PSL sanctions favour Dembare

The Premier Soccer League's disciplinary sanctions against Hardrock FC and Dynamos FC following their abandoned Castle Lager Premier Soccer League fixture have sparked mixed reactions, with supporters divided over whether the punishment was proportionate and fairly applied.

The Matchday 14 encounter at Chahwanda Stadium was abandoned after crowd disturbances, prompting the PSL disciplinary committee to impose fines and additional sanctions on both clubs.

While many supporters welcomed the league's firm stance against football violence, others argued the penalties failed to adequately reflect the respective responsibilities of the two clubs.

Bulawayo-based Dynamos supporter Blessings Marangwanda questioned the fairness of the ruling, arguing that the home side should have carried greater responsibility for security at the venue.

"As a fan, I question how fair the judgment is. If security at Hardrock's home ground was part of the problem, then the home club should have carried a greater responsibility. Dynamos were fined the full US$10,000 while Hardrock effectively pays US$8,000 because part of their fine was suspended. Fans simply want consistency from the PSL," he said.

Another Dynamos supporter, Takudzwa Ndunduma, said the disciplinary committee largely reached the correct conclusion but believed Hardrock deserved more severe punishment as the host club.

"From the videos it was clear Dynamos supporters were involved in the violence and they deserved punishment. But Hardrock, as the home team, failed to provide adequate security and should have received a stiffer penalty, including more matches behind closed doors. The decision to replay the remaining minutes is fair because both sets of supporters contributed to the abandonment," he said.

Tasara Mutongoza shared similar views, saying the sanctions should have reflected a greater distinction between the two clubs' levels of responsibility.

"The PSL was harsh in the sense that there was supposed to be one team that pays a heavier fine. I think the judgment on replaying the remaining minutes is fine," he said.

Hardrock supporters, however, argued that their club had been unfairly penalised despite claiming their fans only reacted after visiting supporters allegedly damaged property at the stadium.

Hardrock FC supporters' chairman Tadious Marima maintained that home supporters entered the pitch to protect stadium infrastructure.

"It is a bad decision because Hardrock fans went onto the field to protect their facility. Dynamos fans damaged some of the infrastructure, breaking banners and security barricades while our fans were seated. We never damaged our own property. How can we be expected to pay such a fine?" he said.

Supporter Asani Milanzi said completing the remaining 14 minutes behind closed doors at a neutral venue would disadvantage Hardrock.

"We were dominating that match and now we have to replay it at a venue without supporters. That benefits Dynamos. Playing one full home game behind closed doors is another huge loss because the club depends on gate takings and our supporters give the team energy," he said.

Another supporter, Alphonse Mugwagwa, questioned why only the remaining portion of the match would be replayed.

"I would have preferred the match to be replayed from the beginning. Playing just the last 14 minutes is difficult to accept. The empty-stadium punishment also hurts because the club loses revenue. The fine is acceptable, but I don't think Hardrock started the violence," he said.

The PSL disciplinary committee fined both clubs US$10,000 after finding them guilty of offences that contributed to the abandonment of the fixture.

Under the ruling, Hardrock will play one home match behind closed doors, while Dynamos has been ordered to submit crowd management reports after each away fixture for the remainder of the season. The outstanding 14 minutes of the abandoned match will be completed behind closed doors at a neutral venue.

The sanctions have reignited debate over accountability in Zimbabwean football, with supporters broadly agreeing that crowd violence must be eradicated but remaining divided over whether the league's disciplinary measures struck the right balance between deterrence and fairness.