New Delhi: Rodrigo Bentancur’s seven-match ban has become one of the most talked-about disciplinary decisions in football this season.
The Tottenham midfielder received the suspension after being found guilty of violent conduct during a recent Premier League match. His actions, reviewed post-match, were deemed serious enough by the FA to warrant a lengthy suspension.
However, the decision has drawn scrutiny for what some see as inconsistency in the FA’s approach to similar incidents. In particular, comparisons have been drawn to a controversial moment involving Chelsea midfielder Enzo Fernandez earlier this season. Despite Fernandez’s alleged involvement in an altercation that many deemed comparable, the FA opted not to take action. This disparity has led to widespread criticism and raised questions about fairness in the application of rules.
What happened on the pitch?
Bentancur’s incident unfolded late in Tottenham’s match when he clashed with an opponent during a heated moment. The referee initially booked him, but post-match footage revealed a possible elbow motion that sparked further outrage. The FA’s review panel deemed it violent conduct, upgrading his punishment to a seven-match ban.
Meanwhile, Enzo Fernandez’s alleged misconduct occurred during Chelsea’s fiery clash with Liverpool earlier in the season. Fernandez was accused of making an intentional physical gesture toward an opponent, though the referee missed the incident entirely. Despite calls for retrospective action, the FA declined to investigate, citing “insufficient evidence” after reviewing match footage.
Why was Bentancur punished and Fernandez not?
The disparity between Bentancur’s punishment and Fernandez’s exemption comes down to the FA’s application of evidence and precedent. For Bentancur, the match footage was deemed conclusive, showing intent to harm, while Fernandez’s incident lacked clarity, according to the FA. Critics, however, argue this explanation exposes flaws in the review system, as both cases involved similar circumstances and evidence.
Some suggest the FA’s stricter stance on Bentancur stems from his prior disciplinary record. The Spurs midfielder has faced suspensions before, which may have influenced the severity of his punishment. Conversely, Fernández, a newer arrival in the Premier League, does not have a comparable record, potentially explaining the leniency.
This decision has reignited debates about the FA’s consistency in handling high-profile players. Many believe Fernandez’s status as a marquee signing for Chelsea might have influenced the decision, as harsher punishment could negatively affect the league’s reputation. Bentancur, playing for a club outside the current title race, may not have received the same benefit of the doubt.
