The Russian Football Union’s Control and Disciplinary Board (CDP RFU) faced a procedural controversy in the 20th round of the Russian Premier League when Pari NN midfielder Yaroslav Mihaylov took part in a match despite being suspended. The issue drew attention after Sport Express reported the incident.
What happened was that Mihaylov, who should not have been on the field due to a prior disqualification, nevertheless participated in the game. Artur Grigoryants, who oversees the CDP RFU, announced that the club had been issued a technical defeat as a result of the infraction.
Grigoryants stated that the club failed to observe necessary precautionary measures and that Mihaylov did not disclose two prior warnings. He emphasized that no action for warning disclosure had been taken appropriately, which led to the protest being upheld.
On March 19, reports indicated that during the 20th round, Mihaylov, a Pari NN midfielder, did not have clearance to appear in the match against Torpedo. The record shows four warnings in the 2022/2023 season, which should have triggered a one-match suspension under the applicable Competition Regulations.
The fixture between Pari NN and Torpedo concluded in a 1-1 draw, with Mihaylov being sent off in the 68th minute. Torpedo later asserted that they were aware Mihaylov was disqualified, which raised questions about the club’s handling of player availability for the match.
On March 20, Artur Grigoryants, chair of the Russian Football Union’s Control and Disciplinary Committee (CDP RFU), confirmed that Torpedo had filed a protest regarding Mihaylov’s participation in the 20th round of the Russian Premier League. The protest centered on the failure to recognize Mihaylov’s disqualification status and the potential breach of competition rules in the cited round.
The governing bodies proceeded to review the incident, examining the sequence of disciplinary warnings Mihaylov received, the timing of those warnings, and whether proper communications about his suspension were conveyed to Pari NN and the match officials. The outcome would hinge on whether the club could demonstrate that it had exercised due diligence in ensuring player eligibility, and whether the league’s disciplinary framework was correctly applied in this instance.
Disciplinary processes in top-tier Russian football emphasize accuracy in tracking suspensions and ensuring clubs enforce eligibility rules. The case highlights how even a single oversight can affect the integrity of a match result and the broader competitive balance of the league. The incident also underscores the role of league authorities in evaluating protests, the sufficiency of club precautions, and the timely dissemination of suspension information to all relevant parties.
As the review progressed, analysts noted that transparency in the handling of warnings and suspensions is essential for maintaining trust among clubs, players, and supporters. The league may consider clarifying procedures, improving communications between clubs and federation bodies, and reinforcing checks before matchdays to prevent similar lapses in the future. The situation remains a reminder that procedural compliance is as crucial as on-field performance in professional football.
The broader implications of this event concern not only the immediate outcomes of the round in question but also the ongoing need for robust oversight within the Russian Premier League. The federation’s disciplinary committees are tasked with upholding fairness, while clubs must implement stricter internal controls to verify player eligibility ahead of every match. The resolution of Mihaylov’s case will likely influence future guidance on warnings, suspensions, and the verification steps required before a player is allowed to participate in league fixtures.