We at NK Olimpija Ljubljana are aware that the season has fallen short of all expectations and that we bear responsibility for results that do not live up to the history, ambitions, and standards of our club. We do not shy away from our own mistakes, nor do we seek excuses for poor performances throughout the season. However, it is completely unacceptable that in crucial moments, the championship is being decided in a way that casts serious doubt on the regularity of the competition.

NK Olimpija Ljubljana is outraged by the events from the match between NK Bravo and NK Radomlje, where the main referee Alen Borošak, after intervention by VAR referees Martin Matoša and Matic Mežnar, awarded a non-existent penalty in extra time, which directly affected the fight for spots leading to European qualifications.

Referee errors happen, but it is unacceptable that such shameful decisions occur with the intervention of multiple referees in the VAR room, where a situation that did not exist on the field is created. This is manipulation at a level that does not belong in professional European football.

Even more concerning is that this is not an isolated incident. Let us recall the disallowed regular goal by Marko Ristić in the match between NK Olimpija Ljubljana and NK Bravo, where Olimpija’s goal, after an initial corner kick and Ristić’s subsequent attractive back-heel move, was unfairly disallowed by the main referee Bojan Mertik due to an alleged foul on the opposing goalkeeper.

It is also concerning that in this particular case, the Bravo player, against whom the foul was allegedly committed, did not even demand a penalty, nor did he react as if it were an obvious foul, yet the VAR room still found a reason to intervene. This raises serious questions about the criteria and consistency of referee decisions in the national championship.

This truly unbelievable situation demands a serious and independent investigation. We expect a clear message from the responsible institutions that Slovenia is not a country where irregularities and decisions that cast doubt on the fairness of sports competition are tolerated. Therefore, our appeal is not only directed at the football public but also at the competent authorities and decision-makers to thoroughly examine the case and take appropriate measures to protect the integrity of Slovenian football.

If championships are decided in such a manner, then we must question whether further investment in Slovenian football still makes sense. What message is Slovenian football sending to foreign investors and partners? At this moment, we are seriously considering whether we should even participate in the final round against NK Bravo.

An unjust decision has no connection to the principles of “fair play.” The damage incurred can truly only be rectified by decisive and transparent action from the competent authorities, which also includes serious consideration of replaying the match under the guidance of the most competent referees in the country. We believe and expect that those responsible will do everything to protect the fairness of Slovenian football.

Expert commentary on the show “Pod prečko”

Robert Krajnc, Vice President of ZNSS and Referee Controller, on the Bravo – Radomlje case: “The correct decision would have been not to award a penalty at all. We do not want such penalties in football, and for me, it is a clear refereeing error. I would never have awarded such a severe penalty myself. The VAR referee also made a mistake by calling the main referee to review the footage for such a situation. For me, this is by no means a penalty.”

Robert Krajnc, Vice President of ZNSS and Referee Controller, on the Olimpija – Bravo case: “For me, this is a clear refereeing error. The goalkeeper flies into the opposing players, and in doing so, the ball drops from his hands, while the intervening opposing player even moves away. The goalkeeper is not obstructed during the intervention and does not have control of the ball. The correct decision would have been for the referee not to interrupt the situation at all, but to wait for the action to conclude. If a goal had been scored, VAR would have had the option to check, but in this case, there would have been no reason for intervention. The only correct decision would have been to allow the goal.”

NK Olimpija Ljubljana