Fifa to rule on Ndoro matter within 30 days

Tendai Ndoro, 29, has already played four matches for the club, but this is in contravention of Fifa rules, because he has already played for two other clubs - Orlando Pirates and Al Faisaly - this season.
Tendai Ndoro Tendai Ndoro, 29, has already played four matches for the club, but this is in contravention of Fifa rules, because he has already played for two other clubs - Orlando Pirates and Al Faisaly - this season.
Image: Chris Ricco

World football controlling body Fifa have received the Tendai Ndoro files from the Premier Soccer League (PSL) and are expected to rule on the case within 30 days.

Ndoro’s eligibility case was referred to Fifa by SA Football Association (Safa) arbitrator Nassir Cassim SC late last month.

Safa legal officer Tebogo Motlanthe confirmed yesterday that Fifa usually make a ruling within a month once they receive all documentation from the parties involved.

Orlando Pirates, who played under protest against Ajax on January 31, submitted their papers on Thursday. Ndoro has played eight matches for Ajax and besides Pirates, the likes of Polokwane City, have also played under protest and have submitted their arguments.

The Urban Warriors risk losing the 10 points they acquired in the eight matches where Ndoro featured and it would appear that the ruling is imminent.

“Fifa will soon make a ruling,” Motlanthe said.

Ndoro’s case has been dragging on since January.

Drama started when the  PSL’s dispute resolution chamber gave him the green light to play for Ajax Cape Town on January 31, but the League appealed the ruling the same day, which was then handled by the Safa arbitrator.

Cassim ruled on March 28 that the DRC did not have jurisdiction to rule on the case because it involved an international club, Al Faisaly of Saudi Arabia.

Ndoro has played for three clubs: Pirates, Al Faisaly and Ajax, but this is contravention of Fifa rules.

Cassim also ordered the Zimbabwean striker to stop playing immediately, which was contested by Ajax at the South Gauteng High Court on April 3, but was dismissed.

 

X