Controversial Calls: Were Trent Alexander-Arnold and Virgil Van Dijk Unfairly Spared Red Cards? Jamie Carragher and Gary Neville Weigh In
Controversy erupted as Virgil van Dijk received a red card for a last-man challenge on Alexander Isak, while Trent Alexander-Arnold narrowly escaped getting sent off earlier in the game after two close calls The decision sparked debate on whether both players deserved to be dismissed
Jamie Carragher disputes the red card given to Virgil van Dijk during the match against Newcastle, arguing that it did not prevent a clear opportunity to score. However, Carragher acknowledges that Trent Alexander-Arnold's earlier decision to not show a second yellow card was appropriate when he impeded Anthony Gordon's counter-attack, despite already being booked for time-wasting.
Below are the views of the pundits, Carragher and Neville, on both incidents, with Carragher analyzing them in the half-time studio and Neville providing his analysis from the St James' Park commentary booth.
Should Alexander-Arnold have walked early on?
INCIDENT: Gordon's shove on Alexander-Arnold goes unnoticed by referee John Brooks, who awards a throw-in to Newcastle. Despite feeling fouled, the Liverpool defender quickly gets back on his feet. However, in frustration, he aimlessly tosses the ball away, causing a delay in the restart of the game. As a result, Brooks issues a yellow card to Alexander-Arnold.
Gordon is taken down by Alexander-Arnold while attempting to launch a counter-attack. Referee Brooks decides against issuing a second booking to the Liverpool defender and opts for a warning instead.
CARRAGHER'S OPINION: "Trent should have received a yellow card [for the initial booking]. We are familiar with the rules, he deliberately throws the ball away, but the referee creates a difficult situation for himself.
Image:
The fact that the referee didn't consider Gordon's shove as a foul initially is baffling. It is quite unbelievable that he chose not to call it. Perhaps this is also why he didn't give Gordon a second yellow card shortly after.
NEVILLE'S PERSPECTIVE: "The initial booking is unnecessary, as we are still adjusting to the updated regulations. The player carelessly discards the ball, resulting in a typical booking. Feeling aggrieved, he reacts by forcefully pushing and discarding the ball.
The second incident overwhelms the referee. He seems unwilling to make a decisive call.
Did Van Dijk deny a clear goalscoring opportunity?
INCIDENT: Alexander-Arnold exhibits luck as he maneuvers to the left and places his arm around Gordon. He is aware that committing another infraction would result in his dismissal. I am firmly convinced that if he hadn't received a yellow card earlier, he would certainly have received one for that action. Moments after Liverpool concede a goal, Van Dijk faces accusations of fouling Isak on the edge of the box. Referee Brooks proceeds to brandish a straight red card, a decision supported by VAR, as the Newcastle forward was deemed to have been deprived of a clear opportunity to score.CARRAGHER'S VIEW: "Van Dijk makes several mistakes - being lazy in his positioning and making an ill-advised challenge, but in my opinion, it doesn't warrant a red card. How can you determine if it was a clear goalscoring opportunity?"
NEVILLE'S VIEW: "I believe he simply kicks at the center-forward. Van Dijk shouldn't have attempted to win the ball from that angle. He ought to have focused on tracking Isak's run instead of trying to win possession."
"He recklessly strikes his left leg, displaying a lack of caution from Van Dijk. It was unnecessary for him to engage in that manner. We can all relate to being in similar situations. He merely needed to step off the field, accept the consequences. Difficult as it may be.
"However, this highlights a change in Virgil van Dijk's behavior compared to a few years ago. Back then, he would have allowed Isak to control the ball and swiftly gained possession as Isak advanced through the channel. Instead, he forcefully thrusts himself towards Isak. As a result, Isak easily bypasses him due to Van Dijk's rash decision."
