\n<\/p>\n
In the Premier League, we have become used to a higher threshold for serious foul play. <\/p>\n
Often we will hear an explanation that contact is ‘glancing’, or ‘lacking in force’.<\/p>\n
That is not the case with Uefa, whose referees are always told to apply a strict interpretation for any challenge which could endanger the safety of an opponent. <\/p>\n
There are three reasons why a red card should be the expected outcome here. <\/p>\n
Firstly, Watkins was hit above the boot. Uefa tells its referees this is a trigger for possible serious foul play.<\/p>\n
Force and intensity still have to be considered, and two factors underline this. <\/p>\n
Anderson was sliding into the tackle with a degree of pace. This indicates a lower level of control than if, say, he was stepping into the challenge. It is this aspect which really ticks the box for a red card.<\/p>\n
Contact on Watkins was with a straight leg, too, which suggests greater force impact on the opponent compared to when the leg is bent.<\/p>\n
Winning the ball does not over-ride how a player makes a challenge, either. <\/p>\n
As the referee did not even give a foul, he cannot provide a description which fits the incident. <\/p>\n
That puts the onus solely on the VAR to judge this as serious foul play. He decided against it.<\/p>\n
As the VAR cannot advise that a yellow card should be shown, Anderson escaped unpunished. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n