LFP disciplinary chief Sébastien Deneux explains the Nantes-Toulouse 0-0 decision: “there were no sporting stakes”
Sébastien Deneux, president of the LFP’s disciplinary commission, has clarified the decision to validate the 0-0 scoreline for the Nantes-Toulouse match, which was halted on May 17th due to a pitch invasion. The ruling has drawn criticism from the Toulouse side.
The Ligue 1 fixture between Nantes and Toulouse on May 17th was prematurely concluded when Nantes supporters stormed the pitch. Following this, the LFP Disciplinary Commission’s decision to confirm the 0-0 draw has not been well-received by TFC, who are now considering an appeal.
“We regret that this encounter could not be completed under normal circumstances, and we question what the club could have realistically done in such a situation to allow the match to finish. We will also remain vigilant regarding potential negative precedents such a decision might set for the future,” stated TFC in an official communiqué. The Toulouse club had likely hoped for a 3-0 victory by forfeit. Sébastien Deneux, president of the LFP’s disciplinary commission, addresses the emerging controversy.
“The decision to uphold the match score, despite Nantes and its supporters being responsible for the interruption, has raised many questions…”
Firstly, this option was introduced into the regulations two years ago. Prior to that, choices for a definitively interrupted match were limited to a forfeited loss or the possibility of replaying the game from a 0-0 start. Secondly, and this is a crucial point here, this particular case had the distinction of having no significant sporting implications for either team, at least at the moment of interruption. FC Nantes was already relegated, and TFC, whether with a draw or a victory, would finish 9th in the Ligue 1 standings with either 45 or 47 points. In other words, the decision to declare a forfeited loss or to validate the existing score had precisely identical effects on a strictly sporting level.
“It is absolutely out of the question that clubs and supporters attempt, through their behavior, to influence the outcome of a match”
“But why choose this decision instead of a forfeited loss?”
The options available to the Disciplinary Commission were specifically introduced to try and separate sporting outcomes as much as possible from the disciplinary sanctions themselves, and to prevent a form of ‘windfall effect.’ This would involve a club ‘benefiting’ from the opposing supporters’ conduct to gain a sporting advantage that was not established at the time of the match’s stoppage. Here, the choice was made to confirm the score, as one could seriously question why TFC should have been awarded a 3-0 victory in a match that was halted at 0-0…
“Are you concerned that this decision could set a dangerous precedent for the future?”
No, not at all. Precisely because this decision must be viewed from the specific angle I just mentioned regarding the absence of sporting impact. In any other scenario, and without speculating on future disciplinary actions, it is almost certain that a different decision would have been rendered. It is absolutely out of the question that clubs and supporters attempt, through their behavior, to influence the outcome of a match through a definitive interruption, hoping to gain any sort of benefit. We will always be extremely vigilant on this matter.”
