Adrien Rabiot was sent off for receiving two yellow cards in quick succession in the win over Pisa, leading to confusion about his ban.
Going into Friday’s match at the Arena Garibaldi, it was known that Rabiot was one caution away from reaching the threshold of five, which results in a one-game ban. He got that yellow in the closing stages against Pisa, after fouling his man right on the edge of the box.
However, he was not happy with the decision and so protested with the linesman and the referee Michael Fabbri, which earned him a second yellow and a red card. In fairness to the Frenchman the foul was dubious and the card even more so, but he got his marching orders.
So, what does this mean in terms of the suspension he will now serve? Rather than becoming a two-game ban, MilanNews write that the regulations say he will miss Wednesday’s match against Como.
He can then return in Parma in the next round but with his yellow card count back to four, i.e. he will once again be a yellow away from getting the one-game ban. Thankfully, Milan were able to see out the three points despite being a man down, winning 2-1.
did he even commit a foul? Did he make contact or was it a dive?
So even though the Como March is a MD24 match (technically in the past) Rabbit will have to miss it? Why not the Parma game?
*Rabiot
Got a yellow for a shirt tug. It was ridiculous.
As much as it pains me to admit to it, the shirt pull was against a player who was about to enter the box with a chance to score; this indeed is, by rule, punishable with a yellow. The ref was correct. So Rabiot was immature with his dissent which resulted in more trouble given that instead of serving a suspension for accumulation of yellows thus being done with it against Como and surely available for the Derby, now he could get suspended again if he collects a yellow against Cremonese, thus missing the Derby. Now that this disaster is possible, it would make more sense for him to, after serving his red card suspension against Como, he returned for Parma but collected a yellow there, missing Cremonese but being available for the Derby.
That was a yellow for a SPA (Stopping a Promising Attack through a foul) and it was correct by rule. Indeed a SPA draws a yellow. A SPA is not as serious as a DOGSO (Denial of an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity) which draws a direct red, but it’s still a yellow.
The difference between the two is this: in a SPA the opponent is advancing, getting close to the box, and if not fouled, it’s conceivable that the ensuing play would carry a significant danger of a score; but not an extremely high probability because there are other defenders that could still get involved. That’s precisely what happened tonight.
A DOGSO is when a goal is imminent without a foul with a very high probability (for exemple if the opponent is advancing 1 v 1 against the goalkeeper with no other defender in sight but the last defender fouls him from behind).
So, SPA = yellow; the ref was right and Rabiot shouldn’t have said something likely very harsh to the ref, who then showed the second yellow likely for an insulting dissent.
By the way, I’m not the only one saying so. DAZN’s refereeing expert also deemed the yellow for Rabiot’s SPA to be correct.
The issue was not if it was a small tug or not. That might not even be ruled a foul if it had happened very far from the goal. It was the context, as the Pisa player could have entered the box and crossed it for a companion’s easy tap in. A ref may ignore a slight shirt pull while disputing a ball far from the goal but won’t ignore it when the victim is a player about to enter the box.
I’m a Milanista but I can be objective when a refereeing decision goes against us but is the correct decision; and in this case, it was.
A lovely post—thank you.
…and on the cusp of a goal-scoring stretch. He’s been shooting well.
I don’t understand why he was arguing. He clearly had missed his player and clearly pulled his shirt. And yes it’s a yellow, because it was dangerous attack. I would expect from player of his caliber to be smart about it. Another option is that he’s trying to nullify his yellows to avoid getting it before Inter game
Who ever mouthed off at the referee and ended up changing his mind?
Thoughtless, immature from Rabiot.
Yes, it was a bullshit yellow, that doesn’t mean you talk yourself into another bullshit yellow?!
He did the same nonsense in the game against Roma as well and had to be pulled from talking in the referees face by Maignan- I think.
Annoying.
When he returns he’ll still be a yellow away from suspension. Watch him end up missing the Inter game….
The thing is, we all know that Rabiot is hot-headed and not very mature. Haha, that’s precisely why we got him cheap; he wouldn’t have been expelled from his club if he never did anything stupid; he got involved in a fist fight with a teammate. So, he came to us, and while he continues to do stupid things from time to time, like yesterday and like against Roma, he is a spectacular, world-class player who transformed our team for the better, so I can forgive him for being stupid from time to time.
Not every contact is a foul. If referees don’t know that then football is doomed to fail. That was not a foul and the referee should have booked the Pisa player for diving.
That was simulation and referees need to trained to know the difference between simulation and real contact for a foul.
Luigi prepáč ale teraz s tebou súhlasiť nebudem. Veľmi rád čítam tvoje príspevky, ale tá žltá karta pre Rabiota vôbec nebol faul.
Rabiot sa ho snažil preskočiť a ten jemný dotyk rukou sa nedá považovať sa ťahanie!
Hráč Pisy mal dostať žltú kartu za simulovanie ako to píše ZionTrain.
Absolútny nezmysel,žiadny faul a už vôbec žiadna žltá karta!
A nerozumiem ako ty taký odborník môžeš napísať ,že to bol faul , lebo aj niekto z DAZN expert to povedal?
Zion má úplnú pravdu čo napísal!
A ľudia čo tu hovoríte na Rabiota,tak si pozrite aspoň 10 krát ten faul za sebou a potom povedzte či to faul bol alebo nie .