19 Jun 2026 12:38:46
This again might sound massively controversial, but I think the Kone leg break challenge wasn't a red card. It remind me a lot of the Struijk on Harvey Elliot challenge.

With Kone there were no studs, he wasn't super high. I think it's more one of those with really weird physics where moderate - not excessive - force at least in my view, caused the injury.

To be clear, it's not a 'lack of intent' issue.

That can't be a redeeming factor. But the pure facts about the challenge should be.

The outcome is undeniably tragic and Kone has my utmost sympathy. But just because Messi's didn't result in an injury doesn't mean that isn't a red card. I do think most challenges that end up with this kind of injury are legitimately red cards, but this one looks pretty rare. It would be a complete yellow for me.

1.) 19 Jun 2026
19 Jun 2026 14:13:47
Yeah. Agree, bkb. There were a few strange decisions in that game. But home team and all.

2.) 19 Jun 2026
19 Jun 2026 15:59:09
The law says, Serious Foul Play: A challenge using excessive force, endangering the safety of an opponent during active play.

When the contact came, the ball was gone, the contact was late and deliberate - he went through the standing leg from the back.

It started with a yellow and got upgraded to a red when the VAR looked at it.

So, yes, it was deserved. Pity that it broke Kone's leg, yes, it was a weird break. Still deserved a red.

3.) 19 Jun 2026
19 Jun 2026 19:57:07
It was careless rather than reckless, but it was a foul and it was late, so a yellow card would've been the right decision. But the ref was influenced by the serious outcome, and went for red. The Struijk / Elliott case was different in that it wasn't a foul at all, and no card was merited.