A shocking image, ten staples on the cheek and no sanction. PSG won (4-2) in Monaco on Wednesday December 18, but it was the clash between the sole of Wilfried Singo and the face of Gianluigi Donnarumma which caught the attention.
If the Monegasque defender seems to want to avoid the Parisian goalkeeper, the disfigured face of the Italian was not enough for the evening referee, François Letexier, to justify a sanction, while Wilfried Singo had already received a yellow card. For former Ligue 1 referee Bruno Derrien, this gesture would have merited an expulsion.
How do you view this action and the lack of sanction that resulted from it?
Bruno Derrien : We can consider that the Monaco defender did not control his gesture, that the consequences are still significant because the player leaves injured, with a cut face. I I think there aren’t too many questions to ask when it’s like that: it’s red, and no one will say anything.
During the expulsion of Amine Harit after his foul on Marquinhos during the Classic, François Letexier [l’arbitre du Classique et du match de mercredi] had said that when he saw the sternum the Parisian’s torso, this had reinforced his decision to wear red. This time he estimated that the fault was reckless and not inconsiderate. Imprudence is not punishable in itself, but inconsideration is. CThis is the limit of interpretation on such a gesture. When we see the cut face of the Parisian goalkeeper, I think we shouldn’t ask too many questions.
The referee did not speak, itIt’s a shame. JI found it very good that he spoke after Marseille-PSG, that he gives his version of the facts, his analysis. Whether we share it or not, it’s good. Thereit would also have been interesting to know why. Did the VAR question him? Why didn’t he go and look at the images? Why doesn’t he take out any boxes? Obviously, if he doesn’t go to the press, it’s because, inevitably, hel doubt of the decision he could have taken et that, obviously, there was a failure.
Is this also a failure of VAR?
We don’t know. During the match between Lyon and Nice, the VAR tells the referee “there is a mistake, he pushes, he holds back”. The referee says “no, I don’t have enough”. While the referee is in front of the images The VAR is at the VAR center in Paris, he is not the one who will arrive on the field. In the end, it’s up tocentral referee to make his decisions. The VAR referee can only call out, show him the image.
With VAR, there was also the promise of infallible refereeing…
Not foolproof, but aimed at reducing big errors. I knew that VAR was not going to solve all the problems in the refereeing. Of course, she fixed some errors, but it contributed to other controversies. You have referees who take less and less responsibility in the surface. On mistakes by the defenders, they wait for the images. Count the number of penalties whistled live over a season. There are far fewer than those who whistled after the use of VAR. This means that today, the referees wait and see. They have a parachute.
What do you think should be done? Sanction the referee? Ccommunicate about the rule, or even change it?
I don’t know if there will be sanctions, but there there have always beenyears before the general public knew it. Referee sanctions are rarely publicized in the media. I think there will be an analysis of the fact, of the VAR. And he There will be communication from the Technical Directorate of Arbitration (DTA). She demonstrates transparency, speaks very often after matches. Will she go with the referee or say he made a mistake? I don’t know.
