The recent incident during the heated Manchester City vs Arsenal match has left many fans and pundits questioning why Man City hitman won’t face retrospective punishment despite launching the ball at Gabriel. The altercation, which saw the City forward kick the ball towards the Arsenal defender in apparent frustration, sparked controversy and calls for disciplinary action. However, the governing bodies have decided against issuing any retrospective ban or fine for the player, and here’s why.
Referee’s Decision Final
One of the main reasons why no further action will be taken is that the incident was fully observed and dealt with by the match officials during the game. According to FA rules, if the referee has seen and judged an incident during play, the decision made on the field is considered final. In this case, the referee opted to issue a yellow card, deeming it sufficient punishment for the act. Since the officials took action at the time, there is no grounds for retrospective punishment unless new, compelling evidence comes to light.
Lack of Malicious Intent
While the act of kicking the ball at an opponent may appear aggressive, the absence of clear malicious intent plays a significant role in the decision not to pursue additional penalties. The player’s actions, though unsporting, did not meet the threshold for violent conduct, which typically involves intent to harm or endanger an opponent. In this instance, the forward’s frustration seemed more directed at the circumstances of the match rather than an outright attempt to injure Gabriel.
Comparison with Similar Incidents
The ruling is consistent with how similar incidents have been handled in the past. Retrospective punishments are generally reserved for off-the-ball incidents or actions that were missed entirely by the match officials. For example, cases involving elbows, kicks, or stamps that are not seen by the referee often lead to retrospective bans if video evidence clearly shows intent to harm. However, because the referee managed this situation on the spot with a booking, it aligns with the FA’s precedent of not revisiting such decisions unless there’s a significant oversight.
The Role of VAR
Another factor in the decision-making process is the role of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR). During the match, VAR reviewed the incident and did not recommend an upgrade of the punishment from a yellow to a red card, which would have led to an immediate dismissal. The fact that both the on-field referee and the VAR team found the yellow card sufficient reduces the likelihood of the FA stepping in post-match.
Impact on Future Conduct
While the player in question won’t face a ban this time, the incident could still serve as a warning for future behavior. The FA and Premier League are keen on maintaining discipline and sportsmanship, and repeated offences or similar actions could lead to harsher consequences. Players are expected to conduct themselves professionally, and incidents like this one, although not leading to a ban, are certainly noted.
Conclusion
The decision not to impose retrospective punishment on the Man City hitman, despite the visible frustration and unsportsmanlike behavior, may seem controversial to some. However, it adheres to the established rules and procedures governing disciplinary actions in the Premier League. As long as the referee addresses the incident during the match, and no additional evidence of violent conduct emerges, the verdict remains consistent with similar past cases. For now, the player escapes further repercussions but will need to be mindful of his actions moving forward.