On July 3, 2005, a football referee was attacked by a lion after entering an enclosure on the field following a match. Contemporary news reports said the animal had been brought into the stadium as part of a celebration; details reported at the time indicated inadequate barriers and insufficient animal handlers. The referee sustained serious injuries and was taken to hospital; subsequent coverage focused on the circumstances that allowed direct access between humans and a large wild animal inside the venue. Accounts from 2005 variously described the lion’s presence as a publicity or celebratory stunt tied to the event; organizers and local authorities faced immediate criticism for permitting a dangerous animal within reach of players, officials and spectators. Eyewitnesses reported chaotic scenes as crowd members and stadium staff attempted to separate the animal from people until professional handlers intervened. Local emergency responders and medical teams treated the injured referee; available contemporaneous sources noted both physical injuries and significant psychological trauma common in such attacks. The incident prompted calls for review of safety protocols at sporting events that use live animals for entertainment or marketing. Animal-welfare and public-safety advocates emphasized the risks of mixing wild animals with large crowds and urged stricter permitting, containment, and handler qualifications. Depending on jurisdiction, events involving dangerous animals typically require permits, secure enclosures that prevent public access, and certified handlers; criticisms after the 2005 incident centered on apparent lapses in those protections. Legal and administrative follow-up varied by location and the parties involved. Some jurisdictions investigated whether event organizers violated public-safety regulations or animal-control laws; media reports from the period indicated inquiries by local authorities into event permits and responsibility for the stunt. Litigation and disciplinary outcomes reported in different sources included fines or regulatory scrutiny in some cases, though public records and long-term legal resolutions differ by country and are not uniformly documented in contemporary summaries. The episode remains a cautionary example cited in discussions about event safety, the ethics of using wild animals for entertainment, and the need to protect officials, players and spectators. It also fed broader debates about crowd control and stadium management: allowing spontaneous access to playing areas or insufficiently fenced enclosures increases the risk of harm when animals or other hazards are present. Because reporting at the time varied in detail and follow-up information is uneven across sources, some specifics—such as the precise chain of decision-making that led to the animal being on the field, the exact identity of the organizers responsible, and the full legal aftermath—are subject to differing accounts or incomplete public records. What is consistently reported is that a dangerous lapse in safety arrangements resulted in a referee being attacked by a lion on July 3, 2005, prompting immediate medical response and subsequent calls for stricter event and animal-handling safeguards.