By Mark Baber
June 6 – The AIFF, which turned down the appeals of four clubs against being barred from next season’s I-League, has come under attack for failing to meet its own criteria.
On Tuesday the Club Licensing Appeals Body turned down appeals of Churchill Brothers, United SC, Rangdajied United and Mohammedan Sporting, the four clubs which had contested the decision of the Club Licensing Committee First Instance Body (CLC-FIB) to bar them from the I-League.
The appeals were heard by a panel including N.K. Sud, (a Retired Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court), Sanjiv Paul, (Managing Director of pig iron manufacturer TATA Metaliks) and Neel Ratan (Executive Director of PricewaterhouseCoopers).
According to the AIFF: “The Committee heard the appeals of the Clubs in detail and found the Clubs to be lacking on various ‘A’-criteria in categories pertaining to Sporting, Personnel & Administrative, Financial, Legal and Infrastructure.
“Based on the evidence provided during the Hearing, the Committee upheld the First Instance Body’s decision to not issue an AFC and National Licence to the four appellant Clubs for the Football Season 2014-15.”
The decision was attacked by supporters of the clubs concerned, including Members of Parliament and has been the subject of a damning article in the Times of India pointing to the AIFF’s double standards with regard to licensing regulations.
According to the Times, the AIFF has for several years failed to be registered as a separate entity, a crucial requirement for federations and one of the reasons India was not handed a direct place in the AFC Champions League.
An unnamed senior football official told the Times, “The AIFF has been lecturing clubs but they must look at themselves before pointing a finger at us.”
Equally seriously, given that failure to meet financial requirements was cited as one of the reasons for refusing I-League licences, is the accusation that the AIFF has defaulted on their payments to clubs, with Churchill Brothers (one of the clubs refused a license) having complained in September last year that the AIFF owed them Rs70 lakh, including part of the I-League winners prize money, despite ” at least 60 reminders.”
The Times points out that the I-League, under AFC regulations, should be independent of the AIFF, but, according to an AIFF insider, its CEO, Sunando Dhar has his salary paid by directly by the AIFF, whilst the clubs complain they are not getting a fair share of television revenues.
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1734928130labto1734928130ofdlr1734928130owedi1734928130sni@r1734928130ebab.1734928130kram1734928130
