FA reveal Luton Town and Sunderland fines after post-match melee and explain their findings

Sunderland have been fined £7,000 for their part in a post-match melee following the 2-1 win over Luton Town earlier this month.

The hosts have been served a fine of £15,000 for their role, with both clubs admitting to an FA charge. The incident occurred after Luton Town players had appealed for a penalty deep into stoppage time, with a confrontation following after goalkeeper Thomas Kaminski and Sunderland defender Chris Mepham challenged for the ball shortly before the final whistle was blown.

The FA commission found that Kaminski had instigated the incident, and that many of those involved in the scenes that followed were trying to calm the situation. The commission also noted that the incident was largely without violence and did not last for a lengthy period.

They explained that Luton's significantly larger fine was due to their 'appalling' recent record of similar offences. Sunderland, meanwhile, were criticised for offering no apology.

The commission report reads: "This was another example of an unnecessary and unsightly demonstration of players being unable to control themselves. In terms of their role within the confrontation, a distinction has to be drawn between the Clubs for the fact that LTFC instigated the confrontation. Thereafter, players from each Club played an equal part. The particular aggravating feature of this mass confrontation is that both Clubs have previous offences of failing to control their players. That is particularly so in the case of LTFC. LTFC are amassing an appalling record of E20 offences. It is clear to us that LTFC are doing precious little to curtail the lack of self-control that their players suffer from. Unless and until the Club takes serious and positive action to modify the behaviour of its playing staff then the sanctions imposed upon them are only going to increase. We take account those mitigating features that we have set out above and principally to both Clubs' admission of the Charge, and we give credit for that. In LTFC's case we take a starting point of a fine of £10,000 to reflect that they instigated the confrontation, and a starting point of £9,000 in the case of SAFC. In LTFC's case we then increase their starting point to a fine of £20,000 to reflect the substantial aggravating feature of their dreadful disciplinary record. We then reduce that to take account of their admission to a fine of £15,000. In the case of SAFC, we increase the starting point to take account of their one previous breach to a sum of £10,500 and then reduce it to take account of their admission to a fine of £7,000."

The commission listed its findings of the incident itself as follows: "Moments before the final whistle LTFC players were appealing for a handball in the penalty area, which was rejected. At the final whistle the Match Referee was occupied in dealing with protests from LTFC players. Meanwhile, a confrontation occurred between the LTFC goalkeeper and SAFC number 26, instigated by the LTFC goalkeeper. Thereafter, a number of players from both Clubs confront each other, with various degrees of pushing and pulling. Fortunately, there were no overt acts of violence that are sometimes seen in these confrontations. It is fair to say that some of the dozen or so players involved were trying to curtail the incident. The incident did involve technical area occupants, albeit in limited number and whose involvement was, in our view, an attempt to quell the situation. Fortunately, the incident took place in the centre of the field of play, away from the immediate presence of spectators and did not involve the use of stewards to regain order. The incident was short-lived. As Non Standard cases go, this incident as a whole was towards the lower end of the scale."