FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

October 27th, 2009 | By: sscouser | 3 Comments »

UAE U.A.E. beat Malawi 2-0 yesterday but it has been reported that two players from the United Arab Emirates have failed the magnetic resonance imaging test carried out on “virtually” all players in the on-going FIFA Under-17 World Cup currently taking place in Nigeria. I thought Age Cheating was a thing of the past.

The players – Mohamed Hussain and Haddaf – spotting jersey numbers 9 and 15 respectively, were not successful in the MRI scan carried out by FIFA medical officials on the players prior to the kick off of the tournament. Apparently, Mohamed Hussain also played for the U.A.E. during the AFC U-16 Championship last year. Hussain was born on January 1, 1993 and Haddaf was born on February 21, 1992 so how can they be over 17?

FIFA media officer for the cadet championship, Wlofgang Resch, had earlier declined comment on the MRI test results, saying the tests were inconclusive. But Sunday October 25 2009 the global football governing body came out with part of the result that ruled out Hussain, a midfielder and Haddaf from the United Arab Emirate team: “The players have been sanctioned from their respective qualification tournaments in their confederations.” On the UAE’S line up against Malawi, the two players were listed as substitutes but with comment: Not eligible to play

If these players took part in the qualification tournament of their confederation shouldn’t U.A.E. be disqualified? Malawi were knocked out in the first round of GROUP B (Burkina Faso, Niger, Malawi and Zimbabwe) of the African U-17 Championship in Algeria, only to be handed a semi-final place (and a World Cup Spot) after it was discovered opponents Niger had fielded an over-aged player when Niger beat Malawi on 20 March 2009 and Zimbabwe on 23 March 2009.

Should U.A.E. be disqualified? Support your answer.(opinion)

Tags: Team News

Malawi World Cup RSS Feed

del.icio.us:FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

digg:FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

newsvine:FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

reddit:FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

fark:FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

Y!:FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

stumbleupon:FIFA U-17 WC NIGERIA 2009: U.A.E. to be disqualified for Age Cheating?

Comments | Add your comment

By Khaled | October 27th, 2009 at 6:07 pm

The MRI test just gives an estimate. There is no precise test for telling somebody’s age.

By John Manda | October 28th, 2009 at 6:08 am

This is very bad for the game of football, and may i ask FIFA to immediatly handle the 3 points to malawi to avoid embalasment, you can imagine even the ofiacian was not good,and nothing has been done yet, please please act before it is too late.

Posted from Malawi

By sscouser | October 28th, 2009 at 1:51 pm

Khaled, it may be true that the MRI age test may not be 100% accurate but it does give a rough idea. There may be statistical deviation of about 0.05% (Positive or Negative). 0.05% over-aged players may pass the test or 0.05% under-aged players may fail the test. At least it’s better than not having any test at all. Please note that Nigeria dropped 15 players due to the MRI test.

What I am against is the random testing. It seems they only test players that they think are certainly over 17. Looks can be deceiving. I don’t know how much the MRI Age tests cost but I think each and every player should be tested.

John Manda, even if Malawi protested, U.A.E. wouldn’t be disqualified. What did FIFA do after Maradona admitted scoring the goal using his hand (against England, World Cup 1986)?

It seems a team is never disqualified after the tournament is over. The U.A.E. players were tested after the AFC tournament but before the World Cup Tournament. Niger were disqualified because the age cheating was discovered while the CAF Tournament was still in progress.

Blaming Malawi’s loss on poor refereeing is like crying over spilt milk. Malawi hit the post twice. I don’t think those would have been disallowed had they gone in. Upon further review, the one that was disallowed for offside was a clear goal. Initially the player seemed to have been offside but he wasn’t because he didn’t interfere with play. The time he “interfered with play” he wasn’t offside. I don’t think the assistant referee (linesman) was biased. I think he was/is incompetent. “Squandering chance after chance” has been the Flames’ (both junior and senior) achilles’ heel. Everytime we hear “the scoreline is not a true reflection of the game”.

Posted from United States