Everything Jim Rodwell just said on Sunderland's COVID-19 outbreak, why Wimbledon game was played and what happens next

The Black Cats had eight players unavailable for last night’s 1-1 draw with AFC Wimbledon, after a positive test forced seven other members of Lee Johnson’s squad into isolation.

Two of those have been displaying symptoms.

Johnson said afterwards that the EFL had ‘let Sunderland down’, due to a lack of clarity on what the consequences of postponing the fixture would be.

The EFL said in a statement this morning that the decision to play was ultimately Sunderland’s, and they would have been subject to a standard investigation had they postponed.

CEO Rodwell was interviewed by Jim White on talkSPORT this morning, in which he was asked about the circumstances surrounding the outbreak, the decision to fulfill the fixture and what happens next.

Johnson said last night that shutting the training ground could become a consideration, which would put Sunderland’s next two fixtures in obvious doubt.

The full transcript of Rodwell’s interview is below...

How many players became unavailable for the game?

JR: “We had eight unavailable that had been available to us on Saturday.

It was a challenge, to put it mildly, but we had a lot of young players playing last night and they did us proud. We had players getting off the treatment couch, and they did us proud.

At what point did you become aware of the situation and did you want the game postponed?

We became aware there was a situation with one of our players at around lunchtime on Monday, which was unfortunate as that was when our U23s game kicked off, which ruled out the majority of those players being available.

So we found out one player was unavailable, then you go through the process of trying to understand who this individual has been close to, and then those players need to test and self-isolate.

On Tuesday, we had another two players report symptoms and so they had to be pulled out of the squad.

It was some challenge for our manager.”

Did you make it clear to the EFL at any stage that you might want the game postponed?

JR: “We certainly explored that and I think that it would have been the best thing to have called the game off.

I just think we were asking people to play last night that weren't in a position to play. We had two lads who were at least two weeks away from being fit, who hadn't done any training and who hadn't played with several weeks.

Some of the U23s had played 90 minutes the day before and were involved.

Sometimes that's football, I understand that the EFL have a fixture list that they desperately need to stick to wherever possible, but it would have been easier to play the game a later date.”

Were you concerned about the potential sanctions if you hadn't fulfilled the fixture?

"I think it's the uncertainty of the sanctions, to be honest.

That's the problem.

It's the uncertainty of what might have happened had we called the game off, because I think there's a misconception about how this actually works, that the league agrees to postpone a game.

It's the club that unilaterally decides to call a game off. In normal times, that's incredibly serious. At the moment, there's a little bit more understanding around it.

Nevertheless, the way the system works, it automatically becomes a misconduct charge against the football club.

The matter is investigated and you're then likely to be held up before a tribunal. If it's then decided that your protocols haven't been followed correctly, you could be subject to sanctions which my understanding is could be anything from nothing, to a fine, to points deductions.

We're in unprecedented times and no one is quite sure, there's no precedent to work upon in terms of what they might look like.

Though several games have been called off, nobody has got as far yet as going before a tribunal.

It was difficult, the EFL couldn't give us that clarity because they're not sure either, as the tribunal process is independent.

So we put a team out and I'm proud of every single one of them.”

Is seems like it was a no-brainer to play, that you had no option?

JR: “That was the situation we got to ultimately.

Given an absolute choice we would have delayed it and played at a later date,

We had to make a call ultimately, so myself, the Sporting Director and the manager were deep in conversation and determined that we're a football club, we get on with it.

Lee was incredibly pragmatic about it, he picked three or four teams through the day with all the different permutations, but we got on with it.”

Are you concerned about more positive tests in the coming days?

JR: “We don't know.

We've now got players out who are testing, and we are waiting for those results today.

Our first concern is that all our players are OK and that they're healthy, but if those tests come back positive then clearly we're going to have to look a bit further afield to Saturday's game and next Tuesday's.

We're just taking it hour by hour by hour to be perfectly honest.

We'll wait and see what today's results tell us and then we'll act accordingly.”

A message from the Football Clubs Editor

Our aim is to provide you with the best, most up-to-date and most informative Sunderland AFC coverage 365 days a year.

This depth of SAFC coverage costs, so to help us maintain the high-quality reporting that you are used to, please consider taking out a subscription to our new sports-only package here.

Your support is much appreciated. Richard Mennear, Football Clubs Editor