Sunderland in trouble

Alfred Borden

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2596295/Sunderland-rocked-emerges-North-East-club-fielded-Ji-ineligible.html

Would expect a points deduction

Mushy

Will the results of the 4 matches be switched to 3-0 wins for the opposing teams?

Liam O

Surely you get clearance for the whole length of a contract no?

Lord TSC

Mushy wrote: »

Will the results of the 4 matches be switched to 3-0 wins for the opposing teams?

Everything is coming up Moyes!

HalloweenJack

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Everything is coming up Moyes!

Hardly, they already won the match but the points could be pretty handy for the other teams, if they get them.

SantryRed

Mushy wrote: »

Will the results of the 4 matches be switched to 3-0 wins for the opposing teams?

They lost 3 of them anyways and then drew 1. Southampton would gain 2 points, that's all. More important is to see if Sunderland are also docked points though, if this is true. It is the Mail after all.

mikeym

Worrying times ahead for the black cats.

Oat23

Liam O wrote: »

Surely you get clearance for the whole length of a contract no?

Stuff like that would have to be re-done after a player returns from loan. He was at Augsburg from January '13 until June.

Mushy

SantryRed wrote: »

They lost 3 of them anyways and then drew 1. Southampton would gain 2 points, that's all. More important is to see if Sunderland are also docked points though, if this is true. It is the Mail after all.

Yeah I didn't check results, was just wondering. I assume they would be alright.

And even though it is the Mail, it's a fairly outlandish and exact claim to be making if it isn't!

ctrl-alt-delete

Don't know how true the above is,

Sunderland already rejected a bid of £5Million last Summer, then loaned him to Ausburg in January, only for it to be announced the next day that he would join Dortmund for free this Summer.

He has already cost the club far too much!

Paully D

We should be awarded points for playing him due to the advantage it gave opposition teams.

Disastrous season. A points deduction would at least put us out of our misery. We're going down anyway so I'm not bothered in all honesty.

A couple of questions though - 1) how could he not have international clearance when he had it the season he signed, do you have to get it every year or something, does it not last for the length of contract? and 2) how did it take the FA/Premier League so long to realise?

A complete Mickey Mouse club from the top of the boardroom to the playing field in recent seasons.

Oat23

Paully D wrote: »

We should be awarded points for playing him due to the advantage it gave opposition teams.

Disastrous season. A points deduction would at least put us out of our misery. We're going down anyway so I'm not bothered in all honesty.

A couple of questions though - 1) how could he not have international clearance when he had it the season he signed, do you have to get it every year or something, does it not last for the length of contract? and 2) how did it take the FA/Premier League so long to realise?

A complete Mickey Mouse club from the top of the boardroom to the playing field in recent seasons.

Give me a hug man. I know the feels you are feelin.

ctrl-alt-delete

Paully D wrote: »

We should be awarded points for playing him due to the advantage it gave opposition teams.

Disastrous season. A points deduction would at least put us out of our misery. We're going down anyway so I'm not bothered in all honesty.

A couple of questions though - 1) how could he not have international clearance when he had it the season he signed, do you have to get it every year or something, does it not last for the length of contract? and 2) how did it take the FA/Premier League so long to realise?

A complete Mickey Mouse club from the top of the boardroom to the playing field in recent seasons.

Can only think you have to apply again once he came back from loan?

But I don't and won't pretend to know anything about International clearance.

Guy:Incognito

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Everything is coming up Moyes!

The opposite actually. If Southampton get 2 extra points they'll only be 4 behind Utd.

If Southampton stay in touch it might men Utd have something to play for in their last game

ctrl-alt-delete

Well the article is updated now and it seems they were fined after confessing to it,

Hopefully this is the equivalent to the FA's well he got a yellow card so there is nothing we can do about it now system.

Alfred Borden

With that article updated, seems they might escape a points deduction now which surely will create outrage if they stay up.

Paully D

Raf32 wrote: »

With that article updated, seems they might escape a points deduction now which surely will create outrage if they stay up.

We won't stay up.

Alfred Borden

Paully D wrote: »

We won't stay up.

Ah you never know mate, only takes one big win and that could give ye the momentum. Hope ye do, league full of non traditional premier league clubs, dont want to lose another big club.

Guy:Incognito

Raf32 wrote: »

With that article updated, seems they might escape a points deduction now which surely will create outrage if they stay up.

West Ham probably wont comment.Pity they aren't in the middle of the relegation fight:)

Alfred Borden

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

West Ham probably wont comment.Pity they aren't in the middle of the relegation fight:)

Would love to see them take the moral high ground :pac:

bucketybuck

Paully D wrote: »

2) how did it take the FA/Premier League so long to realise?

My understanding of the article is that it was Sunderland who informed the FA about the issue, which suggests that had they said nothing then possibly nobody would ever have known. After all, who was going to be looking closely at the eligibility of a team that lost 3 of the games and drew the other?

Its a strong mitigating factor as far as I am concerned.

Alfred Borden

Graeme Bailey ‏@GraemeBailey 52s
Sunderland are not worried by Ji case as it has already been dealt with, but it is the reaction from other clubs that will be interesting.

Might be no more action it seems

dreamers75

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26878545

Sunderland have been fined by the Premier League after it emerged they fielded an ineligible player in four league matches earlier in the season.
Striker Ji Dong-Won played against Fulham, Southampton, Crystal Palace and Manchester United before Sunderland told the Premier League they had made an administrative error.
It is understood they were made aware of the error in December and Sunderland settled the fine in early 2014.
The club will not be deducted points.

Shocking should be docked points

Paully D

dreamers75 wrote: »

Shocking should be docked points

We definitely should be. Imagine if West Brom or Crystal Palace had done this. I would be going off my rocker if they avoided a points deduction.

CSF

Paully D wrote: »

We definitely should be. Imagine if West Brom or Crystal Palace had done this. I would be going off my rocker if they avoided a points deduction.

Yup, this pretty much.

Guy:Incognito

Is it not standard practice that the teams they played get automatic wins?

CSF

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Is it not standard practice that the teams they played get automatic wins?

Nah depends what mood the FA are feeling in that particular day.

Paully D

Very sneaky from the Premier League mind keeping it under wraps. I'd like to have been informed that my club made an absolute shambles of something very simple and were fined for it and the other clubs deserve to know too.

There's been talk in the past of players failing drugs tests and then suddenly picking up an injury in training that means they miss a significant length of playing time. If the Premier League are keeping things like the Ji international clearance affair under wraps then would you really put that sort of stuff past them? What other things are they keeping away from the public? Transparency should be given.

On another note it's quite obvious that there's someone within the club at Sunderland feeding stuff to the press. The Sun "guess" that we'll go 5-3-2 and the exact line-up at Liverpool despite never playing that formation before under Poyet, then the Mail get their hands on this. What a shambles.

CSF

Paully D wrote: »

Very sneaky from the Premier League mind keeping it under wraps. I'd like to have been informed that my club made an absolute shambles of something very simple and were fined for it and the other clubs deserve to know too.

There's been talk in the past of players failing drugs tests and then suddenly picking up an injury in training that means they miss a significant length of playing time. If the Premier League are keeping things like the Ji international clearance affair under wraps then would you really put that sort of stuff past them? What other things are they keeping away from the public? Transparency should be given.

On another note it's quite obvious that there's someone within the club at Sunderland feeding stuff to the press. The Sun "guess" that we'll go 5-3-2 and the exact line-up at Liverpool despite never playing that formation before under Poyet, then the Mail get their hands on this. What a shambles.

Wilshere has always been a rumour.

hullaballoo

What has the Daily fail got against Sunderland?

It says in the bullet points at the very beginning that the FA dealt with it by issuing a fine in October.

Brendan Filone

Talk about storm in a Ji Cup.

miroslavklose

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Is it not standard practice that the teams they played get automatic wins?

Not too far from what happened in reality to be fair.

Knex*

Brendan Filone wrote: »

Talk about storm in a Ji Cup.

I laughed

CSF

hullaballoo wrote: »

What has the Daily fail got against Sunderland?

It says in the bullet points at the very beginning that the FA dealt with it by issuing a fine in October.

And hid it. Clearly a fine wasn't an adequate punishment for the offence.

Guy:Incognito

I'd imagine if Southampton miss out on Europe by a point or 2 they might get pissy? You'd assume as the only team with anything to gain they would have some opinion on the matter.

Hammer Archer

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

West Ham probably wont comment.Pity they aren't in the middle of the relegation fight:)

Raf32 wrote: »

Would love to see them take the moral high ground :pac:

Go on then, what player(s) did we play that were ineligible (note that the two you're probably thinking of were never ineligible). Though you could be talking about Manny Omoyinmi back in 1999 of course.

While I hoped they stayed up anyway, I would love it even more if they stayed up by a single point. Though if they did, they could probably expect to pay an 8 figure sum in compensation going by precedent.

Mr.Nice Guy

Looks like this issue isn't over with just yet.

The Premier League is facing the possibility of a legal battle with three of their own clubs after it emerged that Cardiff City, Norwich City and Fulham have joined forces and instructed lawyers to fight the controversial decision not to dock Sunderland points for fielding an ineligible player.

The Observer can reveal that the first steps have been taken by a self-appointed "Gang of Three" to initiate proceedings about the way Sunderland were let off with a six-figure fine despite fielding Ji Dong-won in four league games, spread over seven weeks, earlier this season. Norwich and Cardiff have enlisted Fulham's support to challenge the league, and a legal letter has been sent on behalf of the three clubs arguing that the offence was serious enough to merit a points deduction.

Sunderland's 1-0 win at Manchester United today helped to relegate Fulham and Cardiff, and leaves the north-east club on a brilliant run of form, three points above third-from-bottom Norwich and on the verge of completing what Gus Poyet has described as a "miracle" escape.

However, there is now the distinct threat of a legal fight continuing into the summer if Sunderland's remarkable sequence of results – also including a 2-1 win at Chelsea and a 2-2 draw at Manchester City – finishes with them securing their top-flight status. The three clubs taking on the league are demanding a review of the Ji case. If that request is turned down, there is the strong chance that whichever club finishes 18th will sue.

League Two side AFC Wimbledon have just been docked three points for fielding an ineligible player and the lawyers for Norwich, Cardiff and Fulham have put together a lengthy list of cases in which other clubs have broken the rules in similar positions and lost points as a result.

Their argument is that Sunderland have been treated as an exception, whereas there is a clear history of evidence – going down the leagues – that this offence ought to merit more than a fine.

Altrincham are the extreme example, docked 18 points in 2006 after signing a player, James Robinson, from Accrington Stanley without realising he had never received international clearance after a previous spell in Iceland. In the vast majority of cases, the punishment has been a three-point deduction.

Demanding an explanation about why the authorities tried to keep the Sunderland case quiet, the legal letter argues that it is unjust that another club might be relegated because of the leniency shown to Poyet's team, and highlights the vast sums of money that would be forfeited by a club dropping into the Championship.

The lawyers also note that Poyet has admitted being surprised the punishment was not heavier, and that Sunderland's manager has stated publicly that Southampton should have been awarded the victory when Ji played in the 1-1 draw at St Mary's in August.

Ji played in three other league fixtures – against Fulham, Crystal Palace and Manchester United. Sunderland lost all of them, which was one of the factors in the league's decision-making, along with the fact that the club had reported their own mistake at the first opportunity. Ji needed international clearance because he had been on loan at Augsburg. Liz Coley, Sunderland's secretary, left her position shortly after the error came to light.

Rule 6.9 in the Football Association's relevant statutes states that "any club found to have played an ineligible player in a match shall have any points gained from that match deducted from its record". It adds that "the board … may also levy penalty points against the club in default".

However, the league believes it has a watertight case because of the wording of the rules. On 4 April, Poyet said: "I'm not saying we should have been docked points, but I would understand if we had. It's incredible. The rules should be clear. It should be one rule. The words 'may' or 'might' in the rules in England, they are unbelievable. They give you a chance to do whatever you like. It shouldn't be may or might. It should be the rule. Yes or no. Then there is no grey area."

Ji also featured in Sunderland's 4-2 win over Milton Keynes Dons in the second round of the Capital One Cup. The case was not heard until Sunderland had reached the semi-finals and the Football League opted against removing them from the competition. Instead, Sunderland received a second fine and agreed to keep the matter on a need-to-know basis, only for the story to be leaked to a national newspaper last month.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/03/sunderland-face-legal-fight-points-deduction

Is this about to get messy?

Alfred Borden

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Looks like this issue isn't over with just yet.



Is this about to get messy?

Yup expecting big trouble now. Dont understand why points werent docked in the first place. Could be important to finish 18th yet.

Chucky the tree

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Looks like this issue isn't over with just yet.



Is this about to get messy?

Unlikely. At this stage it looks very likely that even a 3 points deduction wouldn't relegate them anyway.

upstairs for coffee

Shame that Fulham and Cardiff can't go down with any dignity. Fulham have conceded 83 goals for instance.

Paully D

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Looks like this issue isn't over with just yet.

Is this about to get messy?

It is over. The Premier League made a decision in according to their guidelines. The rule is below (which the article above seems to leave out the most important part highlighted):



Sunderland didn't have an International Transfer Certificate for Ji. The Premier League clearly state that they have the discretion to vary their decisions in those cases, they deemed a 5 figure fine to be sufficient. Even so, the most that we could be deducted is the one point we gained away to Southampton when he played.

Complete straw clutching from those concerned when there wasn't a peep out of them months ago. From Sky:

Sunderland alerted the Premier League to the error and were fined.

They will face no further punishment and the matter is now closed.

The Premier League are separate from the Football League who made the decisions such as that on AFC Wimbledon.

LuckyLloyd

It's a non issue.

The three squads that are going to go down have been filled with under performing players led by incompetent managers for large stretches of the season. All three have turned in a number of utterly gutless performances. They deserve their fate.