The Ref Stop

Southampton Vs Chelsea hair pull

On a related note this hair pull is why 'missed incident' clause was put in the VAR protocol. It was outside the view of the referee which makes it a missed incident. Even if VAR didn't think it was a clear and obvious red, a review should be recommended.
 
The Ref Stop
DavidObs said:
I suspect he is aware of that, but I can see where he is coming from - comparing the pulling of someone’s hair as opposed to striking someone in the face or a head butt, or an elbow etc, though I also think the Law is correct to treat all the same.
Click to expand...
You are comparing it to extreme cases of VC. You can also compare it to a not too vigorous kick out which is also a red. As per my previous post, if the referee sees it and chooses a yellow, VAR wouldn't get involved, but a missed incident, they should.
 
one said:
You are comparing it to extreme cases of VC. You can also compare it to a not too vigorous kick out which is also a red. As per my previous post, if the referee sees it and chooses a yellow, VAR wouldn't get involved, but a missed incident, they should.
Click to expand...
I will have a think about this one. I haven’t seen the Southampton incident but I will try to find it. However, I do recall seeing the Chelsea incident from a few years ago & from memory, it was non too vigorous, but they castigated Dean for not flagging it up with a view at the time being that it should have been a red - which is why he said he didn’t refer it to his friend Taylor. In other words, like with other VC offences can there ever be a non vigorous pulling of a hair as well as a non vigorous head butt, or non vigorous deliberate elbow (rather than a flailing arm) or non vigorous strike to the face.
 
VC stipulates excessive force or brutality, I think both words are unhelpful because hair pulling is never necessary in footballing contexts but I can't imagine an incident of it that wouldn't be a red imo. even though you're looking for EF or brutality to justify.
 
OnlyUseMeWhistle said:
VC stipulates excessive force or brutality, I think both words are unhelpful because hair pulling is never necessary in footballing contexts but I can't imagine an incident of it that wouldn't be a red imo. even though you're looking for EF or brutality to justify.
Click to expand...
I have now seen the Southampton incident and it’s more innocuous (if that’s the right word & probably isn’t) than the Spurs v Chelsea incident a season or two ago, but both can be deemed as brutality.
 
one said:
This is not the definition of violent conduct though. I suggest you read the definition of violent conduct and this action fits it.
Click to expand...
"...unless the force used was negligible."

Was it with enough force for the player to go down like he did? was it Brutal? Violent yes and therefore a red, but my point remains, if he doesn't go down, it isn't looked at and the Southampton player stays on. Just another example of VAR working as it should but it is being used by the player, not the officials here I think.
 
Last edited:
DavidObs said:
I have now seen the Southampton incident and it’s more innocuous (if that’s the right word & probably isn’t) than the Spurs v Chelsea incident a season or two ago, but both can be deemed as brutality.
Click to expand...
I agree they're both brutality except by the definition of the word they kind of aren't, especially Southampton. It's just a bad word to use
 
OnlyUseMeWhistle said:
I agree they're both brutality except by the definition of the word they kind of aren't, especially Southampton. It's just a bad word to use
Click to expand...
Yes and I agree with you too, but I think for anyone from PL down to L7 and beyond into youth etc, if anyone identifies a hair pull - be it men, women, junior - it requires a red card & although for the most serious hair pulls the Referee can fall back on the word ‘brutality’, for the lesser events (as per Southampton incident) it can be said to be ‘deemed’ brutality - even not actually described in the LotG.
 
RonnieM said:
As a Scot, that was a ridiculous decision and I think VAR would have certainly asked the ref to look at that.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you can compare the two - two completely different offences & not like for like. The FA clearly want all hair pulls to be a red card. As to the Beckham incident - I remember it well and it was a very tame red card, but it was determined as a kicking out & unfortunately a red card was correct decision - a kick is a kick (though a 3 match ban can be extended if considered appropriate - same with bites etc).
 
RonnieM said:
"...unless the force used was negligible."

Was it with enough force for the player to go down like he did? was it Brutal? Violent yes and therefore a red, but my point remains, if he doesn't go down, it isn't looked at and the Southampton player stays on. Just another example of VAR working as it should but it is being used by the player, not the officials here I think.
Click to expand...
I think it is because he would still complain to the referee which would initiate the forensics of VAR.
 
It's a long time since I've known whether someone pulling my hair hurts or not, but I'd say look at the reaction, or rather lack of, to this red card. Normally the pundits, ex-pros, etc, are all over what they deem to be soft red cards, I haven't heard any dissenting voices about this one
 
I suppose you could justify not a red based on the interpretation of them wanting brutality for something to actually be VC. As opposed to how it was a few years back.

Maybe they just need to add an extra line in the laws to say hair pulling is a red card. It’s a totally unnecessary thing to do. Something that is potentially more likely in the women’s game due to more of them having longer hair.
 
I think the diffe
Runner Ref said:
Maybe they just need to add an extra line in the laws to say hair pulling is a red card. It’s a totally unnecessary thing to do. Something that is potentially more likely in the women’s game due to more of them having longer hair.
Click to expand...
Ugh. No. That is no more necessary than it was to add biting . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top