Southampton Vs Chelsea hair pull

[Runner Ref]

I think the diffe

Ugh. No. That is no more necessary than it was to add biting . . .

Because?

 

[ARF]

Much like deliberately striking the head/face is violent conduct unless the force used is negligible, it should absolutely be the same logic involving hair pulling.

 

[DavidObs]

Much like deliberately striking the head/face is violent conduct unless the force used is negligible, it should absolutely be the same logic involving hair pulling.

I’m not sure I agree with this. If someone deliberately strikes a head or face, that’s exactly what it is - not sure any such action can ever be described as negligible. Similarly with someone deliberately kicking some one eg Beckham being sent off in the World Cup - a kick is a kick. Similarly a hair pull is a hair pull - there may be degrees of seriousness but to be treated in the same way as a kick whatever the degree.

 

[JamesL]

I’m not sure I agree with this. If someone deliberately strikes a head or face, that’s exactly what it is - not sure any such action can ever be described as negligible. .

There is a specific clause in the laws of the game that relates to this.
It's aimed at players who go head to head, squaring up, it's a strking but force is often negligible.
It only applies to striking in head as laws specifically says about this action. All other actions are judged with CRUEF

 

[DavidObs]

And I am fine with this scenario. Cannot have a situation whereby both just touch heads and both be sent off for it.

 

[bloovee]

At the same time as when violent conduct became a red card offence.

So it's only not VC when it's a City player who gets their hair pulled? (I am going back a long way but one was SPA by a hair pull ...) Hence my question. From other replies it seems there has been a fairly recent "clarification" that it should be red.

 

[one]

So it's only not VC when it's a City player who gets their hair pulled? (I am going back a long way but one was SPA by a hair pull ...) Hence my question. From other replies it seems there has been a fairly recent "clarification" that it should be red.

Somehow I had a feeling that a 'current' thread about Southampton Vs Chelsea becomes about City was hard done by 'long way back' when I responded to your original post

 

[bloovee]

Somehow I had a feeling that a 'current' thread about Southampton Vs Chelsea becomes about City was hard done by 'long way back' when I responded to your original post

You know me so well....

I could start a new current thread about Palace v City...

 

[Kes]

Hair pulling (like the incident we're talking about here) generally isn't excessively forceful or brutal but unfortunately for some players, has become something which is frowned upon and for which a dismissal is the expected outcome. Simple as. Don't try and justify a red for it in the LOTG cos it simply isn't there - not for this particular incident anyway.

It's not unlike a player grabbing hold of another's bits or "fondling" etc. which might not tick the box for SFP or VC but if you were a "victim" of it you'd be hoping the referee would produce a red card ...

It's the correct decision because it just is ....

 

[socal lurker]

In both contexts, the force is excessive because 0 force is acceptable.