Saudi Pro League fixture changes divide pundits over planning and fairness

The Saudi Pro League’s fixture schedule has prompted a sharp split among media figures and football analysts, with debate centred on the postponement of several matches and the league’s handling of fixture congestion.

Some believe the revised calendar is a practical response to the demands of the current season, while others argue that it highlights delays in decision-making and a lack of alternative planning.

The issue was discussed on the programme Nadeena, where contributors examined the work of the competitions department after matches involving Al-Hilal, Al-Ittihad, Al-Ahli and Al-Nassr were postponed.

The changes have created a congested period in the weeks ahead, while several clubs have also expressed objections to the newly assigned dates.

Al-Sunaini defends fixture planners

Hamad Al-Sunaini defended the competitions department, saying the current campaign was among those in which clubs had been given the greatest number of rest periods.

He also praised the decision to consult clubs before finalising the schedule, arguing that playing successive league matches within the same week was preferable to spreading the pressure across different competitions.

Al-Sunaini rejected criticism of the decision to alter the order of the rounds, describing the department’s approach as the best available solution in the circumstances. He warned that moving the Al-Nassr and Al-Ahli derby to the end of the season could reduce some of its competitive importance and impact.

He referred to a previous fixture between Al-Ittihad and Al-Hilal, noting that the two sides had played their first and second legs within a relatively short period. However, he stressed that both matches had taken place, contrary to claims that the first leg had not been played.

Criticism over delayed decisions

Mateb Al-Hazzaa took the opposing view, criticising the way the scheduling issue had been managed. He said the delay in reaching decisions suggested there had been a crisis and no prepared contingency plan for dealing with developments.

Al-Hazzaa added that postponements involving Al-Hilal, Al-Ittihad, Al-Ahli and Al-Nassr had increased the burden on the clubs during the next stage of the season.

He also questioned whether the teams were satisfied with the replacement dates. Abdulrahman Al-Humaidi said only three clubs had submitted formal objections, prompting further discussion about when the postponed matches should be played and whether other solutions were available.

Badr Al-Saqri said the league had benefited from the postponement of the Asian Cup. He considered Mohammed Al-Kahl’s statement that 90% of clubs’ requests had been met to be a positive sign, provided that responding to those demands did not undermine competitive fairness.

Ahmed Al-Harbi, however, warned that the fixture density could have a sporting impact on some clubs, particularly those attempting to improve their squads during the winter transfer window. He said the role of the league and the federation was not to satisfy every club.

Al-Humaidi added that Al-Nassr and Al-Qadsiah had objected because they wanted religious occasions and observances to be considered when match dates were selected. The competitions department rejected both requests and retained the published schedule.

Mohammed Al-Nasser said complete satisfaction among all clubs was difficult to achieve, but fairness in hearing their requests remained important. He also called for recovery reports to be used, arguing that accounting for players’ physical condition would improve technical standards and the quality of the competition.