[Football] Villa Red Card(s)

[1066familyman]

Just watched Motd2.

How on earth is that elbow by Kortney Hause not a red card!?

About as deliberate as they come. Nasty nasty challenge that could have caused really serious injury. It's horrendous! Didn't even get booked for it.

Notice too how he's made himself scarce whilst the rest of his team mates protest the much more debatable red card for Konsa.

Was checked by VAR as well. Does that mean that the FA can't now look at it again?

 

[blockhseagull]

Got both decisions wrong

First was the red card… not the 2nd

 

[schmunk]

The 2nd was a red because it was 'last man' denying a clear goalscoring chance - same as Laporte on Saturday.

 

[drew]

Both red for me and had Hause been sent off that would be 3 games out I think for violent conduct. Meaning Mings would probably play against us which would be an added bonus!!

 

[Jim in the West]

I would love to know why the first one wasn’t a red - it was a diabolical challenge. It seems pretty much anything goes this season.

 

[Machiavelli]

The 2nd was a red because it was 'last man' denying a clear goalscoring chance - same as Laporte on Saturday.

Laporte was debatable in my view (not sure who initiated contact), and I'd err on the side of yellow as a result. Evans wasn't remotely debatable (he hauled Aubemeyang over), yet got a yellow.
I'd say that both the Villa CBs should have been red, particularly the first (which was assault). Smith claims that the ball was going away from the goal for the Konsa challenge. I'm not entirely sure on this, but didn't notice it at the time or watching replays.

 

[Hampster Gull]

First was thuggery, the second a red also

 

[drew]

I would love to know why the first one wasn’t a red - it was a diabolical challenge. It seems pretty much anything goes this season.

We'd all love to know but I'm guessing once again the PGMOL have closed ranks.

 

[drew]

Laporte was debatable in my view (not sure who initiated contact), and I'd err on the side of yellow as a result. Evans wasn't remotely debatable (he hauled Aubemeyang over), yet got a yellow.
I'd say that both the Villa CBs should have been red, particularly the first (which was assault). Smith claims that the ball was going away from the goal for the Konsa challenge. I'm not entirely sure on this, but didn't notice it at the time or watching replays.

Christ knows what Smith is on about. It's irrelevant whether the ball is going towards the goal or away from it. Once clear it only takes once chance to get it back on track and it's still a goal scoring opportunity.

 

[Grizz]

The first wasn't a red as the ref went down the double jeopardy route. If the first is a red, then he can't send off Konza, as the situation wouldn't have arisen. I guess he deemed the last man foul, as the more worthy of the red card.

 

[1066familyman]

The first wasn't a red as the ref went down the double jeopardy route. If the first is a red, then he can't send off Konza, as the situation wouldn't have arisen. I guess he deemed the last man foul, as the more worthy of the red card.

Really?

Can you point to that specific rule please? None of the pundits have mentioned that rule, not that they are always up to speed on these things.

How is it that the clear deliberate assault didn't even warrant a yellow? It's honestly one of the worst 'challenges' I've seen in a long time. The injury consequences could easily have been really serious.

 

[Seagull58]

The forearm smash was a red, if not a criminal offence, all day long. Just staggering that VAR didn't intervene. The other red was very harsh. Not convinced it was a clear goal scoring opportunity having seen it a number of times. Connolly or Maupay wouldn't have scored from that in a month of Sundays (oh, my word, controversial).

 

[kevo]

First a definite red. The second he was at too much of an angle for me, not clean through. A booking.

 

[Grizz]

Really?

Can you point to that specific rule please? None of the pundits have mentioned that rule, not that they are always up to speed on these things.

How is it that the clear deliberate assault didn't even warrant a yellow? It's honestly one of the worst 'challenges' I've seen in a long time. The injury consequences could easily have been really serious.

They commentated on it on MoTD2 I think. Deffo one of the commentators stated that was more than likely the reason.

 

[clapham_gull]

The first wasn't a red as the ref went down the double jeopardy route. If the first is a red, then he can't send off Konza, as the situation wouldn't have arisen. I guess he deemed the last man foul, as the more worthy of the red card.

Makes perfect sense to me.

The referee has SEEN the first incident, but incorrectly judged it to be not a foul. If he is subsequently alerted to it as a clear and obvious error then the second incident becomes null and void. Play is pulled back for the first foul ?

I wonder whether the referee suddenly (coming to his senses) is left with a decision that is fair to West Ham and that's a free kick outside the box and a sending off. Rather than a free kick further back.

 

[B-right-on]

Makes perfect sense to me.

The referee has SEEN the first incident, but incorrectly judged it to be not a foul. If he is subsequently alerted to it as a clear and obvious error then the second incident becomes null and void. Play is pulled back for the first foul ?

I wonder whether the referee suddenly (coming to his senses) is left with a decision that is fair to West Ham and that's a free kick outside the box and a sending off. Rather than a free kick further back.

This sounds right to me on reflection.

 

[drew]

The first wasn't a red as the ref went down the double jeopardy route. If the first is a red, then he can't send off Konza, as the situation wouldn't have arisen. I guess he deemed the last man foul, as the more worthy of the red card.

Pretty sure that is irrelevant. It used to be the case that if an incident warranted a red card, either straight or second yellow, the ref cannot play advantage but that will have changed with VAR as the ref didn't see the forearm assault.

Looking at the FA website these seem to be the relevant part -

Punishes the more serious offence, in terms of sanction, restart, physical severity and tactical impact, when more than one offence occurs at the same time.

Takes disciplinary action against players guilty of cautionable and sending-off offences.


The more serious offence in terms of tactical impact was giving a free kick on the edge of the penalty area rather than where the forearm smash was. However there is nothing to suggest that both players could not then be sent off.