The Match Review panel of the Ghana Football Association has announced decisions on some complaints from clubs in the ongoing league competitions.
Below are the decisions of the Review panel on the respective complaints:
- PRISONS LADAIES VS AMPEM DARKOA LADIES
Prisons Ladies complained that Referee Lovia Boaduwaa denied them Â a clear penalty in the 35thÂ minute of their match against Ampem Darkoa. Prisons also complained that in the 28thÂ minute of the 2ndÂ half, they had another clear penalty which was disallowed by the referee.
After watching the video recording of the match, the Match review panel found that there was no foul that warranted a penalty. Again, the panel found that there was no incident observed in the second instance.
The Review panel, therefore decided that referee Lovia Boaduwaa was correct in her decisions and should be commended for the decisions.
- HEART OF LIONS VS NANIA (MATCH DAY 8)
FC Nania complained that in the 90thÂ minute of the said match, Referee Kwadwo Appiah Nyarko added 5 minutes of play but after 4 minutes of the added time, he awarded the home team a penalty which they consider as a bad call. According to Nania, the penalty made the home team win the game by a lone goal.
After watching the recording of the match, the Committee found that the ball hit the back of the player (No. 26) of Nania and therefore there was no foul committed.
READ ALSO:Â GFA bans two referees for the rest of the season
The Match Review Panel has decided that the referee wrongly awarded a penalty to the home team even though he was close to the action. It added that the referee failed to take the right decision which led to a penalty that affected the result of the game. Referee Kwadwo Appiah Nyarko is therefore suspended for the rest of the league season.
- ELMINA SHARKS VS MEDEAMA (MATCHDAY 15)
Elmina Sharks complained that in the 16thÂ minute of the match, a ball touched the hand of a player of the visiting team in the penalty area but Referee Eric Owusu Prempeh ignored the penalty although he was standing very close to the incident. Sharks also added that in the 40thÂ minute, the referee ignored a penalty after the ball hit the hand of a Medeama player in the penalty area.
The Club also complained series of serious fouls were committed between the 75thÂ and 80thÂ minutes of the game that should have gone against the away team. According to the complaint, in one incident the referee reached his pocket to show a card to a Medeama player for a reckless tackle but later changed his mind when he realized that the player has already received a yellow card and a second, would result in a red card.
The Review panel found that the first incident could not be deemed to be a foul. It also found that the second incident was a shot at goal which hit the body of the defender before touching the hand of the opposing player. With regards to the incidents between the 75thÂ and 80thÂ minute, the panel did not observe any clear incident as claimed by the complainant.
In the opinion of the Panel, the first penalty which the referee did not pick was a good decision as well as the second incident. The Panel agreed that in both hand ball incidents referee Eric Owusu Prempeh was right in his decisions and showed clear application of the law.
- PHAR RANGERS VS AGBOZUME WEAVERS(MATCHDAY EIGHT)
The complainant claimed that in the 36thÂ minute, the referee awarded a penalty which was a wrong decision. It also claimed that in the 39thÂ minute, the referee awarded a penalty which was a wrong decision.
The Review panel found that the decision taken by the referee was correct in the 36thÂ minute and that in the 39thÂ minute, the defender used his arm illegally on the attacker hence the decision.
The Review panel decided that the referee was right on both Â occasions. This goes to confirm a foul was committed on both occasions. It therefore recommended that Referee Franklin Akumatey should be highly commended for awarding the two penalties.
- TECHIMAN CITY VS STEADFAST (MATCHDAY EIGHT)
According to the complainant, an obvious goal was scored which Referee Mahama Siela disallowed. It added that the Assistant Referee Yakubu Sayibu who was closer to the scene indicated a goal and was moving to the centre line for a goal. Also, it claimed that there was a serious infringement in the 18 yard box which was ignored by the referee unfairly.
The Committee found that in the 25thÂ minute, the referee erred by disallowing a good goal scored. It was also found that there was no foul committed within the penalty area because there was no contact made by the two players who went in to challenge for the ball.
The Committee decided that Referee Mahama Adam Siela failed in disallowing a good goal which affected the result of the game. He is therefore suspended for the rest of the league season.