FINDINGS:

1.       That the match was played for about 88 Minutes of the Match before it was disrupted.  

2.       That the cause of the disruption of the match was as a result the 88^th minute goal scored by Enyimba FC which was initially admitted to be a goal. Thereafter, the Referee consulted with the Assistant Referee 1 (AR1) who raised his flag for an offside positioning. The Referee agreed that the goal was scored from an offside position.

3.       That based on Paragraph 2 above, the Referee ordered for a restart of the game with an indirect free kick which was taken by a Doma United FC Player (GK).

4.       That after the restart of play, the ball kicked by Doma United FC Player (GK) was held by Enyimba FC., while an official and reserved players of Enyimba FC ran into the field of play to accost the Referee.

5.       That fans of the home team rushed into the field of play and dragged the Referee to an Outside Broadcasting Van (OB van) owned by Startimes, stationed outside the field of play in order to review the goal scoring action.

6.       That the Referee was further dragged back to the field of play by multitude of hoodlums who forced the Referee to rescind his last decision (offside).

7.       That the Referee testified before the Committee and admitted that the goal was scored from offside position, but had to change his decision after visiting the OB Van for fear of being lynched as he was at all times surrounded by the officials of Enyimba FC and hoodlums.

8.       That the Referee further admitted that his action of going outside the pitch of play and thereafter changing his decision was wrong according to the laws and the spirit of the game.

9       That the Referee stated that he was forced to write and send his report in the dressing room while being surrounded by the home team officials which was why he made an unelaborate report. Consequently, he presented additional report to the Committee which was admitted in evidence.

10.     That it was found out that the Match Commissioner lost control of proceedings from the 88^th minute through his oral testimony via WhatsApp Video call. He could not give accurate account of what transpired and averred that he did not witness most of the occurrences as he was busy rallying round the security operatives whom he confirmed to the Committee were ineffective. He also admitted that most of what he reported was hearsay evidence as he was informed. He made series of contradictions between his oral testimony and his written report.

DECISION:

Based on the above findings, the Committee decides as follows:

1.       That the Referee erred to have changed a decision after a game had been restarted in contravention of the provisions of Law 5, FIFA/IFAB Laws of the game.

2.       That the Referee equally erred by leaving the pitch to go and view the replay of the relevant part of the match proceeding in the Outside Broadcasting Van (OB Van) in order to review his earlier decision. This is a practice unknown to FIFA, CAF, NFF and NPFL.

3.       That the result of the match at the point of the restart of the game after over ruling the goal scored as offside is hereby upheld at (0-0).

4.       That the decision of the NPFL based on Rule B.13.55.2 of the NPFL Framework and Rules declaring the match conclusive is hereby upheld.

5.       The Committee equally upheld the NPFL decisions as provided under paragraphs a, b and c as contained in Form 16 (Summary Jurisdiction Notice) of 14^th March, 2024.

6.       The Match Commissioner is hereby reprimanded for not being totally alive to his responsibility.

7.       That the above decisions are without prejudice to the right of appeal.

In attendance: Barr. J.B. C. Obikwelu (Chairman), Barr. A.I. Abdulrahman (Vice chairman), Barr. Ibrahim Mukhtar (Member), Barr. Wole Ademoyegun (Member), Barr. Bello Galadi (Member) and Queen W. Otarakpo, Esq. (Secretary)