On my first visit of the season to the Madejski Stadium, coming just four days after Reading’s game at Old Trafford, I was inundated by questions, not
to mention denouncements of the referee of that game.
Was the referee right to send off David Kitson for his tackle on Manchester United’s Patrick Evra? I should have expected it, because the match was shown live on Sky Television and I even had a phone call before I could watch it myself on
Match of the Day.
For those who didn’t see the tackle let me describe the action. Kitson, who had only been on the field for about 30 seconds, lunged with his foot outstretched and studs showing at Evra who had the ball on the touchline. The ball had
passed by the time Kitson’s outstretched foot reached his opponent and Kitson’s studs caught him just above the ankle. The referee, Rob Styles, had no hesitation in getting the red card out of his pocket, despite the protestations of Kitson.
This was a major blow for Reading, reducing them to ten men and hanging on for a draw. Kitson himself, said the tackle only warranted a yellow card, and I know many players and supporters wonder why one tackle will only be punished by a free kick, another by a caution, and yet another results in the player being sent off. So what makes the difference?
In the Laws of the Game, a referee has to consider whether a challenge comes under
which of three headings – careless, reckless and using excessive force. When it comes to considering Kitson’s tackle, we can ignore the fact that a player can be sent off for any of those challenges if he denies his opponent an obvious goal scoring opportunity, because clearly Kitson didn’t do that.
Careless is perhaps an unusual way to describe a challenge but it’s what you might call an
'every day foul'. Perhaps a trip, or going for the ball slightly late. It’s something you see in every game and of course this is the category most offences fall into.
The next step up is the reckless challenge. Most referees think of this as a tackle in which the offender shows little regard for the safety of his opponent. A tackle which if the player makes, he can’t be sure of the consequences. It is simply reckless behaviour.
The third step-up is using excessive force. This may be thought of as a player exceeding the force necessary for the tackle and being in danger of injuring his opponent. By a quirk of fate, this year’s version of the booklet on the Laws of the Game, known to referees as
LOAF, has an extended supplement entitled ‘Additional Instructions for referees, assistant referees and fourth officials’.
In fact these Additional Instructions take twice as much space in the book as the Laws themselves. Under
Serious Foul Play ,it states that ‘Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball, from the front, from the side or from behind, using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play and the player should be sent off’.
This, I think, is a more accurate description of Kitson’s tackle, rather than a
'clumsy challenge' as Nick Ive and others called it in the Evening
Post. What’s more, it is even illustrated with a photo depicting a tackle almost identical to Kitson’s.
LOAF (Laws of Association Football) can be obtained by anyone, available from booksellers priced £4. I’m sure Dave Kitson could borrow one from the football club to check it out. Rob Styles promised Kitson that he would look at the video before completing his report. I’m sure he did but I don’t think it would have taken him long and this was one decision he didn’t have to apologise for.