Question Number: 30086

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 2/7/2016

RE: Rec Adult

russell of Sydney, Australia asks...

In this weekends ELP match of Southampton v West Ham, Victor Wanyama received a straight red for a tackle on Dimitri Payet.
While not seeing the full match to know if there had been other issues with Wanyama's play up until this point, a straight red appears a bit harsh (from my comfy armchair, with remote in hand).
We often look at the players around an incident to get a reading on the incident, and I would't be surprised if Payet was surprised at the red.
Considering the location of the tackle (almost dead centre of the field), we can rule our DOGSO, so it presumably comes down to the tackle itself.
I'm keen to hear the panels explanation as to how this particular tackle is a straight red.
Yes it was poorly timed. Yes, it stopped an attacking move that had potential, but it did seem a long way short of DOGSO. Yes, it made Payet hit the turf.
With remote in hand, I seems Payet may have nudged the ball a little too far away, but it is not a two footed tackle, nor does it look like a 'studs up' kind of tackle.
Ref Clattenberg does not have the benefit of the remote, but he was certainly closely positioned, although maybe a bit side on to the play. He clearly is reaching for his cards immediately, and fair enough. but straight red.
Help me understand the straight red aspect that I am clearly missing.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Russell
The red card was for serious foul play. In real time it would have looked like Wanyama went after Payet. The challenge will have looked like a two legged scissor challenge which is certainly frowned on in the game. Couple that with Payets injury reaction plus the hostile reaction of his team mates plus the player got nowhere near the ball the referee Mark Clattenburg would have opined that the contact was more serious than it was which we saw with the benefit of action replay, slow motion etc. Now having said that the manner of the challenge was not good and it was through good fortune that Payet was not contacted more heavily than he was. One can argue that the challenge, the scissor with two legs, certainly endangered the safety of an opponent which is serious foul play.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Russell,
at least you are cognizant the armchair view is inherently biased when compared to real time play and the match referee angle of view. Your observation that earlier play and conditions might have influenced the red card if it was orangey in nature to you. Perhaps that player was spoken too earlier, perhaps something was said or done that the referee became aware via an AR. Then again there is the more obvious factor the tackle was a blatant excessive tackle in open field play in it had only one intention which was to hurt the opposing player by sweeping him off his feet.
Cheers