(Editorial) – You’ve probably already seen the tackle a dozen times by now. The MLS Disiplinary Committee has seen it and they have ruled: Nigel de Jong has been suspended for three league games for his tackle on Portland Timbers midfielder Darlington Nagbe this past Sunday.
Nagbe came up hobbled, grabbing his ankle after the play. A foul was called, but head official Alan Chapman gave De Jong only a yellow card for the play. Nagbe left the field in a wheel chair. Fans and pundits weighed in on the tackle and potential for suspension with fervor. For what it’s worth, Nagbe doesn’t have any broken bones, only a sprained ankle. It appears he has also returned to training.
Analyzing The Nigel de Jong Tackle And Suspension
Now that we know the punishment and have some more information, what does this mean for the Galaxy going forward? Was it fair? What does this mean for setting a precedent for future action by the Disciplinary Committee? Let’s break it down.
The Nigel de Jong tackle on Nagbe was absolutely a red.
Even if you remove intent as a variable, De Jong goes into Nagbe’s ankle with his studs. He does not get any of the ball. The challenge was reckless and endangered the safety of the opponent. That’s a straight red card, no question.
Chapman missed the call, but I don’t hold it against him. If you watch the replay, Chapman to De Jong’s back. Both players and the ball are almost in a straight line from the official’s vantage point, so the angle isn’t great for judging the severity of the play. He can probably see that De Jong doesn’t get the ball. That and Nagbe’s reaction were probably enough for Chapman to call a foul and give De Jong a card.
If any officials are at fault, it’s the nearside linesman and the fourth official. They are both behind Nagbe, the fourth official over his left shoulder, the linesman over his right. They had a much better view of the play. There appeared to be no conference of referees before Chapman made his ruling.
The Disciplinary Committee exists to provide retroactive and well-informed justice. And they did just that.
A three game suspension is probably fair. De Jong could have made it much worse.
We’ve yet to receive a full detailed statement from the Disciplinary Committee as to what they considered and why they chose a three game suspension. The committee has stated that the foul was “a clear and unequivocal red card” adding that it was “of an egregious and reckless nature such that the Committee must act to protect player safety.”
It’s hard to argue against those two points. These types of tackles have no place in MLS (and soccer in general). De Jong’s tackle is more severe than the average red card this year, of which there are many.
That said, De Jong could have made the play much more dangerous. He did lead with his studs, but he doesn’t leave his feet. In many of these potential bone-breaking tackles, the offender leaves their feet, scissors the opponent, and goes through them to win the ball. De Jong doesn’t do any of that. That’s the difference between this play and the Brian Mullan tackle that broke Steve Zakuani’s leg (for which Mullan was fined and suspended ten games total).
Intent and precedent are not back-and-white.
The other two variables are intent and precedent. I always find intent hard to judge. Looking at De Jong’s speed and direction, he commits to going in from about 10 feet out. The ball is in between the two players. De Jong called it a 50-50 ball after the game. I think 70-30 in favor of Nagbe is more accurate. Based on this, De Jong is clearly being reckless.
But is he seeking to win the ball, take a bite out of the player, or both? Based on the pictures, it’s difficult to tell where De Jong is looking at the time of the contact. He said after the game that he went in hard but didn’t intend to get Nagbe’s ankle. This could be lip service. Those accusing De Jong of intending to hurt Nagbe may be looking at the Dutchman’s history, which brings us to precedent.
While there’s lots of history and data on the Disciplinary Committee adding retroactive red cards, we don’t have much precedent for multi-game suspensions. The most well-known one was the Mullan tackle on Zakuani, which was much more egregious in principle and in result. There are lots of one game suspension cases, not that many 2-5 game suspension cases.
The other side of precedent is De Jong’s reputation. U.S. Men’s National Team fans are well aware that he is partially responsible for the downfall of Stewart Holden. Then there’s that kick to Xabi Alonso’s chest in the 2010 World Cup final.
Players with history should not be given the benefit of the doubt and De Jong wasn’t. This suspension is clearly a warning to De Jong if there’s a next time. Another bad foul like this one, and they could throw the book at him. Had De Jong slid in studs up and/or if Nagbe was out long term, I think De Jong would have been given a suspension on par with Mullan (and rightfully so).
This punishment was an extension of the league’s initiative to clean up play, just like the recent spike in red cards.
Baggio Husidic will take his place in the meantime.
The good news for Bruce Arena is that he has central midfield reinforcements on the way. Steven Gerrard returned and started against Houston. Jeff Larentowicz is back in training. Expect Gerrard and Husidic to start together in some capacity as they did against Houston. De Jong has already served one of his three games. The club should be able to patch things up and be ok against Real Salt Lake and at Sporting Kansas City.
