Controversy raised over the decision → Press conference on controversial owner Choi Dae-ho who shot a corporate team, refer to the F.C.A. Anyang reward and punishment committee
May 21, 2025
|
|
"We have come to the conclusion that we can no longer remain silent about the unfair refereeing decisions that have occurred repeatedly in FC Anyang's recent matches," he said. "This is due to the accumulation of serious judgment errors at a level that can determine the flow of the game and determine the outcome beyond just a misjudgment."
Then, he shot a corporate club with 'partners' and became controversial. "Korean soccer is dominated by one of the few corporate teams," he said. It is necessary to innovate the current decision-making problem, which some corporate teams are wary of. It must be corrected" has introduced a strange logic. It is a point that can be taken as if the 'corporate club' is receiving preferential treatment.
Anyang confirmed its promotion to the first division 11 years after its foundation in November last year. After Mayor Choi's press conference, several corporate teams are angry. No league in the global community, including the K League, can be free from controversy over misjudgment. The phrase 'part of a miscarriage game' doesn't just come out. Determining flawlessness is an eternal homework. This is why VAR (video reading) came out to the world.
|
|
Apart from efforts to strengthen the accountability and transparency of the referee system, it cannot be overlooked that a specific club is discriminated against in the judgment and that the discrimination is due to the difference in the size and operating entity of the club as a federation with final responsibility for the operation of the K League. The K League's classification of municipal and corporate clubs is customary, but there is no official distinction according to the operating entity of the club in the K League articles of association and regulations. The club's financial size can be reflected as a difference in performance, but league rules and game management principles apply equally to all clubs, and the fairness of the judgment is strictly maintained regardless of the club's form.
The professional federation also stressed the damage, listing 10 judgment scenes that were unfavorable to FC Anyang at a press conference. Of the 10 scenes, the Korea Football Association's judging committee recognized two as misjudgment after an evaluation meeting. The Korean Football Association's judging committee has the authority to make the final judgment on whether a judgment is judged or misjudged in Korean soccer. It is not a legitimate criticism to arbitrarily interpret even decisions that have already been concluded with sincerity through due evaluation procedures and to criticize them as misjudgment.
The professional federation then criticized the K-League regulations, which prohibit public criticism of the decision, as toxic provisions. This regulation is not only in the K-League, but also in advanced leagues in Europe, including the English Premier League, and in neighboring Japan's J-League.' FC Anyang is the first club to be promoted to K-League 1 among the so-called `Citizen Club' that has newly established and joined the league since 2013 when the promotion system was implemented in the K-League. FC Anyang's propaganda proves the K-League's fair competition system, and FC Anyang's claim of structural unfairness in the K-League is like denying its own history. The affection and pride for the club must be expressed with respect for the league,' it added.
The date and time of Anyang's reward and punishment committee will be confirmed later. Finally, in order to strengthen the transparency and fairness of the referee administration, the Korea Football Association recently proposed various measures to improve the referee system by involving various stakeholders such as leaders, retirees, and journalists to the referee committee, such as ▶ English Premier League and German Bundesliga, ▶ controversial decisions will be explained directly to the club and the media, and ▶ VAR on-field reviews were conducted by the referee to explain the situation to the audience through in-house broadcasts' also disclosed the fact.
◇Professional Federation's entry
First of all, the Federation deeply regrets the current situation in which the accuracy and fairness of the judgment have been questioned, regardless of the reasons. The federation promises to make various efforts to resolve distrust in decisions with the Korea Football Association, which is in charge of allocating and evaluating K-League referees.
However, apart from efforts to strengthen the accountability and transparency of the referee system, it cannot be overlooked that a certain club is discriminated against in the judgment and that the discrimination is due to differences in the size of the club or the operating entity.
In the K-League, the classification of municipal and corporate teams is customary, but there is no official distinction according to the operating entity of the club in the K-League articles of association and regulations. The size of the club's finances can be reflected as a difference in performance, but league rules and game management principles apply equally to all clubs, and the fairness of the judgment is strictly maintained regardless of the club's form.
FC Anyang is the first club to be promoted to K League 1 among the so-called 'Citizen Club' that has newly established and joined the league since 2013, when the promotion system was implemented in the K League. FC Anyang's propaganda proves the K-League's fair competition system, and FC Anyang's claim of structural unfairness in the K-League is like denying its own history. Love and pride for the club should be expressed with respect for the league.
Choi Dae-ho highlighted the damage at the press conference, listing 10 judging scenes that were unfavorable to FC Anyang. Of the 10 scenes, two were recognized by the Korean Football Association's referee committee as misjudgment after an evaluation meeting. The Korean Football Association's Judgment Committee has the authority to make the final decision on whether a judgment is judged or misjudged in Korean football. It is not a legitimate criticism to arbitrarily interpret even decisions that have already been concluded with sincerity through due evaluation procedures and criticize them as misjudgment.
Choi Dae-ho criticized the K-League rule, which prohibits public criticism of the decision, as a toxic clause. This regulation was enacted in 2011 by the resolution of the board of directors composed of representatives of all K-League clubs. In the past, without this regulation, it was common for managers and officials who lost the game to turn the loss into an unfavorable decision through interviews. At the time, K-League members enacted the regulation in a sense of crisis that such reckless criticism of the decision could undermine the league's credibility and deepen mutual distrust, eventually leading to the league's destruction.
These regulations are not only in the K-League, but also in advanced leagues in Europe, including the English Premier League, and in neighboring Japan's J-League. In Europe, you can often find cases in which a famous coach was disciplined for criticizing a referee in an interview. Freedom of expression regarding judgment is guaranteed to the press and the public. However, members of the K-League are required to have their own weight to protect its values and trust. Within the institutional framework, league members can raise questions about decisions and demand improvement. Institutional communication, rather than reckless public condemnation, can actually contribute to the development of the league and the restoration of trust.
In response, the federation decided to refer FC Anyang, a club belonging to the owner Choi Dae-ho, to the reward and punishment committee, judging that the press conference is a violation of Article 37 (6) of the K-League's game regulations, which prohibits negative comments or expression of the judgment, and constitutes a slander and loss of honor under Paragraph 10 of the disciplinary standards for each type of reward and punishment regulations.
The date and time of the reward and punishment committee will be confirmed later.
In addition, in order to strengthen the transparency and fairness of referee administration, the Federation recently proposed various measures to improve the referee system by involving various stakeholders such as leaders, retirees, and journalists to the referee committee, such as the ▲ British Premier League and the German Bundesliga, ▲ controversial decisions will be explained directly to the club and the media, and ▲ VAR on-field reviews were conducted by the referee to explain the situation to the audience through in-house broadcasts.
In the future, the Federation will continue to develop and work together on various measures that can contribute to enhancing trust and improving accuracy of decisions through close communication with the Korea Football Association.
This article was translated by Naver AI translator.
