CAF respond to Pirates’ complaint over FC Lupopo

CAF have responded to Orlando Pirates’ complaint regarding the eligibility of coach Guy Bukasa, who recently guided St Eloi Lupopo past the Soweto giants in the CAF Champions League.

The Buccaneers lost the first leg of the Second Preliminary Round in the DRC 3-0 but managed to level terms in the reverse fixture at Orlando Stadium, resulting in an aggregate score of 3-3. However, they were eliminated after a 5-4 penalty shootout loss to the Cheminots, ending their run in the competition.

Nevertheless, the Sea Robbers remain hopeful of reaching the group stage of the prestigious continental tournament.

The Bucs filed a complaint with the continent’s football governing body regarding the Congolese coach, who was reportedly serving a six-match ban for a disciplinary offence. Bukasa was charged during the Under-20 AFCON in Egypt, where he coached his country’s youth national team, and the Soweto giants claim he should not have been allowed to sit on the bench due to a CAF suspension.

They also claimed that Henoc Molia was registered after the transfer window had closed, violating CAF registration regulations. Furthermore, Pirates reported that Wanet Kashala holds two different passports, raising concerns about his eligibility.

WHAT CAF HAS SAID ABOUT PIRATES’ COMPLAINT

CAF’s Head of TV and Communications, Luxolo September, confirmed the complaint had been received but would not be drawn into providing timelines of when the outcome will be announced.

“There’s an independent judicial body, the disciplinary board. I believe that they are looking into a lot of these matters. It’s important that we give space to them to look at the merits of all these complaints,” September said. At the moment, we are not at liberty to talk about it. We are giving space to our judicial bodies to look at these things. We have to continue with the business of the day, and we will be led by whatever the DC says, or the judicial bodies of CAF dictate.”

He stressed that the administration would permit the processes without interfering with the independent judicial body’s work.

“I don’t know what will happen. I cannot pre-empt this. The only thing I can confirm to you is that all these matters are before the care of judicial bodies. They are obviously being processed through the system at the moment. And as the administration, we are waiting for the outcome of the judicial bodies.”

Click here to read article