Spurs get new Van Dijk red card referee verdict as VAR decision explained

Keith Hackett, the former general manager of PGMOL, believes referee Craig Pawson had grounds to send off Virgil van Dijk for his elbow on Richarlison during Tottenham’s League Cup semi-final second leg against Liverpool.

The incident unfolded just three minutes into the match at Anfield when Van Dijk clashed with Richarlison, leaving the Spurs forward on the ground clutching his face. Pawson halted play but decided against awarding a foul, despite replays clearly showing the Liverpool captain making contact with his opponent’s face.

Football.london reports that VAR, overseen by Michael Salisbury, reviewed the altercation and deemed no clear and obvious error had occurred, allowing the on-field decision to stand.

During the Sky Sports broadcast, co-commentator Alan Smith acknowledged the severity of the challenge but confirmed that the review had been completed without further action. ITV pundit Ally McCoist provided additional insight, stating that Van Dijk had deliberately raised his arm to fend off Richarlison.

He pointed out that while the Dutch defender’s elbow made contact just below the Brazilian’s chin, it might not have been forceful enough to warrant a red card. McCoist admitted that while aggression was evident, the decision to let Van Dijk off without punishment was debatable. WATCH THE VIDEO HERE

Hackett, however, suggested Liverpool were fortunate to avoid going down to ten men. Speaking to Football Insider, he stated that Van Dijk was “very, very fortunate” not to receive any sanction for using his arm or elbow in the challenge.

He classified the act as reckless and believed it warranted a minimum of a yellow card, though he hesitated to categorize it as excessive force worthy of a red. In his view, the challenge straddled the line between cautionable and dismissible, ultimately deciding that a booking would have been the appropriate punishment.

This moment sparked controversy, with many questioning the consistency of refereeing decisions. Van Dijk, as Liverpool’s captain and defensive leader, holds a commanding presence on the pitch, but incidents like this raise concerns about the application of the rules.

Had a similar act been committed by a less prominent player, would the outcome have been the same? Such inconsistencies in officiating continue to fuel debates among pundits, fans, and former officials.

Tottenham’s frustration grew as the game progressed, as Liverpool asserted dominance, eventually securing a 4-0 victory to eliminate Spurs from the competition.

Despite arriving at Anfield with a 1-0 aggregate lead, Tottenham never looked in control, and moments like Van Dijk’s clash with Richarlison only added to their woes. While Richarlison managed to continue playing after the incident, the lack of action against Van Dijk became a significant talking point post-match.

Hackett’s perspective aligns with the broader concerns about how referees interpret aggressive challenges. While football remains a contact sport, the fine line between physicality and recklessness often leads to controversial decisions.

Van Dijk’s challenge may not have been intentional, but his arm movement, coupled with the force of the contact, suggested he took a risk that could have easily resulted in harsher consequences.

The inconsistency of officiating in high-stakes matches is nothing new. Similar incidents in the Premier League and cup competitions have led to debates about whether referees should be more stringent when reviewing contentious moments.

With VAR in place, the expectation is that blatant infractions, particularly those involving contact to the face, should be addressed with more clarity. However, as seen in this instance, subjective interpretations continue to influence crucial decisions.

This debate also raises questions about how referees manage big-game players. Van Dijk, a respected figure and key player for Liverpool, may have benefited from the perception that he is not typically reckless.

On the other hand, had a different player, particularly one with a history of disciplinary issues, been involved, the outcome could have been different. This fuels the ongoing discussion about whether refereeing decisions unintentionally favor high-profile individuals or teams.

Tottenham’s exit from the League Cup was disappointing, but moments like this only add to the narrative of the game. While Liverpool’s overall performance was dominant, the incident involving Van Dijk and Richarlison remains a flashpoint in the match.

As football continues to evolve, the demand for greater consistency in refereeing decisions will only intensify, ensuring that players are held to the same standard regardless of their reputation or stature in the game.