The FA – quick as they are –  haven’t seen fit to pick this up and do something about it which to my mind is incredibly inconsistent. Surely a red card offence is a red card offence no matter what? The referee didn’t give a foul which means that he both didn’t see it and that a retrospective card is

Let me just get one thing straight before we begin – the Sunderland game is done and dusted in my mind and I prefer to think of it in its correct context as one point gained than two lost. What I am writing below is not based on a desire to see it happen but more a lack of understanding over why it has not, and does not, seem to happen at all. 

My query is this: 

Why isn’t Titus Bramble being retrospectively red-carded?

I think anyone who has seen that incident – live at the match, replays during the match, live on TV, on Match of the Day, on the Match of the Day repeat, on MOTD 2 – would agree that Bramble clearly pushes Arshavin in the back just before he shoots which is a) a foul and b) a denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Given a) and b) it is a clear red-card offence but since it is not a dangerous tackle the incident has been glossed over and the culprit has gotten away scot free.

So scot free that he has in fact come out in a subsequent interview to claim that Arshavin was perhaps a ‘little bit too honest’, which is in effect admitting his guilt to the media. Despite Bramble’s further claim that it was just ‘good defending’ in reality Arshavin wouldn’t have anything to be ‘too honest’ about unless some sort of foul play had taken place. 

The FA – quick as they are –  haven’t seen fit to pick this up and do something about it which to my mind is incredibly inconsistent. Surely a red card offence is a red card offence no matter what? The referee didn’t give a foul which means that he both didn’t see it and that a retrospective card is possible so why is this not an issue?

Now, really dangerous tackles are objectively far, far worse than professional fouls like Bramble’s. For this reason I can understand why there is far more attention given to such tackles and why managers, players and the media are more likely to call for retrospective action in such cases. That makes sense. 

But just because no one is calling for a card now it doesn’t mean that one isn’t deserved, according to the rules of the game. It is not the managers’, players’ or media’s duty to issue justice, it is the referees’ and the FA’s responsibility and this is a task that they shy away from all too regularly in my book. 

This is not a campaign calling for a retrospective ban. We’ve played Sunderland twice so frankly I don’t care what happens to them and this is certainly not a question of retribution. It is, however, a question of justice and a question of consistency. 

If dirty tackles can be deemed worthy of a card after a game then why can’t professional fouls? 

Does anyone know of any instances when a foul such as this has received retrospective action?

I keep getting this feeling that I’m being naive, perhaps even wrong, but for the moment I’m predominantly unsure. If anyone has answers to my questions I would love to hear them. 

WB