Safa convinced Ghana-SA ref influenced by betting
Ncobo says 90% of wrong decisions went against Bafana
The SA Football Association (Safa) is convinced it has gathered enough evidence to prove that Bafana Bafana’s 2022 World Cup qualifier match against Ghana on Sunday was fixed.
During a media briefing at the Safa House yesterday, Andile “Ace” Ncobo, a former PSL referee, stated he unearthed 71 major incidents that point to blatant bias from Senegalese referee Moguetta Ndiaye.
“My independent conclusion is that the referee in this match was blatantly biased against SA; 90.9% of incorrect decisions against one team is a clear case of a match official unlawfully influencing and/or manipulating the course and/or the outcome of the match,” Ncobo told the media.
“Of the 33 incorrect decisions, 30 of them went against SA.”
Ndiaye awarded a penalty against SA after deciding Rushine de Reuck allegedly fouled Daniel Amartey inside the area when there was barely contact between the two players.
Besides the harsh penalty, the Senegalese officials made several other questionable calls that have prompted Safa to suspect there may have been match fixing involved. They are pushing for the match to be replayed.
“In the first half, out of 45 major decisions, he got only 17 correct. In the second half, there was already a sense of comfort that the outcome of the deliberate bias had been achieved up to a certain moment,” Ncobo said.
“We suddenly had a referee that gets every decision spot-on. The same referee that was getting almost half of the decisions incorrect in the first half is now getting them correctly.
“There were free-kicks that were awarded to SA in the game when allowing the advantage would have led to a promising attack.”
Safa president Danny Jordaan said the match was manipulated by betting syndicates and they have asked Fifa to investigate.
“We are concerned with certain decisions in the match. We believe there was match manipulation at play,” Jordaan said.
“There is evidence that there was betting on this match. There was a betting spike before a penalty was given to [against] us. It is a fact that there was betting on the match.”
Would you like to comment on this article or view other readers' comments? Register (it’s quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.