Rodrigo Bentancur: Why Premier League Refereeing Sparks Debate Over Consistency

Rodrigo Bentancur’s Yellow Card: A Case Study in Premier League Controversy

When Tottenham Hotspur’s Rodrigo Bentancur slid in on Chelsea’s Reece James last month, few expected his tackle to ignite a debate stretching far beyond North London. Yet, as the dust settled on another dramatic Premier League weekend, the question wasn’t just about Bentancur’s yellow card—it was about what it revealed: a growing frustration with refereeing consistency, and the role of VAR in shaping outcomes.

Managers Speak Out: Comparing Bentancur and Caicedo Incidents

Enzo Maresca, Chelsea’s head coach, articulated what many in the football community feel. After Chelsea’s Moises Caicedo was sent off for a challenge on Arsenal’s Mikel Merino, Maresca couldn’t help but draw parallels to Bentancur’s booking for a similarly forceful tackle on Reece James. “It’s a red card, but why was Bentancur’s against Reece not a red card when we were at Spurs away?” Maresca asked (BBC Sport, Sky Sports).

Maresca’s point is poignant. On one hand, Caicedo’s challenge—studs up, high contact, and a pronounced buckle of Merino’s ankle—was met with swift VAR intervention and a red card. On the other, Bentancur’s studs-first tackle, albeit lower and less forceful, resulted only in a yellow, with the VAR and Premier League’s Key Match Incidents (KMI) Panel largely agreeing with the referee’s initial call. The KMI panel supported the yellow card for Bentancur by four votes to one, citing that the challenge was “low, just slightly late and reckless” rather than dangerous.

Inside VAR Protocols: Why Decisions Diverge

What separates these two incidents? According to Premier League guidelines, the referee—and, if necessary, the VAR—must assess whether a foul is merely reckless (yellow card) or dangerous (red card). The criteria include the speed and force of the challenge, the height at which contact is made, whether the player’s studs are showing, and whether one or both feet were off the ground.

In Caicedo’s case, he executed a small jump, resulting in both feet briefly off the ground and making contact higher up Merino’s leg. The VAR, John Brooks, deemed this a clear and obvious error after the on-field yellow, triggering a pitchside review and the subsequent red. Bentancur, by contrast, kept one foot grounded, and while his tackle was studs-first and downward, the force was judged to be lower. The VAR in that match, Craig Pawson, did not intervene, believing the referee’s yellow card was sufficient under the circumstances (Sky Sports).

Subjectivity at the Heart of Officiating

Refereeing decisions for serious foul play are inherently subjective. Unlike offside calls or goal-line technology, there is no absolute measure for “dangerous” play. The Football Association’s rules state: “A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.” Yet, applying this rule relies on the judgement of the referee and VAR, often leading to marginal differences in outcomes.

Daniel Sturridge, speaking on Sky Sports, captured the dilemma: “It looks nasty, but initially the referee makes the decision to give him a yellow card so it is slightly re-refereeing it.” The VAR’s remit is not to re-officiate the match, but to correct clear and obvious errors—a line that, in practice, is blurred by individual perspectives and live-match context.

Managers and Players Left in Limbo

The sense of inconsistency isn’t just a media narrative—it’s felt acutely by those on the pitch. Maresca reflected, “As managers we try to understand why they judge in different ways. We struggle to understand.” The visible outcome was Chelsea playing with ten men against Arsenal, while Tottenham kept their full complement after Bentancur’s foul in a prior fixture.

The fallout impacts more than just disciplinary records; it shapes the flow and outcome of matches, influencing league tables and the fortunes of clubs. After Caicedo’s dismissal, Chelsea fought valiantly with ten men, even taking the lead before Arsenal’s equalizer. Yet the shadow of the decision lingered, fueling debate among fans, pundits, and officials alike (News18).

VAR, Protocols, and the Human Factor

Much of the confusion stems from VAR protocol. Referees are instructed to wait until an offending player is back on their feet before issuing a card, which can create delays and misperceptions about VAR involvement. In the Caicedo incident, Anthony Taylor played advantage, booked Caicedo after treatment, and only then was prompted by VAR to review for a red card. In Bentancur’s case, no such intervention occurred.

Even within the KMI Panel, errors and inconsistencies are logged—12 mistakes on serious foul play reviews since the start of the 2023-24 season. The reality is that no two fouls are ever truly identical, and the subjective lens of officiating means similar incidents can yield different outcomes.

The Wider Implications: Is Consistency Possible?

The Bentancur-Caicedo saga is emblematic of a broader challenge facing the Premier League: balancing the demand for consistency against the nuanced, fast-paced reality of elite football. As long as subjective judgement remains central to serious foul play rulings, managers and supporters may continue to feel aggrieved by what appear to be contradictory decisions.

Howard Webb, the referee’s chief, has made clear that VAR’s job is to address only clear and obvious errors, not to rewrite the game. But the threshold for intervention—and the criteria for what constitutes “dangerous” play—are open to interpretation. This means that, for all the technology and protocol, football remains a sport defined by human judgement and, inevitably, human error.

Ultimately, Rodrigo Bentancur’s yellow card has become a touchstone for broader questions about fairness and transparency in the Premier League. For Tottenham fans, it may seem like a fortunate escape; for Chelsea and Maresca, a source of lingering frustration. For neutral observers, it’s a reminder that football’s beauty—and its controversy—lies in the unpredictable intersection of skill, passion, and imperfect officiating.

The Bentancur incident highlights that, despite technological advances and detailed protocols, Premier League refereeing still hinges on subjective judgement. Until standards and intervention thresholds are clarified and unified, debates over consistency will remain central to the sport’s narrative—and its sense of justice.