T.I.M.
16 September 2005
The public expects more rational decisions from the FECAFOOT commissions.
The new texts of the Cameroon Football Federation saw the birth of three judicial structures - the Central Homologation Commission, the Discipline, Ethics and Problem-Solving Commission and the Appeal Commission. The domains of intervention of these structures were clearly stated. This division of tasks gave the impression that the Appeal Commission; that was expected to come in only if the decisions of the two other structures were being contested, would have very little importance. Far from it. It has been work round-the-clock for President Tchouamani Joseph Bertin and his men. This is because most of the decisions taken by either Central Homologation Commission and the Discipline, Ethics and Problem-Solving Commission have been subject to appeal by the parties concerned or the Cameroon Football Federation.
For instance, after the violent incident at the Bamenda municipal stadium between PWD and Esperance, the central homologation commission of the Cameroon Football Federation ordered that the match should be replayed on a neutral ground. The decision did not please officials of Esperance who sent in an appeal. The Appeal commission annuled the decision of the homologation commission and took new decisions. PWD lost the match and had to pay a fine. The Bamenda municipal stadium was also suspended for three matches.
This dual mannerism in decision-taking does not only weaken the authority of the FECAFOOT in the eyes of the public, but is also embarrassing in most cases. On August 28th, for example, Foudre Akonolinga travelled to Garoua for the return match of the 8th final of the Cup of Cameroon; an encounter that it was not even supposed to play following the decision of the Appeal commission. In effect, the away match in Akonolinga was marred by violence. It was reported that Fans of Foudre beat and wounded match officials. On August 23, the Discipline Ethics and Problem-Solving Commission of FECAFOOT took decisions with regards to the encounter. It homologated the match at the score of the 88th minute - 0 - 0, suspended the Akonolinga Municipal stadium for three matches, and fined Foudre CFA 500, 000. Officials of the team were also sanctioned. The decision was considered as "not severe enough", by the FECAFOOT General Manager, Patrick Precheur, who decided to appeal. After examining his case on September 02, the Appeal Commission of FECAFOOT cancelled certain decision taken by the Discipline Ethics and Problem Solving Commission of the same structure and inflicted heavy sanctions on Foudre. The Akonolinga-based team lost the match by penalty and was on the same occasion disqualified for the race of the Cup of Cameroon for the 2005 season.
Why all these cacophony ? Was it necessary to have all these commissions if the decisions have to be appealed all the time? How come different sanctions are given for the same fault? Do some clubs benefit from the sympathy of members of the FECAFOOT commissions? The public expects Patrick Precheur, General Manager of the Cameroon Football Federtaion, to answer all these questions and more. Hopefully, when he does accept to open up, the answers would be clear enough to dissipate all doubts that are already being raised over the Precheur rule.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2005 Cameroon Tribune. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
