-
I think he meant it but even if it was an accident dangerous play doesn't have to be on purpose. He went in at speed, with a lack of control and ended up stamping on a player.
Exactly that. All of the teams were warned before the tournament that they were going to pick up on this kind of thing. Dangerous play is still dangerous play even if accidental.
VAR didn't intervene because the ref gave a yellow. As I understand it VAR could only intervene if the ref hadn't given a card or just given a free kick. The ref giving it a yellow means he was aware of the potential severity of it and decided it wasn't a red.
Put it another way, if the ref hadn't given a yellow then VAR could have intervened and it would probably have been a red. But that doesn't mean either the use of VAR or the ref was wrong.
Greenbank-
Put it another way, if the ref hadn't given a yellow then VAR could have intervened and it would probably have been a red. But that doesn't mean either the use of VAR or the ref was wrong.
Is that the case in the EPL? I swear I've seen examples this season of VAR intervening in a yellow card decision to increase the severity...
Or maybe I'm just remembering the times they've undone a red.
Which brings me to my point - if VAR can decide it's not a red, why can't they decide it's worse than a yellow?
Soul
I think he meant it but even if it was an accident, dangerous play doesn't have to be on purpose. He went in at speed, with a lack of control and ended up stamping on a player.
That fact that he immediately fell on the floor 'injured' tells you everything you need to know. He thought he was going off. And he should have done.