The Malta FA Appeals Board confirmed its decision to sanction Marsa FC with a deduction of thirteen points to be applied during the season 2026/27.
The appeal concerned the decision of the Member Clubs Licensing Board dated 21 November 2025, whereby Marsa FC was sanctioned with a deduction of thirteen points following the Club’s failure to satisfy certain financial obligations within the applicable deadlines.
Earlier during season 2025/26, the Licensing Board had identified a number of outstanding matters relating mainly to amounts due to players and to the Malta Tax and Customs Administration. Marsa FC’s licence was converted into a provisional licence and a temporary prohibition on the registration of players was imposed. The club was initially given until 31 October 2025 to regularise its position. The deadline was subsequently extended to 20 November 2025, with the Club being informed that further action would be taken should the outstanding matters remain unresolved.
Following the expiry of this deadline, the Licensing Board established that amounts totalling approximately €67,000 remained outstanding and consequently imposed the thirteen-point deduction.
Marsa FC appealed the decision principally on the grounds that the points deduction constituted a second sanction for the same default, that the sanction was excessive and disproportionate, and that the club had subsequently remedied its financial position.
The Appeals Board took note of the fact that the Club had subsequently remedied its financial position and cleared the amounts which had given rise to the sanction. However, it was argued that the Association and its Licensing Board were required to apply the applicable licensing regulations and could not disregard or depart from these rules just because the club had subsequently regularised its position.
The Board said that while recognising and welcoming the fact that Marsa FC subsequently settled its outstanding obligations, such subsequent regularisation does not, under the applicable provisions presented to the Board, provide a sufficient regulatory basis for cancelling or reducing a sanction which had arisen following the club’s failure to regularise its position within the applicable deadline and that there were insufficient grounds to vary the decision reached by the Member Clubs Licensing Board.
For this reason, Marsa FC will begin their BOV National League I campaign with -13 points.
Meanwhile Marsa FC issued a statement following this decision.
“Following the decision of the MFA Appeals Board which once again upheld the 13-point deduction against Marsa FC, we cannot remain silent.”
The club said that they respect the fact that this Board is autonomous and must make its decisions in accordance with the regulations and without pressure from anyone. However, they believed that in cases such as these small clubs should not be left to face complex procedures on their own.
“We are talking about a 13-point deduction due to an amount of around €67,000. Not millions. Not hundreds of thousands. Around €67,000. An amount that has now been paid in full. In fact, today Marsa FC can clearly state that the club is free from any debt. We have no debt to the Tax Office, suppliers, staff, coaches or players. We have no debt to anyone. And despite this, a club that has now completely regularised its financial situation will start a new season with 13 points less.”
Marsa FC said that they understood the fact that the MFA has a responsibility to maintain financial and administrative standards in Maltese football but believed that the system should be proportionate and that it should take into account the reality of small clubs, which are often run almost entirely by volunteers.
“The MFA demands a lot from clubs. It demands continuous changes, more bureaucracy, more documentation, more controls, more licensing requirements and standards that are often difficult to implement, especially by small clubs run by volunteers. We are not saying that there should be no regulation or standards. Clubs should be organised and accountable. But if the MFA is demanding more and more from clubs, it should also provide them with the tools and assistance needed to be able to meet these requirements. It should make the clubs’ lives easier, not leave them to face every difficulty on their own.”
“In cases where a club is trying to regularise its situation, the MFA should consider providing concrete help, including administrative and legal assistance. This could be done by giving the club access to a lawyer or independent legal adviser who can assist it in proceedings before sports boards and tribunals. A small club should not be left to face a complex legal and administrative process alone, when the decision could affect its entire future.”
“Boards should be independent and make their decisions in accordance with the regulations. But clubs should be helped to present their case in a clear, complete and professional manner. It cannot be that a small club, run by volunteers who are not experts in the law or sports procedures, is left to struggle alone before a board whose decision could determine the future of the club.”
“Legal aid does not mean that the MFA should interfere with the Board’s decision. It means that it should ensure that the club has a fair opportunity to be heard and to present its case in the best possible way.
It cannot be that the MFA demands quasi-professional organisational standards, but leaves small clubs to carry everything on their own, without resources, without help and without guidance.”