[Feature] A Disgraceful 27-Game Winless Streak... How Did Gwangju FC Fall This Far?

Despite Nearly 10 Billion Won Annually in Taxpayer Support,
Both Performance and Finances Are in Crisis

Key Duties Delegated to Certain Individuals Despite the Personnel Committee's Unsuitability Ruling

Calls Grow for Comprehensive Review of Club Operations Amid Ongoing Controversies

Editor's NoteSince their victory against Incheon United on March 7, Gwangju FC has failed to win in 27 consecutive matches. The crisis facing Gwangju FC cannot be explained solely by the poor performance of the players. It is a result of multiple, complex factors: statements by the CEO regarding his reappointment, which are connected to the political circumstances of the club owner; the appointment of key personnel contrary to the Personnel Committee's judgment; and decision-making that failed to reflect internal dissent. This has made many call for a thorough review of the management approach under CEO Doongil Noh.

The question of proper standards for club management arises from CEO Noh's remarks about his reappointment. Having previously served as head of Kang Gijeong's supporters' association, it is reported that he participated as a co-head of the supporters' association for Mayor Kang even while serving as CEO during the last local election.

At the board meeting at the end of last year, when his reappointment was under review, Noh cited the club owner's low approval ratings and emphasized his strong political alliances by stating, "You can't leave just because you're unpopular." The result was that the political standing of the club owner entered into a process meant to assess the CEO’s qualifications and achievements.

In the CEO office of Gwangju Football Stadium, Doongil Noh, CEO of Gwangju FC, and former coach Jung Hyo Lee are posing together. Photo by Gwangju FC

Although some directors objected, CEO Noh’s reappointment was passed as it was at the end of last year. Complaints arose from various quarters, saying, "Given the composition of the board, it was an uneven playing field from the start."

The proper standard for deciding whether a civic football club CEO should remain is the club's performance and his management capability. Yet, political background and associations took precedence.

In personnel decisions, concerns over procedural fairness came to the fore.

Currently, Mr. A—who has been involved in the youth player money request controversy—applied for the position of Head of Players in September 2024. The Personnel Committee is said to have determined that both candidates interviewed at the time were "unqualified." Nevertheless, CEO Noh reportedly signed a delegation contract with Mr. A and entrusted him with duties equivalent to a Head of Players.

Some insiders claim this amounted to preferential hiring but say their opposition was dismissed. The club explained it was a plan based on the need for continuity of work. However, simply citing continuity does not resolve an unsuitability assessment. Without an explanation of any additional vetting, the fundamental question remains: what purpose did the open recruitment and Personnel Committee review actually serve?

Subsequently, Mr. A’s role expanded to Technical Director, allowing him to be involved in player recruitment and youth development. This means that core authority was granted to someone whose qualifications had already been called into question. The real issue has become whether internal dissent during recruitment decisions was adequately considered and whether there were mechanisms to check the CEO’s judgment.

Dissonance continued in team operations as well. At the time of coach Jeongkyu Lee’s appointment, some board members voiced concerns that a more proven manager was needed given the risk of weakening the team, but the owner reportedly accepted the opinions of the CEO and director.

No alternative can guarantee success. However, enduring poor results cannot be blamed solely on the manager. The decisions to select the manager and build the squad should also be evaluated. The controversy over board composition is tied to this decision-making structure. Members of the 7th board, most recently established, include not only city, sports association, education office, and football association officials, but also business leaders, bankers, medical professionals, lawyers, and fan representatives.

Within the local football community, questions are being raised as to whether the board has sufficient expertise to oversee team operations and whether it is independent from management. While it is too simplistic to judge a lack of expertise or political ties based on the member list alone, the core question is whether the board was capable of reviewing opinions from inside and outside the club in advance, and filtering unreasonable decisions from management.

The club’s response after the controversy erupted has also been ambiguous.

The player’s side claims that, as a condition for a call-up to the professional team, they were asked for a 100 million won development fund, and for a transfer to another club, a 60 million won training compensation fee. The police decided not to forward the case to prosecutors, clearing CEO Noh and two others of any charges.

Authorities viewed Mr. A's comments as an "offer" rather than a "demand" for money and considered the fact that the donation target was a foundation affiliated with the club rather than an individual. They also included CEO Noh’s statement, "Do not involve money," in their judgment.

The player’s side immediately filed a formal objection, and prosecutors are now reviewing the case. This means the controversy could be reopened from the beginning.

The club announced that after the controversy, Mr. A was placed on standby and his duties were suspended. However, there are still claims within the football community that he remains involved in key functions. By granting Mr. A official and unofficial roles for scouting, technical direction, and player management—halting only certain responsibilities—the club’s measures are being criticized as effectively meaningless.

In reality, it’s reported that Mr. A had actual decision-making authority within the club in the absence of the CEO and the head of the management headquarters.

As unprecedented negative public sentiment continues to mount due to the club’s winless streak in professional Korean football, CEO Noh recently offered his resignation. But a mere resignation offer cannot address a situation that has deteriorated so severely. Each year, nearly 10 billion won of taxpayers’ money is invested in the club, but financial difficulties and management controversy persist, driving mounting demands for accountability.

Despite numerous suspicions and rumors about corporate card usage, there has yet to be a clear explanation. Management must disclose budget execution details and the causes of financial deterioration, while the city and the city council must answer whether oversight and support were appropriate. Calls for the integrated city and council to directly step in to fundamentally review the club’s human resources, finances, and team operations are part of this same context.

A source in the local football community remarked, "Rebuilding Gwangju FC cannot be accomplished simply by changing a few people. We need a structure where different internal opinions are reflected in the decision-making process, and individuals who exercise clear standards and authority rather than personal connections are held to account for the outcomes. Investigations are still ongoing into club insiders at the center of the recent player transfer controversy, but no one is stepping up to take responsibility. The team has not won in 27 consecutive matches. The club is in crisis, but nothing is being clearly resolved, from identifying the problems to finding solutions. At this point, investigative agencies need to step in to identify where the real problems lie."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.