Howard Webb reveals why David Brooks WASN’T sent off for clash with Marc Cucurella – after referee rejected red card on review for first time ever

Howard Webb has revealed why David Brooks wasn’t sent off for Bournemouth against Chelsea in mid-January – despite referee Rob Jones being sent to the monitor.

Chelsea had led the game at Stamford Bridge on the heels of a sumptuous Cole Palmer goal within the opening 15 minutes, but were pinned back by Bournemouth after Justin Kluivert struck home a penalty five minutes after the restart

As the hosts sought to get back on top, Marc Cucurella on the left flank was keen to spur on an attack but was brought down by David Brooks in his own half with a challenge which appeared to involve the Bournemouth midfielder pulling the Spain international’s hair.

While commentators likened the gesture to a wrestling clothesline action, Jones did not originally punish the incident, but was instead advised to consult the pitchside monitor by the VAR team over potential violent conduct.

After a lengthy wait in west London, Jones handed Brooks a yellow card only – rejecting the guidance of the team in Stockley Park after being sent to the monitor for the first time.

PGMOL – the referees’ Professional Game Match Officials Board – chief Webb, speaking on Match Officials Mic-d Up, has now explained why there was no red card shown – and why it was the correct decision.

The incident happened when Chelsea defender Cucurella appeared to go down after being stopped by Bournemouth midfielder Brooks

Webb revealed that referee Rob Jones was sent to the screen for a review having missed the initial incident

‘In this situation the referee didn’t see any of the situation on the field,’ Webb began. ‘It was not something that he was looking as David Brooks and Marc Cucurella come together.

‘That’s important because when Cucurella goes down and the VAR looks at this footage, he’s the first match official to see it. He’s not therefore looking at the situation and judging it against the call that’s made on the field and deciding whether that on-field call is clearly and obviously wrong.

‘So when the VAR looks at it, he’s looking at it and thinking “OK, is that for me a red card offense?’ And when he sees the left arm of David Brooks come around the front of Cucurella, he calls it something like a clothesline or something similar.

‘It has to be something that VAR genuinely believes could be a red card and therefore sends a referee to the screen for that purpose. When the referee gets there, he looks at it and says “OK, thank you. But based on the footage I’m looking at, I don’t think it’s quite a red card”. You hear him say it’s not an act of brutality.

‘So I think on balance, Rob Jones makes the right decision. [He] deems it not to be a conclusive red card, but it’s clearly something that’s at least reckless and therefore shows a yellow card and is absolutely within his rights to do that.

‘So we actually think it was a good use of VAR to show Rob Jones a possible red card. And he makes his own determination that it’s not quite red, but is reckeless and therefore yellow.’

VAR official Graham Scott Scott is believed to have said to Jones at the time ‘it’s your gift’ – a cryptic message which left some in doubt over the process of the decision-making.

In a statement issued after the decision, the PGMOL said: ‘VAR recommended an on-field review for a possible red card to Brooks for violent conduct.

‘Upon review, the referee deemed that the challenge on Cucurella was a reckless action and not violent conduct – and issued a yellow card to Brooks.’

Webb also spoke on the incident that saw Myles Lewis-Skelly sent off for Arsenal against Wolves, before the decision was overturned after the game.

Jones looked at the screen and opted to show only a yellow card – the first time a red card review had been rejected

Cucurella was left incensed – the game finished 2-2 after a late Reece James free kick

Webb has also broken his silence on the red card shown to Arsenal’s Myles Lewis-Skelly

‘From the outset, we would prefer a yellow card in this situation,’ Webb said. ‘The referee felt it was serious foul play, the VAR checked the footage to see if the call was clearly and obviously wrong and he felt it wasn’t – seeing that the contact was quite high up on the leg.

‘But we know that for serious foul play, we need excessive force or brutality and what we see here is that high contact [just] glancing and coming off the leg quite quickly. 

‘So for that reason, everybody pretty much in the game has formed the same conclusion that this is falling short of serious foul play – because of that glancing contact. Because the studs don’t really go right into the leg, they glance in before coming down onto the foot.

‘I’ve heard this described as a really horrendous officiating decision. It’s not! I understand why the referee saw this on the day as a serious foul-play action.’