Referee explains Krstovic-Saelemaekers VAR controversy | OneFootball

Refereeing chief Dino Tommasi explains why Nikola Krstovic was sent off in Milan-Lecce, but Alexis Saelemaekers did not get a red card in Frosinone-Bologna.

DAZN have a weekly slot on their Sunday evening coverage called Open VAR, where the footage and audio from the Video Assistant Referees is played, along with an analysis of whether these were correct or incorrect decisions.

There was controversy this weekend because two fairly similar moves were not treated the same way, as Krstovic saw red for catching Milan’s Samuel Chukwueze in the ribs, whereas Saelemaekers was only booked for a much higher boot on Frosinone’s Nadir Zortea.

Some would argue that neither were red cards, as there was no intention to hurt an opponent, but that is not in the rulebook.

“This is the big difference between violent conduct and serious foul play, it doesn’t matter if it is intentional or not, it is about the danger you put your opponent in,” explained CAN chief and former referee Tommasi.

“Intention is irrelevant, there is intensity, the studs are showing, the leg is outstretched, so that makes it serious foul play.”

On Sunday there was a very similar incident, where Bologna forward Saelemaekers almost caught Frosinone player Zortea in the face with a high foot, but that was only a yellow card.

Many saw it as remarkably similar, if not worse than the Krstovic challenge, but Tommasi, the referee and the VAR all agreed it was not.

“It is a yellow here, because there is no intensity, Saelemaekers goes up to meet the ball, Zortea goes up to meet it at the same time, there is only a grazing.

“There are no clear studs showing, no intensity, Zortea strikes the ball that is also struck by Saelemaekers, so it is not serious foul play, it is only imprudent behaviour.

“If he had struck the player’s face with a stud or anything else, then that would’ve been a red card. Instead, Saelemaekers makes contact with the ball and then afterwards the outside of the boot grazes his head, not the studs.”

It was safe to say that the panel of former players in the DAZN studio, Massimo Ambrosini and Emanuele Giaccherini, absolutely did not agree with either of these decisions.

They considered the Saelemaekers incident to be far worse, as he could see Zortea and still went in with a much higher boot, whereas Krstovic had no idea that Chukwueze was there.

It is clear from the footage that Krstovic only has his eyes on the ball and Chukwueze leaps towards him, so is never in the striker’s eyeline.

Ultimately, Tommasi agreed that it is entirely down to luck – if Krstovic had been 5cm more one way, or Saelemaekers 5cm more the other – the decisions would’ve been reversed.

There was more disagreement in the studio with former referee and DAZN pundit Luca Marelli maintaining Napoli deserved a penalty for the Alessio Zerbin challenge on Cyril Ngonge, whereas Tommasi backed the decision of the VAR in waving play on.