RFS have asked the Latvian Football Federation to reconsider scheduling the 2026 Latvian Cup final for 20 November, arguing that the decision benefits title rivals Riga FC and differs from the treatment RFS received during their own European campaign in 2024.
FC RFS have formally challenged the scheduling of this season’s Latvian Cup final, asking the Latvian Football Federation to move the match between FK Auda and Riga FC from 20th November to a date before the end of the Virslīga season.
The LFF announced on 9th September that the final would take place at Skonto Stadium on 20th November, citing Riga’s participation in the UEFA Conference League, fixture congestion and the potential workload of Latvian national-team players. The date is permitted under competition regulations, which provide for the final to be played in October or November.
RFS’ objection is instead centred on consistency and the possible effect on the Virslīga title race.
In a publicly released complaint letter, the club points out that as recently as 3rd September, when Riga and Auda had already been confirmed as finalists and Riga’s Conference League participation was known, the LFF was still publicly stating that the final would take place at the end of October.
In a submission signed by general director Māris Verpakovskis, RFS asks what changed between that announcement and the decision six days later to move the final to 20 November.
Title race at the centre of dispute
The new date places the Cup final after the conclusion of the Virslīga season, removing one potentially demanding fixture from Riga’s schedule during the championship run-in.
RFS argue that an October final would affect recovery, squad rotation and preparation at a time when the two Riga clubs are competing directly for the title. They have asked the LFF to explain whether alternative dates before the end of the league season were considered and whether the interests of other Virslīga clubs formed part of the decision.
The club has also questioned whether agreement between the two finalists, if given, should be sufficient when the timing can affect other teams.
RFS use their own 2024 campaign as the main point of comparison. That year, they were simultaneously competing for the Virslīga title, Latvian Cup and Europa League, but still played the Cup final against Auda on 30th October.
Their schedule included an away Europa League match against Eintracht Frankfurt on 24th October, a Virslīga match against Metta four days later and the Cup final on 30th October. RFS then returned to league action on 3rd November before hosting Anderlecht in Europe four days later.
Despite that congestion, the final remained before the end of the domestic championship. RFS are now asking what materially distinguishes Riga’s situation in 2026 from their own two years earlier.
European qualification adds another concern
RFS also argue that the issue extends beyond the title race because the Cup result can affect Latvia’s allocation of European places.
If the Latvian Cup winner also qualifies for Europe through their league position, the consequences can extend further down the Virslīga table. By playing the final after the championship has finished, Riga and Auda will already know the final standings and exactly what each possible Cup result means for European qualification.
RFS suggest this could create different sporting incentives for the two finalists and argue that playing the match before the league concludes would reduce that risk.
The club has asked the LFF Competition Organisation Committee to review the decision, explain the criteria used to select 20th November and move the final to a date before the end of the Virslīga season.
For now, the LFF’s announced date remains unchanged, leaving a dispute that is less about whether 20th November is legally available and more about whether the same scheduling principles have been applied consistently to Latvia’s leading clubs.
