Samir Nurkovic’s lawyer has shared the PSL’s response to their plea for intervention in the player’s bitter debt battle with Royal AM.
This protracted legal battle, spanning over a year, has seen Royal AM steadfastly refuse to settle the debt owed to the SuperSport United striker.
The initial debt of R12 million has ballooned to over R15 million due to accumulated interest.
In a significant setback for Royal AM, the Court of Arbitration for Sport [CAS] dismissed their appeal against a previous ruling.
Subsequently, Nurkovic’s attorney, Davor Lazic, invoked Article 10.10 of the National Soccer League (NSL) handbook to request the PSL’s intervention to secure the club’s R2 million monthly grant and allocate it towards the outstanding debt.
It stipulates that, “A Member Club, by virtue of its membership of the League, authorises the League to deduct from the moneys payable to the Member Club any sums due by the Member Club to the League or to other Member Clubs, Member Club Officials, Players or any persons falling under the jurisdiction of the League.”
However, according Lazic, the PSL has declined to intervene, citing that this only act on rulings from the South African Football Association [SAFA] Dispute Resolution Chamber.
WHAT WAS THE PSL’S RESPONSE TO PLEA FOR INTERVENTION IN NURKOVIC’S DEBT SAGA
“We addressed this issue to SAFA and to PSL, because there are ways for them to step up instead of the club,” Lazic told FARPost.
“Just to transfer all the money that is supposed to go to Royal AM directly to Samir Nurkovic. But at this stage, they declined to do that.
“And I also warned them, if that remains to be their case, I would need to report that also to FIFA.
“Because basically, you know, there is this NSL handbook and in Article 10.10, it clearly stipulates that any member, you know, or member club, only by virtue of its membership of the league, automatically authorises the league to deduct from the money payable to the club any sums that this club is supposed to be to paid to a player or any other person that they have a debt towards it. So, we addressed this issue to SAFA and PSL.
“But basically, at this stage, I provide them with additional deadline as well, at this stage, they responded that, that article only applies to the rulings by South African Football Association Dispute Resolution Chamber
“And basically, that it does not concern the final bindings decision for FIFA and CAS stating that, in their opinion, it wouldn’t be appropriate way for the league to apply its own processes in those circumstances.”
Lazic expressed disappointment with the PSL’s stance, labeling it “discriminatory.” He indicated that they would escalate the matter to FIFA and seek additional sanctions against Royal AM.
‘IT APPEARS DISCRIMINATORY TOWARDS THE PLAYER’
“And in my opinion, and I think it should be FIFA’s opinion again as well, this interpretation lacks foundation because it’s not according to their own NSL handbook,” added Lazic.
“In my opinion, it appears arbitrary and discriminatory towards this particular player.
“…I will ask for further bans, you know, against the club. But I will ask FIFA for their opinion, you know, in relation to the bans to PSL and SAFA.”
RELATED STORY: Samir Nurkovic’s expectations under Gavin Hunt’s guidance at SuperSport United
