Euros - Red Card Logic

[MU655]

What is actually the logic behind it?

Is it based on level of danger? Clearly not.

- The most dangerous challenge to happen in this tournament is Lloris's flying punch into the Portuguese player's head.
- The second-most dangerous is Morata kicking out into the chest of the Croatian player.
- And another is the Ukrainian player following through with his foot into the Sweden player's chest.

All of the above are capable of resulting in death if they connect correctly (worst case scenario). None of them received a red card. However, tripping someone up, connecting with the ankle just above the boot, and connecting with the knee is a red card despite none of them carrying the same level of danger. Supposedly, it is written into that a connection with the ankle like that is a red card every time, but somehow the same rule doesn't exist for connection to the head or chest.

According to the Sweden red card today, it doesn't matter if you win the ball, it can still be a red. However, it doesn't seem to be the case if you follow through on the chest.

In other words, if you don't want to be sent off, make sure you don't connect with the legs. It is messed up.

 

[Lu Tze]

Reminds me of the Nani red. If you want to buy a red, run recklessly where a player is attempting to play the ball.

 

[Jippy]

What is actually the logic behind it?

Is it based on level of danger? Clearly not.

- The most dangerous challenge to happen in this tournament is Lloris's flying punch into the Portuguese player's head.
- The second-most dangerous is Morata kicking out into the chest of the Croatian player.
- And another is the Ukrainian player following through with his foot into the Sweden player's chest.

All of the above are capable of resulting in death if they connect correctly (worst case scenario). None of them received a red card. However, tripping someone up, connecting with the ankle just above the boot, and connecting with the knee is a red card despite none of them carrying the same level of danger. Supposedly, it is written into that a connection with the ankle like that is a red card every time, but somehow the same rule doesn't exist for connection to the head or chest.

According to the Sweden red card today, it doesn't matter if you win the ball, it can still be a red. However, it doesn't seem to be the case if you follow through on the chest.

In other words, if you don't want to be sent off, make sure you don't connect with the legs. It is messed up.

A tad dramatic for the latter two fouls, no?

 

[diarm]

In other words, if you don't want to be sent off, make sure you don't connect with the knee with your studs.

Sage advice.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Sage advice.

Head with your knee or fist is fine though.

All the Swede ex pros and management team agreeing with the red in fairness. I just can’t understand why Lloris isn’t sent off, he comes second ffs!

 

[diarm]

Head with your knee or fist is fine though.

Says who?

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Says who?

Says the VAR and ref from the France game obviously.

 

[MU655]

Says who?

Says the ref who gave Lloris a yellow.

 

[Ananke]

There’s no consistency as usual. No surprise. Differs from referee to referee.

Even with VAR, there’s a person in charge making decisions.

 

[MU655]

A tad dramatic for the latter two fouls, no?

Not really. One of the main dangers of a fractured rib is the potential to pierce the lungs dependant on the break.

Maybe the heart if you are very unlucky.

 

[youngrell]

Logic is often nowhere to be seen on a football pitch. I was commenting to my brother last week about head clashes not being punished when one player clearly wins the ball.

If you got the ball with your foot and a defender kicks you afterwards you’d get a free kick or penalty no probs. But someone can headbutt you after you win a header and it’s nothing.

It’s mental.

 

[MU655]

There’s no consistency as usual. No surprise. Differs from referee to referee.

Even with VAR, there’s a person in charge making decisions.

Yeah, it seems strange though that after all the stuff about dementia and football (seems to have been forgotten now) that there is no rule about any forceful connection with the head being a definite red card.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Obviously a big part of the logic is “how bad does it look in slow motion”. And fair enough if that is how football is to be reffed, but feck me, could Lloris flying punch possibly look worse??

The fecker was second to the ball and absolutely poll axed a guy with a flying fist to the head, but was deemed yellow.

It’s confusing is what it is.

 

[MU655]

Logic is often nowhere to be seen on a football pitch. I was commenting to my brother last week about head clashes not being punished when one player clearly wins the ball.

If you got the ball with your foot and a defender kicks you afterwards you’d get a free kick or penalty no probs. But someone can headbutt you after you win a header and it’s nothing.

It’s mental.

Especially with all the dementia stuff that was going around. You would think they would have at least made some sort of change to the rules.

 

[diarm]

Says the VAR and ref from the France game obviously.

Ah sorry, I misread or interpreted your point. I agree completely that Lloris should've seen red.

 

[Compton22]

I was wondering how long it would take for a thread to be made on this

 

[sidsutton]

Harry Wilson’s challenge was the worst I’ve seen in this tournament. It should probably be a season long ban.

 

[ivaldo]

Obviously a big part of the logic is “how bad does it look in slow motion”. And fair enough if that is how football is to be reffed, but feck me, could Lloris flying punch possibly look worse??

The fecker was second to the ball and absolutely poll axed a guy with a flying fist to the head, but was deemed yellow.

It’s confusing is what it is.

Don't forget the no context stills!

 

[Zen]

Being able to pause the screen and slap up a random screenshot online doesn't help anything. Opinions here there and everywhere. Most contradicting themselves when it's their team.

I'm surprised they aren't at least 2 reds in every game at this point.

 

[youngrell]

Obviously a big part of the logic is “how bad does it look in slow motion”. And fair enough if that is how football is to be reffed, but feck me, could Lloris flying punch possibly look worse??

The fecker was second to the ball and absolutely poll axed a guy with a flying fist to the head, but was deemed yellow.

It’s confusing is what it is.

Some were even debating if it was even a penalty

 

[Zlatan 7]

Being able to pause the screen and slap up a random screenshot online doesn't help anything. Opinions here there and everywhere. Most contradicting themselves when it's their team.

I'm surprised they aren't at least 2 reds in every game at this point.

Never mind online, VAR is shown the on field refs stills before any video context

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Don't forget the no context stills!

Even then, if you have a still of Lloris twatting a bloke in the head with a flying fist, how can you deem “yellow”?
Because heads don’t bend?
Because a fist appears more suited to a face than a foot to a knee?

As I say, I think fine if that’s how football is headed, but consistency at least. And a flying fist to the head coming second to a ball whilst seeing the oppo player in your line of fire should be as clear cut as can be. Yet one is red and one yellow.

 

[ivaldo]

Even then, if you have a still of Lloris twatting a bloke in the head with a flying fist, how can you deem “yellow”?
Because heads don’t bend?
Because a fist appears more suited to a face than a foot to a knee?

Oh I agree. It's absurd there was even a debate over whether it should've been a pen or not. The intent and the known risk from Lloris was markedly higher.

 

[Abraxas]

The rules are fairly clear, but then you have human beings tasked with interpreting them within a range of circumstances. You will never, ever get consistency. The refs have all kinds of different experiences, different metaphors to understand what the terminology behind the rules mean, and different ways of seeing incidents.

If we take just one of them, that being the terminology that the rules consist of, then we cannot even agree on what a 'challenge' is on this forum in relation to the Sweden red. What about 'dangerous', keeping in mind all the various shades of 'dangerous' that there may be.

Imagine a ref that came up through the system and witnessed 3 young players receive career threatening leg breaks. How would he analyse a high, studs up tackle in comparison to one that has never seen anything like that? Who is likely to be the more sympathetic to the guy making the challenge? That is just one very crude example.

Expecting consistent witnessing of events is a complete impossibility. Expecting perfection is even less likely, and yet the level of criticism refs attract would seem to suggest something approaching that is even possible. As fans, we are far too critical of these people. But as to the wider concern surrounding refs in this tournament, I think they've been alright, personally.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Obviously a big part of the logic is “how bad does it look in slow motion”. And fair enough if that is how football is to be reffed, but feck me, could Lloris flying punch possibly look worse??

The fecker was second to the ball and absolutely poll axed a guy with a flying fist to the head, but was deemed yellow.

It’s confusing is what it is.

Isn't there some rule about you can't have a red card and a penalty or is that just the Premier League?

 

[acnumber9]

Isn't there some rule about you can't have a red card and a penalty or is that just the Premier League?

Dangerous play can be a red regardless.

 

[simmee]

Isn't there some rule about you can't have a red card and a penalty or is that just the Premier League?

Only applies to denying clear goalscoring opportunities.

 

[Withnail]

What is actually the logic behind it?

Is it based on level of danger? Clearly not.

- The most dangerous challenge to happen in this tournament is Lloris's flying punch into the Portuguese player's head.
- The second-most dangerous is Morata kicking out into the chest of the Croatian player.
- And another is the Ukrainian player following through with his foot into the Sweden player's chest.

All of the above are capable of resulting in death if they connect correctly (worst case scenario). None of them received a red card. However, tripping someone up, connecting with the ankle just above the boot, and connecting with the knee is a red card despite none of them carrying the same level of danger. Supposedly, it is written into that a connection with the ankle like that is a red card every time, but somehow the same rule doesn't exist for connection to the head or chest.

According to the Sweden red card today, it doesn't matter if you win the ball, it can still be a red. However, it doesn't seem to be the case if you follow through on the chest.

In other words, if you don't want to be sent off, make sure you don't connect with the legs. It is messed up.

You just can't let that Wilson red card go, can you?

 

[V.O.]

You just can't let that Wilson red card go, can you?

If you want a gripe about a Wales red card, how about Kalvin Phillips doing the exact same thing Ampadu got sent off for and only getting booked for it?

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Dangerous play can be a red regardless.

My question is does the awarding of the penalty influence that outcome?

Only applies to denying clear goalscoring opportunities.

Yeah maybe not the correct chain of events in the Lloris case.

 

[acnumber9]

My question is does the awarding of the penalty influence that outcome?



Yeah maybe not the correct chain of events in the Lloris case.

Not by the rules. If the ref deemed it to be serious foul play they can send him off even if the penalty is given. It only stopped not being red for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Not by the rules. If the ref deemed it to be serious foul play they can send him off even if the penalty is given. It only stopped not being red for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Cheers.

 

[CoopersDream]

Lloris should certainly have gotten a red, but I suspect that had to do with not wanting to give pen and a red card even if it should have been one. Morata's I can't quite remember, the Ukranian clearly pulled away his leg, nothing he did would merit a red card (as opposed to Danielsson almost breaking the other guys leg).