Once hailed Caf Licensing rules now a pain for clubs

Benjamin Mosha of Muhoroni Youth (left) and Samuel Mutiria of Sofapaka vie for the ball during a Kenyan Premier League match on October 22, 2016. Muhoroni and Sofapaka have been relegated for failure to comply with Caf Club Licensing Rules. PHOTO | MARTIN MUKANGU |

What you need to know:

  • Only league champs Tusker, Ulinzi Stars and Bandari have met the requirements
  • The Caf Clubs Licensing System aims to, among others things, promote and improve the quality of football in Africa.

When the Confederation of African Football and Fifa introduced the Caf Club Licensing rules in late 2015, the move was met with an air of optimism.

At long last, it was felt, professionalism would be injected in the management of clubs and federations across Africa.

In Kenya, the idea was received warmly. Caf sent instructors to conduct a seminar on the matter for the Kenyan Premier League (KPL) and National Super League clubs in May last year.

Three instructors, former Ghanaian great Antony Baffoe, Sunday Burton Kayumi (Tanzanian and former AFC Leopards coach) and Kabelo Bosilong (South African) conducted a two-day seminar at Strathmore University.

But what clubs had praised as a long overdue measure aimed at sanitising the football industry, is fast turning into a monster.

On Monday, Football Kenya Federation (FKF) president Nick Mwendwa announced that out of the 14 KPL clubs, only Tusker, Ulinzi Stars and Bandari had fully complied with the rules. On the other hand, Sofapaka, Muhoroni Youth and Thika United had not, resulting in their relegation.

“The clubs failed in the financial aspect — the ability to meet their expenditures. One of them had a legal challenge,” Mwendwa said without elaborating.

FKF President Nick Mwendwa addressing a press conference on Club Licensing on January 9, 2017 at Kandanda House. PHOTO | CHRIS OMOLLO |

IMPROVE FOOTBALL

The Caf Clubs Licensing System aims to, among others things, promote and improve the quality of football in Africa. The rules seek to ensure that clubs have appropriate infrastructure, improved financial capacity.

Through proper corporate governance and control, the rules look to ensure and guarantee the continuity of the international competitions of clubs during the season.

In a bid to achieve this, clubs were assessed on five parameters namely; sporting, infrastructure, administrative and personnel, legal and financial. They were graded by the Vetting and Licensing committee chaired by Prof  Edwin Wamukoya.

Although it was unfortunate that Sofapaka and Muhoroni Youth failed the test, Thika’s inclusion among the non-complaint clubs came as a surprise.

Club chairman Ellio Lolli was at pains to explain the development on Tuesday.

“We have no debts and we don’t owe any player money. We have a partnership with Brookside. I’m sure some of the clubs, which were issued with provisional licenses owe their players,” he said.

In Sofapaka’s case, the club has been tottering on the brink of collapse in the last three years because of financial difficulties, leading to a mass exit of players. During the beginning on the 2016 season, the club had to replace at least 18 players.

At Muhoroni, things have not been rosy. Last term, several players petitioned KPL to have their contracts terminated. The club changed coaches with James “Odijo” Omondi and John “Bobby” Ogolla all handling the club briefly before leaving under unclear circumstances.

Lead striker Wycliffe Ochomo terminated his contract midway through the season when he was leading the league score chart.

This season, the sugar millers have already lost their first choice custodian Farouk Shikhalo, who has since penned a deal with Posta Rangers.

Shikhalo on Tuesday said he left because of the enticing job offer at Posta and the poor management at Muhoroni.

ABOUT CLUB LICENSING

The criteria described in these Caf regulations are graded into three separate categories:

“A” criteria – “MUST”: If the license applicant does not fulfil any “A” criteria requirements, then it cannot be granted a license to enter the Caf inter-clubs competitions.

“B” criteria – “MUST”: If the license applicant does not fulfil any “B” criteria required, then it may be subject to sanctions as specified by the licensor but may still qualify to receive a license to enter the Caf inter-clubs competitions.

“C” criteria – “BEST PRACTICE”: C criteria are best practice recommendations. These criteria are best practice recommendations and the Non-fulfilment of any ‘C’ criteria may or may not lead to a sanction or the refusal of the necessary license.

Areas covered are: Sporting (Senior and Junior teams); Infrastructure; Administrative and personnel; Legal-ownership; Financial.