueness and on sound basis the average number of goals to be scored by Enyimba in the 5 outstanding matches. 

 

Over 5 to 10 matches, it can be predicted to high level of correctness how many goals a team is likely to score or concede, based on the form of the team over the time under consideration. This has been proven to be true in many cases and used by pundits during Football analyses. This is how average number of goals scored/conceded per match will bridge the 5 outstanding matches left for Enyimba just as PPG brings every teams leveled on matches played.

 

Enyimba have scored 30 goals in 20 matches. That's 1.5 goals per match. That implies Enyimba will record 7.5 goals in their next 5 matches on the average. Hence in 25 matches, Enyimba will score a total of 37.5 goals. Enyimba have conceded 20 goals in 20 matches. That's 1 goal conceded per match in average. Hence in their next 5 matches, Enyimba will concede 5 goals. In total and for 25 matches, Enyimba will concede 25 goals. The Calculated Goal difference (CGD) for Enyimba thus becomes 37.5-25= 12.5. Problem solved! This is an omitted tie-breaker.

 

 

Without approximation which is a standard ruling in cases like this, Rivers united leaves with Superior GD of 13. Fairness and sportsmanship applied in all Ramifications, as both teams are brought leveled on matches played, goals scored and conceded. Again, I'm for fairness, sportsmanship and upholding the integrity of the NPFL. 

 

Force Majeure principle in different countries is applied according to the circumstances surrounding the situation in the country. In fact in many cases, application of force Majeure varies even within the same country depending on the terms and situation of each contract. At this point, it's safe and sound to argue that there's no universally accepted general standard of the application of force Majeure principle. In this context, Sherman and Sterling at http://url.ie/1jgdu writes;

As with all matters dependent upon the terms of the contract, each force majeure provision must necessarily be considered on its precise terms and in its specific context."

 

Consequently, It's unlikely to have global best practice in cases involving force Majeure such that citation is required on how it was applied in country B or Country A. This is true because the depth, magnitude and the way the pandemic affect different contracts and rules varies. But in the end, force Majeure will be evoked and applied generally but in accordance to the accepted law, fairness to all parties and situation surrounding each contract.  The state in time at which the NPFL was abruptly ended due to the pandemic is not same as French League, Scottish league etc. Hence, there's need to apply the force Majeure principle as suitable and appropriate to the situation.

 

Again, refer to clause 15.24 of the LMC rule book which states; "Any  matter  unforeseen  or  not  provided  for  or  in  conflict  in  the interpretation  and  application  of  these  Rules,  shall  be  dealt  with by  the  LMC  as  the circumstances  require,  having  regards  to  the  interest  of  fairness,  good sportsmanship  and the overall interest  of  the game of  football”. ANY MATTER UNFORSEEN...SHALL BE DEALT WITH AS THE CIRCUMSTANCES REQUIRE, HAVING REGARDS TO THE INTEREST OF FAIRNESS; Let this line resonates for some seconds. This calls on the LMC to handle this situation with utmost priority to how it applies in the NPFL circumstance with fairness as the paramount interest and not how it's applied elsewhere.   

 

 

Two meetings were held in deciding how best to end the league, first with club owners alone and second with LMC officials. In those meetings, it has been reported that the final table was presented based on PPG, with Rivers United placed third. It has also been reported that Rivers United were present in both meetings and didn't object. If this is true, what changed? Could this be an afterthought? Moreso, while Rivers united may have a case at Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), the PPG principle cannot be invalidated. It'll be a lost course if this is their argument although I perceive it isn't. In any case, no single club should hold Nigerian League to ransom.

 

The Nigerian Football Federation (NFF) Football committee in a release dated August 25 made available through NFF Communication department has endorsed LMC's final League table adding "That the NFF does not have the power to overturn the decision of the LMC on the matter unless it is found to have flouted its own rules and regulations as contained in the NPFL Rule Book."  Rivers State government, owners and sponsors of Rivers United have resolved and communicated through the state Commissioner for Sport Hon. Boma Iyaye to seek redress at CAS. Iyaye addressing a press conference in Port Harcourt on Thursday 27th August said;

“In the light of this development, the Rivers State government, sponsors of Rivers United is compelled to seek the proper interpretation of the applicable rules on the pronouncement and propriety or otherwise of the actions and decisions of the LMC on the matter from the Court of Arbitration for Sports."

 

 

I was privy to the list of cases lined up for CAS. All dates from the 24th of August until the 9th of December 2020 are occupied with hearings in CAS Calendar. This means Rivers United case against NFF/LMC will be heard sometimes January 2021 if logged in. Just to mention, Samson Sia Sia's case against FIFA will be heard on the 6th of October. 

 

 

The deadline for the submission of clubs that'll represent each Country to CAF is 31st August 2020, that's just 48 hours from today. The LMC had proposed the last week of September/first week of October for the begining of 2020/2021 NPFL Season. In the interest of the league which is enshrined in the LMC's rule book, the NFF might want to reconsider resolving this issue via dialogue. The league is about to suffer once again. We're not unfamiliar to the effect of court cases on Nigerian Football.  On their own, failure to meet CAF deadline might result in an unpredicted consequence. 

 

 

The Sport ministry, the umbrella body governing Sports in the country, headed by Sunday Dare may also consider seeking resolution via dialogue else we're about to witness another season of unwanted delay in the growth of Nigerian Football. If no resolution is made via any of these channels then the best and final tiebreaker will be CAS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read 1423 times Last modified on Last modified on August 31 2020

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.

Listen live

Connect To Us

Advert

for more inquiries, please call

 
 
 
 

Photo

add2.jpg

Advert Space

Subscribe to Newsletter

Recent Twitter Posts

Facebook