Former PGMOL chief government Keith Hackett has claimed that Virgil van Dijk is a ‘serial offender’ with regards to getting away with on-field incidents which he feels benefit a better sanction than what was awarded.
In an article for The Telegraphthe ex-Premier League referee reviewed various skirmishes involving the Liverpool captain, together with one from the opening exchanges of the Reds’ 3-2 defeat to Fulham on Sunday when he clashed with Rodrigo Muniz.
Whereas a lot of the discuss surrounding the 33-year-old since yesterday’s match has centred round his declaration that ‘progress’ is being made on a doable contract extension, the previous top-flight whistler was as a substitute specializing in what he believes is an intensive rap sheet for the Dutchman.
Listed below are the seven incidents involving Van Dijk that Hackett has adjudicated upon, together with our verdict on each.
Picture through Sky Sports activities Premier League
Van dijk on Rodrigo Muniz (Fulham in Liverpool, April 2025)
The Liverpool captain seems to dam off Muniz within the penalty space within the first 5 minutes however VAR checks the incident and doesn’t really feel a must intervene.
Hackett says: “Virgil van Dijk as soon as once more unfairly impedes his opponent. He is aware of precisely what he’s doing. He has no likelihood of getting the ball, turns his again and successfully blocks Rodrigo Muniz.
“Van Dijk is a serial offender and will get away with one other one. This got here immediately after Liverpool keeper Caoimhin Kelleher had carelessly taken out Andreas Pereira. This was additionally a penalty – no marvel Fulham supervisor Marco Silva was going mad.”
EOTK verdict: It was certainly clumsy from the Dutchman, who received nowhere close to the ball and clattered into Muniz, and he was lucky to not have a penalty given in opposition to him.
Van Dijk on Richarlison (Liverpool V Spurs, February 2025)
Van Dijk catches the Tottenham Hotspur ahead together with his elbow at simply beneath head peak, though on-field referee Craig Pawson didn’t blow for a foul and VAR didn’t intervene.
Hackett says: “If on this incident the referee had issued a purple card, there would have been no intervention by VAR. The very minimal sanction that ought to have been issued was a yellow card for a reckless act.
“When reviewing such a incident for a purple card, you might be searching for a clenched fist, a bent arm and a backward motion of the arm and elbow with extreme drive.”
EOTK verdict: We disagree with Hackett right here. Van Dijk barely even catches Richarlison, who willingly threw himself to the ground in obvious agony. It wasn’t as if the Dutchman swung his elbow dangerously. Pawson and VAR received it proper.
Van Dijk on Dominic Solanke (Spurs v Liverpool, January 2025)
Within the first leg of that Carabao Cup semi-final a month earlier than the Richarlison incident, Van Dijk was accused of raking his studs down the calf of his former Liverpool teammate Solanke, though no motion was taken by on-field official Stuart Attwell.
Hackett says: “You’ve received contact with the underside of Van Dijk’s proper foot into the calf of the participant. Particular yellow.”
EOTK verdict: It undoubtedly regarded naughty from the Liverpool skipper, who in that occasion was lucky to keep away from a warning.
Picture through @footballconfid1 on X
Van Dijk on Anthony Gordon (Newcastle v Liverpool, December 2024)
Just like the Muniz incident from yesterday, Van Dijk barges into the Newcastle winger within the penalty space off the ball, however no foul was given by Andy Madley on the pitch or Attwell on VAR.
Hackett says: “Gordon was introduced all the way down to the bottom by a late and deliberate physique verify, Van Dijk intentionally altering route to maneuver in entrance of and use his shoulder in opposition to his opponent. This could have resulted in a penalty kick and a minimal yellow card.”
EOTK verdict: Once more, we’ve got to agree with Hackett right here. We don’t know what the Liverpool skipper was pondering in that second.
Van Dijk on Kai Havertz (Arsenal v Liverpool, October 2024)
Van Dijk has a kick out at the Arsenal ahead, who was grabbing the Dutchman’s shirt instantly beforehand because the pair jostled with each other. Anthony Taylor awarded a foul, with each he and VAR Michael Salisbury not feeling that any additional sanction was required.
Hackett says: “While making an attempt to kick an opponent is a purple card offence, as a result of Van Dijk’s actions lacked a level of brutality and restricted drive, I do really feel that the referee ought to have produced a yellow card for an act of unsporting behaviour.”
EOTK verdict: Even a yellow card would’ve appeared extreme – it wasn’t as if Van Dijk swung a boot studs-first at Havertz, who wasn’t an harmless get together both by tugging our captain’s shirt. Plus, the German made a three-course meal out of his subsequent dramatics.
Van Dijk on Auston Trusty (Liverpool v Sheffield United, April 2024)
The Dutchman was seen placing his arms on the neck of the American defender and pushing him to the bottom because the Reds have been getting ready to take a nook kick, with no motion taken by on-field referee Attwell or VAR Chris Kavanagh.
Hackett says: “Van Dijk, utilizing his left hand, grabs his opponent across the throat after which holds on to him and pushes him to the bottom. After I ran PGMOL, this might have been an computerized red-card offence however it’s not punished as usually now.”
EOTK verdict: Whereas some legitimately made the purpose that Casemiro was despatched off for the same offence earlier within the season, a purple card would’ve appeared moderately harsh right here. A stern warning off Attwell would’ve been ample, as long as Van Dijk didn’t repeat the offence.
Van Dijk on Amadou Onana (Everton v Liverpool, September 2022)
Two years after having a critical damage inflicted upon him by Jordan Pickford at Goodison Park, Van Dijk turned offender with a nasty ankle-high problem on Amadou Onana (now of Aston Villa) with studs displaying.
Hackett says: “Van Dijk’s problem used extreme drive and endangered the security of his opponent, utilizing his outstretched proper leg, with studs touchdown on the shin of his opponent. The problem fulfilled the factors for critical foul play.”
EOTK verdict: Of all of the incidents that Hackett reviewed, this was probably the most grotesque. Even probably the most ardent Liverpool followers must admit that our quantity 4 was very fortunate to not have been despatched off for his foul on Onana.
