There is no ‘Ewha University Finance Committee’…KBL “did not fulfill the conditions for referral”

1 minute, 46 seconds Read

A financial committee will not be held regarding Seoul Samsung’s Lee Dae-sung in professional basketball. Daegu KOGAS requested to hold a financial committee on Lee Dae-sung’s return to the KBL, but the request was ultimately denied.

The KBL announced on Thursday that “as a result of the review of KOGAS’ application for a financial committee regarding free agent Lee Dae-sung, the conditions for referral to the 안전카지노사이트 financial committee were not sufficiently met.”

Lee, who officially joined Samsung on Nov. 21, has been the center of controversy during the free agency process. Lee, who played for Korea Gas Corporation until last year and became a free agent, had been calling for a move overseas. KOGAS, which had initially announced its policy of re-signing Lee, was unable to get hold of him, and he eventually left for Shihosuzu Mikawa (Japan) as an unsigned player. When he went abroad last year, Lee expressed his ambition to “survive as long as possible.”

As a result, Lee decided to return to Korea after a year. In particular, Lee claimed to have kept his integrity by disclosing the entire transfer process to the Korea Gas Corporation, but at the same time, he attracted attention by mentioning something that could be suspected of tampering.

Lee’s remarks at his signing press conference on the 22nd drew attention. Lee said that Samsung’s offer came after he canceled his contract with Shihosuzu Mikawa, but before that, he said that he had a casual conversation with Samsung coach Kim Hyo-beom. The fact that Lee and Kim share the same management company also contributed to the tampering allegations.

On the same day, a KOGAS official personally visited the KBL Center to brief KBL on the financial committee. KOGAS reportedly mentioned prior contact (tampering), infringement of interests, breach of trust, and defamation.

As a result, KBL concluded that the referral conditions were not met. In the end, tampering requires direct confirmation from the relevant parties, and KBL’s review of tampering is limited by the fact that it is not an investigative agency. In addition, the KBL did not seem to accept KOGAS’s claims of profit infringement and good faith.

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *