The WBC sulphan scandal. He was identified and apologised.
SSG Kim Kwang-hyun, NC Lee Yong-chan and Doosan Jung Chul-won have all been expunged from the first team roster. They will be suspended indefinitely.
Now comes round two: disciplinary action.
The KBO will hold a punishment committee as soon as possible after completing a thorough investigation.
The Korean Baseball Organization (KBO) has conducted a full investigation and has received statements from the players in question. It’s just a matter of determining whether or not it’s false. The time and place have been specified, so we can hold a punishment committee based on the facts so far.
If there is a lie in the statement, or if there are additional incidents of misbehaviour, then we can hold another hearing and impose a more severe punishment.
You need to reach a conclusion as quickly as possible. Clubs that have sent players to the national team will not call them up pending the outcome of the penalty committee. This is a double whammy for the clubs, who are dealing with the aftermath of the WBC and the uncontrollable behaviour of their players.
▶What to Discipline: The Two Points of the Laws of the Game
What kind of punishment will be handed down is a major concern for fans and clubs.
Depending on the situation, not only the clubs involved but also other clubs may be indirectly affected. The three players are key pitchers for the three clubs.
The criteria are clear. The criteria is clear: does it violate the National Team Operating Regulations?
“We will scrutinise the case and investigate whether there are any violations of the National Team Operating Regulations to determine the next steps,” the KBO said.
‘National Team Operating Regulations’. There are two things to note.
The first is Article 9, Athletes’ Obligations, which states that athletes are obliged to “uphold the honour and dignity of their national team during the period of their call-up”.
The second is Article 13, Discipline. It reads, “Disciplinary action against players of the national team shall be applied in accordance with the KBO Rules and Penalty Regulations. One of the reasons for holding a disciplinary committee is ‘causing social harm’, which leaves room for interpretation.
From here, it’s a matter of interpretation.
Article 151 of the KBO Constitution provides clear sanctions for behaviour that impairs dignity.
It specifically lists gambling, violence, sexual assault, drug offences, military service irregularities, economic offences such as drunk driving and theft fraud, doping, unsportsmanlike behaviour towards spectators, religious, racial and sexual discrimination, slander of the league and anti-social behaviour such as defamation through social media. The penalties are also clear. The Code states that “any disrespectful behaviour not listed may be subject to appropriate sanctions in accordance with this table. These are the grounds for punitive sanctions
How to interpret the difference between regular drinking and ‘nightlife’
The question is, how should we view the drinking in an entertainment venue during a national team call-up?
The players admitted to visiting a snack bar in Akasaka, Tokyo. However, they denied the initial reports, saying, “We didn’t go there the day before the game.” They claimed that “there were no waitresses at the bar,” even though the bar is a sex shop where waitresses come and go.
If the players’ statements are true, the grounds for disciplinary action are somewhat murky. The concept of “entertainment” is important in this case. It’s unlikely that a player would be disciplined for drinking alcohol at a nearby izakaya, or tavern, on the eve of a non-match rest day if there was no official ban. You can’t punish based on circumstance alone.
Regardless of the specific behaviour, the focus of the disciplinary action is likely to be on the fact that the athlete went to a snack bar, a type of nightclub, and drank alcohol, which made the news and brought the national team into disrepute.
The level of discipline will depend on how the disciplinary committee interprets the resulting responsibility.
Unjae Lee’s case, the weight of the A team is different for football and baseball
Here is the most similar case.
The drinking scandal involves four South Korean footballers (Lee Un-jae, Woo Sung-yong, Lee Dong-guk, and Kim Sang-sik) who competed in the 2007 Asian Cup 16 years ago. It was revealed in the media about three months after the tournament that they had been drinking at a nightclub during the tournament.
The players held a press conference and tearfully apologised to the public. At the time, the KFA punished the four with a one-year suspension from the national team. Lee Un-jae was banned for three years from competitions organised by the KFA, and the other three players were banned for two years.
The suspensions were based on the principle of proportionality, as the offences were committed during a national call-up. This is a severe punishment in a sport where A-matches matter.
Baseball, however, is a different story. While it can be a reward for free agency, the national team is more of an honour and obligation than a benefit. While making the national team is very important for undrafted athletes who can take advantage of the military service that comes with Olympic and Asian Games medals, for those who have already completed their military service, there is no real advantage. In fact, it can be a burden that can make it difficult for them to stay fit for a full season 안전놀이터.
Kim Kwang-hyun, Lee Yong-chan and Jeong Chul-won have not completed their military service. This is why a national team suspension is not an effective punishment.
However, it’s also not logically easy to link their national team issues to their regular season suspensions. The court of public opinion can be a burden.
There’s also the consideration of the club, which is already suffering. If you’re already missing a player from your roster, adding a suspension to the mix will only prolong the gap.
It’s a tough case to call. What wisdom of Solomon will the penalty committee come up with?