Vinicius’ Sanction Remains at Four Matches After the Appeal

The RFEF Appeals Committee confirmed the four-match ban on Vinícius Júnior, rejecting all the arguments presented by Real Madrid.

The hair pull and the sanction

The Appeals Committee of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) dismissed this Friday the appeal by Real Madrid against the four-match ban imposed by the Disciplinary Committee on Brazilian forward Vinícius Júnior for his direct red card in the last league match against Villarreal.

Discipline imposed two matches on Vinícius for pulling Nathan Saliba's hair with the ball in play, without the ball being contested between them," in application of article 130.2 of the Disciplinary Code and the minimum penalty it establishes, and another two for addressing the referee in an aggressive manner after seeing the red card, according to the report by referee Isidro Díaz, in accordance with article 127, in both cases with additional fines.

The matches Vinicius misses and the appeal

With the decision of the Appeals Committee, the Madrid player will be unavailable for the next match, next Sunday against Sevilla, in the classic in Barcelona at Spotify Camp Nou on the 25th, and in the following league matches against Racing in Santander on November 1st, and in Mestalla against Valencia on the 7th.

Real Madrid requested in its appeal to annul the disciplinary consequences of the expulsion (m.73) due to a manifest material error, or alternatively to classify the conduct according to article 121.1 or 130.1 and impose a one-match sanction, and also revoke the two matches for addressing the referee or classify the conduct according to article 118.1 and change the suspension to a warning.

The club pointed out among its arguments that there was an error in the referee's report, after understanding that "the provided images prove that the player did not pull his opponent's hair, but that there was an accidental contact of his hand with the hair and the headband he was wearing, during a tussle typical of the game"; also that there was no evidence of risk to the opponent's physical integrity and that the referee did not identify any specific expression to affirm the existence of a protest.

The Appeals Committee ruled out any error in the referee's report, stating that "the images allow us to appreciate the hair pull, and the alternative explanations offered by the club do not undermine the certainty of the referee's account."

He also rejected the club's version for not applying article 130.2, due to the absence of risk in Vinícius's action, as he understood that the concurrence of such risk was established and that the sanctioned conduct took place outside the scope of a legitimate dispute for the ball, in the terms contemplated in this precept.

The appeal also upheld the two-match ban for Vinícius' words to the referee, in which the latter could not perceive any specific expression, and disagreed with the club's argument that "shouting, addressing the referee's position, or showing a displeased attitude does not necessarily equate to protesting a referee's decision."

The Committee indicated that "the report does not merely state that the footballer raised his voice" and that "on the contrary, it explicitly describes that, after being sent off, he continued to protest the referee's decision loudly, heading toward the area where the referee was located with an aggressive attitude and having to be restrained by his teammates."

We are therefore faced with a description of the behavior that incorporates various elements, whose joint assessment allows us to appreciate its character as a protest. The absence of specifically identified verbal expressions does not determine the atypicality of a protest behavior sufficiently described and supported by other elements." concluded the Appeal Court, which also upheld the additional fines of 1,300 euros for each of the infractions. EFE