Joe Mifsud faces crucial survival vote for MFA presidency, as PL leader is angered at canvassing by Micallef and Pellegrini

MFA president Joe Mifsud today faces the umpteenth challenge to his unbroken 18-year reign at the helm of the Malta Football Association, but the challenge has been politically tainted.

7 August 2010, 12:00am
by Karl Stagno-Navarra

1 min read

PL leader Joseph Muscat has been angered at the news that former party secretary general Jason Micallef and former Lorry Sant henchman Ronnie Pellegrini have been campaigning to have Joe Mifsud re-elected as President of the Malta Football Association in today's crucial election.

MaltaToday is informed that the PL leader "blew his top" as soon as he was informed that the two party officials were making phone calls to MFA delegates encouraging them to vote for Joe Mifsud and confirm him in office.

It is understood that a 'secret agreement' was reached between Prime Minister and PN leader Lawrence Gonzi and Opposition leader Joseph Muscat that both political parties will stay away from interfering in the toughly contested election for the MFA presidency.

Tensions are high as the 109 delegates from clubs around Malta and Gozo will cast their votes later today and decide between incumbent Joe Mifsud who has been in office for 19 years and Norman Darmanin Demajo who is contesting for the post for the second time.

More from Karl Stagno-Navarra

joseph mercieca •

In my contribution I clearly said that I did not agree with these antics and yes these two are harming the Party. My objection is using this piece of news to hurl mud at Lorry Sant, a favourite hobby horse of the PN. I find this very unethical since Lorry Sant has now departed this world and cannot defend himself. And yes Mr. Cassar it relevant as Mr. Stagno Navarra is mixing sport with politics just as Mr. Micallef and Mr. Pellegrini are doing. The big difference is the PN do almost subliminally whilst Labour does it in the usual clumsy fumbling way. You see Mr. Cassar in the piece Mr. Stagno Navvarra hit two birds with one stone A) Exposing Micallef's and Pellegrini stupid interfering thus losing Labour some brownie points. B) Using the news to continue to throw more mud at Lorry Sant.

Andre Micallef •

Whether Ronnie Pellegrini was Lorry Sant's henchman is irrelevant. So is the point whether Sant was a gangster or not. The point here is that neither Pellegrini nor Micallef had any right to drag the PL into this innecessary tournament between Joe Mifsud, admittedly one of the most arrogant ("kiesah") personages around and his contendent. What does the PL stand to gain from intruding in this soccer scene tussle? The PL is there to serve the interests of labourites in the political sphere, not in the football arena. If Pellegrini and Micallef cannot comprehend this they ought to leave politics and join the MFA.

joseph mercieca •

I agree that these two should not interfer. Maltese football needs these antics like a shot in the hand. On the otherhand I think the author of the piece was way out of line describing Ronnie Pellegrini as a Henchman of Lorry Sant. Alot can be said about Ronnie but that he was a henchman. Our ex PN author who was quite young or not even born in Lorry Sants times wants to pertetruate the myth that Lorry Sant was somet kind of gangster. If, and I repeat if, for argument's sake, Lorry Sant was as implied by the author, a gangster, compared to today's gangsters Lorry is a pup whilst those of today are unsatiable rapid wolves!!!

Andre Micallef •

Jason Micallef and Ronnie Pellegrini had no right to canvas for Joe Mifusd. He is not the Labour candidate or anything of that sort in the local football scene. What was the real motivation behind their uncalled for and unwarranted canvassing? Do these two conspirators work in the interest of the PL or for some other, personal, agenda? These two individuals should be disciplined by the party conference, lest they continue to drag the Party into further unnecessary spheres of national life. If they want to continue acting like two juveniles they should be sent to exercise their inclinations outside the Party. Again, Dr Joseph Muscat was right to chide them. He should be watching them from now on with greater vigilance. They have created enough trouble in the past. They should not be allowed to pursue their dubious ways in the future, particularly so as general elections may be looming nearer than generally perceived.