Drama continues to mar the PSL Promotional Playoffs that finally kicked off on Sunday with match between Richards Bay and Chippa United. This after, Royal AM CEO Sinky Mnisi told SABC News that the club will not pitch for their fixture scheduled to take place on Tuesday afternoon against Chippa United and that they have taken the matter to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
“Our stance is very clear. We are not going pitch up and the PSL is very much aware of that. They have received correspondence from our attorneys. They have exchanged correspondence. Their stance is that we should play. Our stance is that we are not going to pitch” says Mnisi.
There was confusion as to the effectiveness of the court interdict issued by Acting Judge, Justice Nyathi, last week Monday following last Friday’s dismissal of the KwaZulu-Natal’s application for leave to appeal.
Royal AM had sought leave to appeal a judgment by Deputy Judge President, Roland Sutherland, the previous week upholding the SAFA Arbitration’s decision to award Sekhukhune United three points and three goals for their match against Polokwane City earlier this year. The judgment meant that Sekhukhune United would finish top of the GladAfrica Championship, well positioned to gain automatic promotion to the DSTV Premiership – much to the annoyance of Royal AM club.
Mnisi says the interdict remains in place pending the outcome of the Supreme Court of Appeal.
Mnisi’s full interview below:
On Saturday, Advocate Mphafolane Koma told SABC News that the PSL is, in fact, in the clear to proceed with the Promotional Playoffs for now.
Koma said until the president of the Gauteng High Court had granted the KwaZulu-Natal team permission to approach the Supreme Court of Appeal, the interdict against the playoffs would be without basis.
“Remember, the so-called interdict, in its nature, is a temporary relief or a temporary court order, depending on the outcome of certain processes. That is why an interdict is not something permanent. In fact, maybe if they would have opted to make an application in terms of Rule 6.12(c) of the Supreme Court Act, which is an application for reconsideration, I believe they would have more grounds to challenge the status quo,” said Koma.
Koma’s full interview below: