Chaos after the draw at Bonifika: Koper and Radomlje present opposing versions of the physical altercation
The second-round Slovenian league match between FC Koper and NK Radomlje, played on July 26, 2026, at Bonifika Stadium, ended in a 2:2 draw, but the sporting outcome was soon overshadowed. After the final whistle, a physical altercation took place inside the stadium facilities and in the VIP parking area, after which the two clubs published completely opposing versions of the events. Radomlje claims that Koper sporting director Ivica Guberac and three other representatives of the home club attacked visiting club president Matjaž Marinšek and then his son Grega Marinšek, Radomlje's sporting director. Koper rejects that account and states that Guberac himself was attacked and that a police report was filed against officials of the visiting club. The Football Association of Slovenia confirmed that it was aware of the incident, condemned the violence and announced a review of all available reports and facts before deciding on possible disciplinary proceedings.
Given the mutually contradictory claims, it is currently impossible to independently determine the responsibility of individuals solely on the basis of the clubs' statements. A complete official police reconstruction of the events has not been published, nor have the public been shown the surveillance-camera footage that Radomlje believes exists. It is therefore important to distinguish between what has been confirmed and what, for now, remains an allegation by one side or the other. It has been confirmed that a physical confrontation between club representatives occurred after the match and that both sides reported the incident to the police. What remains disputed is who started the conflict, how many people took part, exactly where the individual stages of the incident occurred and what injuries, if any, were sustained.
Dramatic match lasted almost three hours
Even before the post-match incident, the evening at Bonifika was unusually tense. According to a report by the Slovenian sports newspaper Ekipa, the match began at 20.15 and did not end until 23.02, following an interruption caused by a severe storm and a power outage. Radomlje took the lead as early as the fourth minute through a goal by Luka Kušić, while Divine Ikenna doubled the visitors' advantage to 2:0 in the 24th minute. FC Koper responded in the second half through Leo Rimac, who first reduced the deficit in the 79th minute and then converted a penalty in the eighth minute of stoppage time to make the final score 2:2. FC Koper's official match report confirms that the referee was Denis Halilović and that Rimac's second goal was scored from the penalty spot in the 98th minute.
At half-time, the stadium was left without lighting, which meant that the restart was delayed for almost 50 minutes. According to reports in the Slovenian media, the technical problem occurred when the Koper area was hit by severe weather accompanied by heavy rain. The lengthy break changed the rhythm of the match, and the home team took the initiative in the second half and gradually fought its way back into the game. The closing stages raised tensions even further because the penalty decision was made after a review of the footage using the VAR system. Radomlje thus lost its chance of victory in the final seconds, while Koper rescued a point in front of its home supporters.
It was precisely the events during the interruption that later became part of the dispute. In its statement, Radomlje claims that Ante and Ivica Guberac, as leading figures of the home club, put pressure during half-time on the coaching staff, technical manager and captain of the visiting team to prevent the match from continuing because of the downpour. According to Radomlje's version, its representatives insisted that the decision be made exclusively by the referees and the match delegate and wanted to play the match to its conclusion at a time when they were leading 2:0. That claim has not been independently confirmed, and Koper did not specifically address it in its brief response. The home club limited itself to saying that Guberac had been attacked and that it was leaving further action to the competent authorities.
Radomlje claims that its president and sporting director were attacked
According to NK Radomlje's statement, club president Matjaž Marinšek headed towards the dressing room after the end of the match to congratulate the players and coaching staff on their performance and the point they had earned. The visiting club states that Ivica Guberac first verbally attacked him at the entrance to the club and dressing-room facilities. Radomlje then claims that Guberac and three other representatives of the home side forcibly pushed Marinšek through the entrance door and physically confronted him. The statement additionally says that at least two people from that group allegedly did not have the required accreditations. Neither the identities of those people nor their official status have been publicly confirmed.
Radomlje further claims that the incident was seen from the parking area by Grega Marinšek, the president's son and the club's sporting director, who attempted to protect Matjaž Marinšek. According to the visiting club's version, he was then attacked as well, with Guberac and three other people allegedly taking part in the assault. The club announced that Grega Marinšek had suffered physical injuries, but it did not provide detailed medical documentation or describe their severity. At the time of publication of this article, there was no official, independent confirmation of the extent of the injuries. Radomlje stated that it had not provoked the home representatives and that it immediately reported the incident to the police and the Football Association of Slovenia.
The visiting club requested a full investigation into all the circumstances and expressed its belief that the disputed areas of the stadium and the VIP parking area were covered by security cameras. If such footage exists and captures the entire course of events, it could be crucial in establishing the sequence of actions and the identities of those involved. Testimony from accredited persons, security personnel, the match delegate, members of the coaching staffs and other eyewitnesses could also be important. Club statements in themselves represent the accounts of interested parties, so their credibility will depend on how closely they correspond with independent evidence. Radomlje presented its version in detail, but so far it has not publicly released materials that would directly confirm it.
Koper claims that Ivica Guberac was the victim
FC Koper responded with a brief statement in which it said that every event has two sides. The home club claims that its sporting director Ivica Guberac was attacked and that a police report was filed against officials of NK Radomlje. Koper did not name the people reported, did not describe the precise location where the conflict began and did not provide a more detailed chronology. The club announced that it would not comment further on the case until the proceedings had been completed. It therefore presented a fundamentally opposing claim to Radomlje's, but without responding to the visiting club's individual allegations concerning the events in the corridor and the parking area.
Such communication leaves several key questions unanswered. It is not clear whether this was one continuous conflict that moved through several areas or a series of separate incidents. It is also unknown whether some people became involved only after the initial argument, whether they were attempting to separate those involved or whether they actively participated in the violence. It has not been publicly confirmed whether the security service intervened or at what point the police were called. A detailed timeline will be particularly important if individual and club responsibility is to be established.
Koper's decision not to engage in further public dispute can be interpreted as an attempt to leave the public discussion to the formal proceedings, but at the same time it means that many of Radomlje's specific allegations currently remain without a detailed response. That does not mean that they are automatically true, just as Koper's brief report does not confirm its version. At this stage, both sides have an interest in protecting their own officials and the reputation of their club. Journalistic caution therefore requires terms such as attacker, victim or guilty party to be used only with clear attribution. The final picture can be established only through the police determination of the facts and possible disciplinary proceedings by the football authorities.
Football association condemned the violence but did not prejudge responsibility
On July 27, the Football Association of Slovenia confirmed that it was aware of the incident following the league match at Bonifika. The association stated that, according to the initial information, a physical confrontation had occurred between representatives of the two clubs. Its statement strongly condemned every form of violence at matches and in their vicinity, stressing that such behaviour has no place in football. The association emphasised that violence is not only a violation of the rules but also an attack on the values of respect, integrity and responsibility. At the same time, it refrained from assessing who was responsible until all available information had been reviewed.
According to the association's announcement, the competent bodies are expected to analyse the official match reports and other available facts and then decide whether there are grounds for initiating disciplinary proceedings. The match delegate's report, the referees' reports, statements from the clubs, surveillance-camera footage and police findings could all be important in such proceedings. The association announced that it would not publicly assess the course of events or the responsibility of individuals until the checks had been completed. This is important because prematurely siding with one party could make it more difficult to conduct the proceedings impartially. The association also announced that it would inform the public of further steps when permitted by any potential disciplinary process.
The possible sporting consequences cannot yet be reliably predicted. They will depend on who participated in the conflict, in what capacity, how intense the violence was and whether the club can be held responsible for the conduct of its officials or for the organisation of security. Disciplinary proceedings within the football system are separate from police proceedings and any possible criminal or misdemeanour proceedings. This means that the same fact may be relevant at several levels, but the standards of proof and the types of sanctions differ. Until the competent authorities publish their findings, any assessment concerning suspensions, fines or other measures would remain speculation.
Incident overshadowed the start of the new season
The match in Koper was only the second-round fixture of the Prva liga Telemach in the 2026/27 season, but the incident immediately became one of the main topics in Slovenian football. FC Koper had four points after two rounds, while Radomlje had earned its first point of the new season. Instead of discussing the home side's comeback from a 0:2 deficit and Leo Rimac's two goals, attention shifted to the conduct of the club officials. Such events have broader consequences because they can undermine the confidence of players, supporters, sponsors and the public in the safety and professional standards of the competition. It is particularly problematic when a conflict is associated with people whose behaviour should set the standard within their clubs.
Stadiums are workplaces for a large number of people and venues for public sporting events, so the obligation to behave safely does not end with the final whistle. Corridors, dressing rooms, VIP zones and parking areas are part of the organisational space of a match, and conflicts in those areas can be just as serious as incidents beside the pitch. In this case, the fact that the conflict allegedly occurred between the clubs' highest-ranking officials creates additional sensitivity. Regardless of which version proves to be accurate, the mere confirmation of a physical confrontation demonstrates a serious failure to keep the situation under control. The clubs and the association are therefore expected not only to establish individual responsibility but also to analyse whether the security protocols were adequate.
For the public, it is crucial that the process be swift, transparent and based on verifiable evidence. Publishing disciplinary decisions with clear explanations could reduce the scope for speculation and mutual accusations. It is equally important to protect the presumption of innocence of everyone involved until the facts have been established. Clubs may defend their interests, but public statements should not further inflame the conflict or prejudge the other side. Sporting credibility in this case will be determined not only by any punishment that may be imposed, but also by the institutions' ability to demonstrate that violence between officials is investigated just as seriously as violence in the stands or on the pitch.
Until official findings are published, two irreconcilable versions of the same night remain. Radomlje claims that Matjaž and Grega Marinšek were attacked after the visiting club insisted that the match be played to its conclusion. Koper claims that Ivica Guberac was the victim of an attack and that Radomlje officials were reported. The Football Association of Slovenia confirmed the physical confrontation but did not assign responsibility to either side. The next steps will depend on police findings, official reports and any footage that could clarify what happened in the corridors of Bonifika and in the VIP parking area after the 2:2 draw.
Sources:
- Football Association of Slovenia – official statement concerning the incident, condemnation of the violence and announcement of possible disciplinary proceedings (link)
- FC Koper – official match report, result, goalscorers and match officials (link)
- Primorske novice / Slovenian Press Agency – allegations from Radomlje's statement and chronology of events after the match (link)
- Ekipa – published version from FC Koper and information about the police report against Radomlje officials (link)
- Planet Nogomet – report on the course of the match, the interruption caused by the power outage and the equaliser in the 98th minute (link)