________________
OPINION
By Patrick Gukiina Musoke
Ugandan football has recently been marred by unprecedented drama, ego clashes, and widespread confusion, casting a long shadow over the sport’s future.
Central to this turmoil is the contentious introduction of a new league format, which has sparked vehement opposition from two of Uganda’s most iconic football clubs, Vipers SC and SC Villa, which have openly voiced their concerns, describing the new system as hastily conceived, inadequately researched, and shockingly approved without meaningful engagement of critical stakeholders.
This was followed by Vipers SC’s decision to withdraw from the league, while SC Villa chose to participate only under protest due to the significant investments they had already committed ahead of the season.
The magnitude of this dispute is further accentuated by the fans’ overwhelming rejection of the new league structure, with fans across the country vowing to boycott matches under this format, a promise visibly upheld during the opening double-header fixtures, which saw an alarming paucity of supporters in stadiums usually brimming with life and energy.
This palpable decline in attendance is a clear manifestation of a deeper disconnect between the league’s governance and the football community it purports to serve.
Against this backdrop, it is glaringly evident that Ugandan football is hurtling towards an adverse and precarious trajectory and it is up to all stakeholders of goodwill, administrators, clubs, players, and fans alike to unite decisively to avert an impending crisis that threatens to cripple our football progress.
It is also notable that you cannot talk about the development of Ugandan football without talking about Dr Lawrence Mulindwa, whose contribution to the sport is far beyond question.
A case in point was 2009, when he was FUFA President and FUFA had meagre funding. Bunamwaya FC had qualified for continental football, and Uganda Cranes also had critical international fixtures.
In an extraordinary act of solidarity, Dr Mulindwa withdrew his team (Bunamywaya FC) from the continental matches and instead purchased tickets for the national team, ensuring their participation on the international stage.
Such selflessness is rare and highlights just how deeply Dr Mulindwa cares for the growth and dignity of Ugandan football.
It is, therefore, wrong for anybody to claim that they love this sport much more than he does.
Secondly, it is disheartening to see the current acrimony between FUFA, Vipers SC, and the Uganda Premier League fans, which now risks setting the sport back by decades.
While the necessity of reform in football cannot be overstated, history consistently demonstrates that attempts at transformation that bypass genuine stakeholder involvement undermine the foundations of the game.
The fans of the Uganda Premier League have made their stance unmistakably clear, as evidenced by the conspicuous absence of spectators during fixtures that traditionally attract large crowds.
Their dissatisfaction is not merely superficial; it stems from substantive concerns that the new league format severs football clubs from their communities, the very heart and soul of their existence.
Moreover, the current system ironically exacerbates negative behaviors such as increased gambling by creating periods where teams compete for no tangible reward, playing matches that lack competitive significance.
Similarly, fans, while purchasing match tickets, expect their support to directly bolster their beloved clubs, which shoulder substantial costs in recruiting and paying players, maintaining facilities, and delivering community engagement. Yet, under the new model, gate collections are centrally controlled by FUFA, diluting the clubs’ financial benefits and effectively eroding incentives for innovation and growth.
In light of the above, it is clear that this model introduces a troubling socialist framework into a sport that thrives on entrepreneurship and investment.
As some clubs expend considerable resources on advertising and community outreach to build their brand, and when revenue is collected and redistributed by FUFA indiscriminately, it stifles ambition, rewards mediocrity, and resurrects an antiquated ethos that belongs in a bygone era.
It is therefore my well-considered submission that while the objective of supporting weaker clubs is commendable and necessary, it should not come at the cost of club individuality or the stifling of competitive spirit.
A uniform revenue-sharing system risks homogenising the league and diminishing the rivalry and identity that make football captivating.
A preferable approach would be targeted financial support for struggling clubs through donations or grants, rather than a one-size-fits-all revenue redistribution scheme.
In closing, genuine reform is not a unilateral edict but a sustained dialogue that respects the voices of club owners, players, supporters, and sponsors.
Any overhaul of the league structure must be underpinned by inclusive conversations that reflect our collective passion and diverse interests.
Rushing into sweeping changes risks alienating key stakeholders, sidelining teams, dampening fan enthusiasm, and stunting innovation within clubs.
FUFA would do well to heed lessons from the global football community, where patience, inclusivity, and maintaining competitive balance form the cornerstones of successful league management.
Only through such consultative and measured approaches can Ugandan football realise its full potential and embark on a path of sustainable growth.
The writer is an Advocate of the High Court of Uganda, a Uganda Law Society Digital Excellence award Laurette (2025), author, researcher, and ardent fan of Ugandan football