The silence at Namboole Stadium last Saturday was deafening. What was expected to be the dawn of a new, vibrant Uganda Premier League (UPL) era instead turned into a stark symbol of crisis. This “double-header” never captured its audience, echoing with the sounds of uncertainty and discontent.
At the heart of this storm is Dr Lawrence Mulindwa, president of Vipers SC, who has taken a firm stand against the Federation of Uganda Football Associations (FUFA) and its newly introduced three-phase league format. His resistance has exposed deep fractures within the country’s football administration; fractures that now threaten to destabilize the entire sporting ecosystem.
“I can’t be intimidated, bribed, or corrupted. If you want to dismiss Vipers out of Ugandan football, I have no problem,” Mulindwa recently said.
This is no mere dispute over competition rules; it is a battle for control, transparency, and the future of Ugandan football.
The Reform that sparked the Storm
FUFA’s new three-phase UPL structure was meant to modernize the league and increase competitiveness. However, Mulindwa and other critics argue that it was imposed without sufficient consultation and has major commercial and sporting flaws.
The most controversial element is that points from the first phase of the season do not carry over to the second, effectively nullifying that part of the campaign. The new revenue-sharing model has also angered clubs, as it reduces the home team’s share of gate collections, with a larger portion directed toward FUFA’s operations.
Mulindwa, a former FUFA president and one of Uganda’s most influential private sports investors, insists the reforms are “fundamentally flawed” and a “direct assault on club independence and sustainability.”
The Potential Fallout
If Mulindwa follows through with his threat to withdraw Vipers SC from Ugandan football, the consequences could be devastating across multiple levels.
1. Sponsorship and Brand Image
The dispute has already made the Uganda Premier League appear unstable to corporate sponsors. Ongoing conflict and boycotts make the competition look unpredictable and commercially risky
A format that even fans struggle to understand undermines marketing, broadcasting, and sponsorship contracts.
Should Vipers withdraw, the league could be branded a “commercial liability”, deterring both local and international investment.
2. Employment and Livelihoods
While the exact number of people employed by Vipers SC is not public, estimates from similar professional clubs indicate the following structure:
- Players: 20–30
- Coaching and medical staff: 5–10
- Administrative staff: 10–20
- Support staff (cleaners, security, drivers): 5–10
This suggests at least 40–70 direct employees, excluding hundreds of others who depend indirectly on the club, like vendors, transport operators, media teams, and nearby businesses.
Uganda’s youth unemployment crisis exacerbates this situation. With over 81,000 applicants competing for 280 public jobs and 600,000 young people entering the job market annually against just 80,000 formal jobs created, any job losses in the private sector, like sport hit hard.
Vipers’ exit would add to that burden.
3. Loss of Private Investment
Dr Mulindwa’s “blank cheque” approach to football has driven millions into the game — from facilities and salaries to youth development. His St. Mary’s Stadium–Kitende and St. Mary’s Secondary School pipeline have redefined Ugandan football infrastructure.
His withdrawal would mean the loss of one of the largest private investments in the country’s sports sector, capital that may take years to replace.
4. Reduced Economic Activity
Football is more than a game; it’s an economic ecosystem.
Vipers’ matches generate spending through ticket sales, merchandising, transport, food vendors, and local hospitality businesses.
Their participation in continental competitions like the CAF Champions League also brings international exposure and tourism opportunities to Uganda.
Without them, these economic activities, particularly around Kitende would sharply decline.
5. Tourism and Local Development
Vipers SC’s home matches have made Kitende a football destination, attracting visitors from across the country and even neighbouring nations.
Mulindwa’s investments transformed the area from a “small bushy town” into a bustling urban hub with businesses, schools, and sports facilities.
If he scales back his involvement, the local economy around Kitende would likely slow, affecting businesses that depend on matchday traffic and student sports programs.
6. Governance and Leadership Vacuum
Mulindwa’s departure would leave a power vacuum in Ugandan football politics
As a former FUFA president and current stakeholder with immense influence, his absence could shift leadership dynamics within the federation and weaken checks on FUFA’s decision-making.
His criticism has already reignited debates about transparency, accountability, and representation in football governance.
If he steps aside completely, the league could become even more centralised — with limited oversight and dissenting voices.
7. Conflict and Controversy
The standoff has already led to Vipers boycotting their match against Kitara FC, an act that disrupted the UPL schedule and heightened tensions.
Such boycotts risk spreading, with other clubs and fans expressing solidarity or frustration.
If more teams follow suit, FUFA could face an operational crisis, damaging the league’s credibility and competitive integrity.
8. Impact on Club Football
Vipers SC has been a dominant force in Ugandan football, consistently competing for titles and representing the country in CAF competitions.
Prolonged disputes or withdrawal would reduce the league’s competitiveness and lower its international standing.
This would also impact the national team pipeline, given how many national players have emerged from St. Mary’s Kitende and Vipers’ youth structures.
9. Loss of Sponsorship and Support
Football thrives on perception. A league riddled with conflict and uncertainty drives away sponsors, broadcasters, and fans.
Existing partners may reconsider commitments if they see instability, while potential investors might avoid entering the market altogether.
The UPL’s already fragile financial model could collapse without steady commercial backing.
10. Potential FIFA Implications
If FUFA fails to resolve the crisis, it risks attracting FIFA’s attention.
Prolonged governance disputes and match boycotts could trigger sanctions or direct intervention — as seen in other federations where administrative interference compromised the game’s integrity.
Such a scenario would have far-reaching consequences for both domestic and international football operations in Uganda.
11. Wider Economic Effects
Beyond the sport, football contributes to Uganda’s informal economy — from local vendors and boda-boda operators to hospitality workers.
Every home match at Kitende or elsewhere generates ripple effects across local supply chains.
A weakened league means fewer matchdays, less spending, and lower incomes for thousands of small traders who depend on football weekends.
FUFA’s Position
FUFA, on its part, maintains that the new UPL structure is intended to modernize Ugandan football and align it with international standards.
According to the federation, the reforms are designed to “enhance competitiveness, attract sponsorships, and improve the league’s marketability.”
In an official statement, FUFA emphasised that all clubs were “duly consulted and represented” through the Uganda Premier League Board before implementation. The federation also insists that the new gate revenue model ensures “financial transparency and equitable distribution of resources” among stakeholders.
FUFA has urged all clubs, including Vipers SC, to “remain patient and committed to the collective development of Ugandan football” while the league’s reforms take root.
The Bigger Picture
The crisis between FUFA and Vipers SC has become more than an internal football issue; it’s a reflection of broader governance challenges in Ugandan sport, balancing reform with inclusivity, control with collaboration.
At its core, the battle is about who shapes Ugandan football’s future: the federation, the clubs, or a partnership between both.
For now, the silence at Namboole stands as a warning. If dialogue does not replace defiance soon, the echoes of this standoff could be felt across every level of the game — from the stadium terraces to the national economy.
Well articulated.
This needs to be resolved as soon as possible lest Uganda stands to lose out on so many things
I can’t imagine the Uganda Football is going back to all these issues of management gaps like in the past decades.
It’s always about “Uganda Premier Leagues Managment issues.” – When Dr. Lawrence came to save FUFA Administration and Management, there were almost 2 Leagues being played and was streamed lined by “WHO?” – I recall so well as an Excom and a Delegate of FUFA, that through the appointment of Eng. Moses Magogo – who was an Excom and a Delegate who headed to handle all Competition issues and so many become proud of that atmosphere.
But let’s not forget one individual from Express FC Mr. Kabenge” – who kept on dragging FUFA to court over Competitions especially over “Premier League” – And I recall – CEO, Dr. Mulindwa, Eng. Magogo etc would almost weekly or Monthly be in Courts – what helped was the team winning most of the cases and there became “Peace and Joy” in Uganda Football Competitions.
My stake over these ongoing matters is or that, “you mean we learnt nothing and forgot nothing?” – Because I expected the current FUFA Management to have kwon exactly how sensitive the “Uganda League management” issues can be. – I expected the stakeholders workshops organized to sensitize these Clubs should have thought much deeper than just say “we as FUFA have thought and designed how the League 2025/2026 will be played” and probably ends up sending follow up letters.
As an Associate Consultant at UMI, FUFA would have done much more engagement and communicated officially why going for that New Format and when it will come into force say after the end of this current season 2025/2026. So that all what the Clubs who could be having Sponsors and etc would communicate and gets feedback – of course and believe me – some sponsor would fail to agree and communicate to terminate their contract to that effect whereas others would accept. The plans and pains that only Club owners and managers have and feel.
I think if these Top officials at FUFA had either one or two Clubs and having sponsors, then all the strategies planned, designed etc would have been differently thought of how to implement it. Taking a lesson from how we are still struggling to implement “Double Licensing of Players” – I feel like writting much more an Associate Consultant, but I can only continue if you revert back to me either appreciation or critiquing what I am trying to bring up here.
Thank you,
Calvin Okello – +256 782 040 874 – Former FUFA Delegate and EXCOM member for Northern Uganda
I am tempted to think that Vipers boss (former FUFA President) and the current FUFA President could be having secret wars we are not aware of. How can about 14 clubs agree to the terms and conditions under the new format,and only 2 disagree?; There’s something we are yet to discover. But my reasoning is FUFA is bigger than Vipers and in any case (FIFA) is the Regulator of Ugandan football
Don’t be fooled by the fact that 14 clubs agreed to the new format, big numbers don’t make wrong right, after all,
non of these clubs are investigating personal money like Dr. Lawrence, so they’re less concerned; we are talking of an individual whose stadium hosted National team matches because the entire country had no fitting stadium – he deserves more respect than he’s being accorded right now. Problem is, the current FuFA president seems to have big ego issues, handling everything with the impunity of little boys, we have all seen/heard him insult people in the name of “Tutegeere omupiira”, and this has trickled down to the national team social handles(especially X) admins, they answer fans with zero care, even insulting some.
With due respect, UGX 3.4 bn is very small money for 16 clubs that have to navigate 3 unprecedented phases of a league( The league format from mars), FUFA, please tone down your pride, you’re holding this office on behalf of all of us football loving Ugandans, respect that and know that you aren’t th first or last. Even the few achievements had efforts of many other players, including Dr. Mulindwa. We need all hands on deck