Msida St Joseph are requesting the MFA to postpone the start of the local championship until a final decision concerning the corruption cases is taken by the investigating board.
Robert Micallef, club president, told reporters yesterday that with the start of the championship only three weeks away, Msida did not know yet whether they will be taking part in the Premier Division or in the First Division.
He said that because the Board investigating the cases is to continue with its hearing on 20 August, that is just one day before the scheduled start of the competition, the club was appealing to the MFA to postpone everything until after the final verdict is announced by the Board.
Micallef went on to explain how the club had suspended coach Patrick Curmi after Marsaxlokk had opened negotiations with him without Msida's permission.
He then went on to say that the club had written to the MFA on 6 March 2009, stating that the Board to investigate Corrupt Practices should start procedures involving the match between Marsaxlokk and Msida of 23 November 2008 which had ended in a 1-1 draw. He remarked that two members of the Marsaxlokk club had admitted in court that they had approached the Msida goalkeeper with a view to bribe him for that match. Msida had also requested that the result be changed into a 2-0 win for the Saints.
Micallef also stated that on 26 July, they had sent another letter to the MFA after noting that Marsaxlokk had been doing everything to delay the final verdict on this issue.
The Saints president said that because of all this, the club had lost several sponsorships as well as some players who have decided to leave the club. "Moreover we also have five foreigners on trial at present and we do not know yet what we will be doing," he added.
The Saints' president also said that another letter was sent to the MFA on 31 July. "In that letter, Dr A. Farrugia, legal adviser of the club, requested the MFA and the Board to investigate Corrupt Practices to refrain from further delays, adding that rules 4 and 15 about corruption clearly indicate that evidence heard in court was proof enough for a decision to be taken," he said.