card

Leeds United manager Daniel Farke says he “will never jog again” after being “embarrassed in front of the whole world” by his red card at the end of Saturday’s home defeat by Manchester City.

Farke, 49, headed straight on to the Elland Road pitch at the final whistle to confront referee Peter Bankes, aggrieved at several decisions in his side’s hard-fought 1-0 loss in the Premier League.

Farke, sent off for the first time in his 16-year managerial career, said he did not swear or use threatening language towards Bankes and his fellow officials, and that he was shown the red card before he said anything.

He gave an 11-minute answer when asked about the incident in his news conference for Tuesday’s match with Sunderland (19:30 GMT).

“I jogged over,” he said. “Not one bad word. No swear words or bad language. I just wanted to ask him why he didn’t add any [further stoppage time] on. He didn’t speak to me and just pulled out the red card.

“To pull out a red card and embarrass me in front of the whole world, I wasn’t happy. Even the assistants were shocked the red card was shown. This is not how we should work with each other. I have so much respect for the referees.

“I don’t think Peter did it on purpose, he just misjudged it. I will never jog again.”

The former Norwich boss could appeal against the dismissal but is yet to decide if he will.

“I’m not sure what the processes are and when we can appeal it,” he said. “I can just give you my gut feeling this should not be a red card.

“When there has been a clear and obvious mistake, and for me this was a clear and obvious mistake, it should be overturned. This is what I’ve experienced when players have a red card by mistake, it can be overturned, and I expect the same.”

Former Premier League defender Curtis Davies said the decision was an “absolute disgrace”.

“Kelly goes up for a header, he’s gone for the header cleanly. His feet have to land on the ground somewhere,” he added on BBC Radio 5 Live.

“Unfortunately, he lands on the player. There needs to be a level of understanding – where is he meant to put his feet? I understand Kelly’s frustration.”

Davies’ sentiments were echoed by football journalist Rory Smith, who called the decision “awful” and a “disgrace”.

Meanwhile, former Tottenham midfielder Andy Reid felt football was “moving closer and closer to being a non-contact sport”.

“There needs to be contact in football and sometimes people do get painful ones. It happens. There’s nothing you can do about that. It’s part of the game,” he said.

According to Uefa rules, any player sent off by the referee – whether that is via two yellows or a straight red – is automatically suspended for the next match in European club competition.

However, in light of Juventus’ exit from the Champions League, Kelly’s suspension will carry over to next season.

Former Manchester City defender Nedum Onuoha added: “If I was Kelly I’d be really disappointed, but with how football works, it’s always going to be a red.”

But former Liverpool full-back Stephen Warnock disagreed.

“I don’t agree with it because it is purely accidental. I understand the yellow card, but not the red,” he said.

Celtic say VAR in Scotland “needs urgently reviewed” after their unsuccessful appeal against the red card shown to Auston Trusty in their Scottish Premiership defeat by Hibernian, with the defender now to serve a three-match ban.

St Mirren were successful in challenging Richard King’s sending off in Saturday’s loss to Motherwell and his ban was overturned.

Trusty, 27, was dismissed with the score 1-1 at Celtic Park following an incident with Hibs’ Jamie McGrath as the pair jostled at a corner. The defending champions lost 2-1.

The defender will be banned for three games, including Sunday’s Old Firm derby at Rangers, before Scottish Premiership games away at Aberdeen and at home to Motherwell.

On February 16, a group of Palestinian footballers, clubs and advocacy groups referred the heads of FIFA and UEFA to the International Criminal Court (ICC). The 120-page filing accuses Gianni Infantino and Aleksander Čeferin of “aiding and abetting war crimes (specifically, the transfer of civilian population into occupied territories) and crimes against humanity (specifically, apartheid)”.

This historic case marks the first time sports leaders are being accused of these crimes and sends a warning to presidents of all other corporate entities in and beyond athletics. It offers a perfect opportunity to challenge the impunity of Israeli apartheid, occupation and genocide.

Football is the world’s most popular form of cultural expression, with some five billion fans across the planet. Therefore, the stakes of this charge are immense in terms of the spectacle of accountability and legal precedent.

In the course of its campaign in Gaza, of genocide generally and “athleticide” particularly, Israel has killed 1,007 Palestinian sportspeople and destroyed 184 sports facilities, while damaging 81 others.

Although this “athleticide” cannot be directly attributed to the Israel Football Association (IFA), its activities linked to clubs from illegal Israeli settlements located on the occupied Palestinian territory and their participation in domestic and international tournaments can be seen as abetting Israeli crimes of occupation and apartheid.

Despite facing demands for the suspension of these clubs or the IFA, UEFA and FIFA leadership have taken no action. In a recent interview, FIFA chief Infantino said he opposed a ban on Israeli teams from participation in global football, calling it “a defeat”. He went on to add that he was in favour of enshrining in FIFA statutes that no country should ever be banned from “playing football because of the acts of their political leaders”.

Ironic, when you consider he is the very person who oversaw the suspension of Russia from FIFA in 2022 and the banning of Crimean clubs from playing in the Russian league, linked to UEFA, after the Russian occupation of the Ukrainian peninsula in 2014.

The complaint is filed against Infantino and Čeferin because private organisations cannot be defendants before the ICC, but those individuals responsible for their policies can be.

The focus of the complaint is the fact that the IFA has been permitted to materially support, recognise, and include in domestic and international competitions clubs that are based in the stolen settlement land of the occupied West Bank.

Article 64(2) of FIFA Statutes prohibits member associations and their clubs from playing on the territory of another member association without the latter’s approval.

The complaint alleges that by allowing the IFA to oversee clubs that operate on stolen land, Infantino and Čeferin are accountable for normalising illegal Israeli settlements, in direct contravention of a 2024 pronouncement by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and a resolution from the United Nations General Assembly, which found the settlements to be “unlawful” and required Israel to “cease immediately all new settlement activities, and to evacuate all settlers from the Occupied Palestinian Territory”.

The existence of sanctioned Israeli clubs in West Bank settlements, the referral argues, contributes to the transfer of the civilian population into the occupied territory, contrary to the Rome Statute Article 8(2)(b)(viii), by normalising colonisation.

Likewise, because Israeli clubs in the occupied territory prohibit Palestinians from spectating matches or playing for or managing these teams, the continued sanction of these organisations falls under the definition of aiding and abetting apartheid (a crime against humanity pursuant to Rome Statute Article 7(1)(j).

In continuing to allow the membership of these clubs and the IFA in global and European sport, the filing alleges that Infantino and Čeferin have acted in full knowledge that they have participated in the violation of international law based on the fact that they have deliberately ignored numerous reports and letters advising them to intervene.

Now that the complaint has been formally filed, the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC will conduct a preliminary examination to confirm that the elements of jurisdiction, admissibility, and the interests of justice have been satisfied. They will then have the option to either decline to open the investigation or proceed to investigate the legal issues raised in the complaint.

If an investigation does ensue, evidence-gathering will occur and arrest warrants or summonses may ultimately be issued. If that happens, this would set an important precedent and give momentum to the campaign for justice for Palestine.

It is notable that while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been able to dodge an ICC arrest warrant by cowering away from Rome Statute signatory states, it would be impossible for Infantino and Čeferin to do so while still fulfilling their roles, assuming it is enforced.

Football is, without question, one of the most popular sports on the planet. When such a cultural juggernaut is connected to business, what emerges is an industry like no other. FIFA and UEFA are global regulatory monopolies, meaning their rules and regulations act the same way a country’s legislation acts on its population. They also preside over a huge, lucrative industry worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

Given the amount of eyeballs and money at stake, the impact of a ban on participation is enormous, as Russia understands all too well after being subjected to suspension. This is no doubt exactly why the presidents of these organisations have refused to act against Israel under the guise of “political neutrality”.

As former UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory, Michael Lynk, told us: “When an occupying power is blatantly committing war crimes by creating civilian settlements in occupied territory, the rest of the world – including states, corporations and international sporting organisations – is required to ensure the enforcement of international law by doing everything in their power to bring the violations to a swift end. Yet, FIFA and UEFA are sportswashing the illegal Israeli occupation by allowing the Israeli Football Association to include clubs based in the illegal settlements to participate in their domestic leagues. Nothing could be further from the rules of fairness and equity.”

The bottom line is that sport is and has always been political. The veneer of “political neutrality” conceals the reality that politics is the name of the game for FIFA and UEFA.

Nobody is entitled to stand above international law. It is time for the ICC to prove it.

The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Pikachu? More like Pi-ka-ching.

A rare Pokémon card owned by wrestler and social media personality Logan Paul sold for $16.5 million on Monday, setting a new record for the auction price of a trading card. Paul had acquired the Pikachu Illustrator card in a trade worth $5.275 million in 2021 — the most expensive Pokémon trading card sold at a private sale at the time.

The retail price for a standard pack of Pokémon cards is usually around $5 for 10 cards — though, much like hunting for shiny Pokémon, successfully purchasing a new pack may require some luck, strategy and patience as the cards have exploded in value in recent years. Paul, who began unboxing Pokémon cards on video during the COVID-19 pandemic, is often credited with helping propel the boom.

Described as an “unimaginable Holy Grail piece,” the card Paul sold features beloved Pokémon mascot Pikachu holding a pen and feather sweeper. The art on the card is by Atsuko Nishida — the graphic artist who designed a number of popular Pokémon, including Pikachu. It is believed only around 40 were ever printed, and they were given out as prizes for an illustration contest in the late 1990s.

The Pikachu Illustrator Pokémon trading card once owned by Logan Paul.

(Goldin)

Paul’s card was graded 10 by Professional Sports Authenticators, or PSA, a third-party service that authenticates and grades trading cards and other collectibles. According to Goldin, the auction house that organized the trading card auction, Paul’s is the only Pikachu Illustrator card to achieve that “virtually perfect” PSA grading.

On top of its rarity and quality, this Pikachu Illustrator card had been placed in a bejeweled case on a diamond necklace and was worn by Paul at WWE WrestleMania 38 in 2022. The card was also featured in Season 3 of Netflix’s “King of Collectibles: The Goldin Touch.”

The winning bid for the rare card was placed by venture capitalist AJ Scaramucci, the son of former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci.

According to People, AJ Scaramucci is on a quest of “collecting the uncollectable.” He reportedly also hopes to eventually buy “a T-Rex dinosaur fossil” and the Declaration of Independence on his “planetary treasure hunt.”

With Alisson marooned upfield for a set-piece as Liverpool searched for a late equaliser, Rayan Cherki kicked the ball towards an empty net.

Haaland gave chase and was clearly going to outpace Dominik Szoboszlai.

The City striker had overtaken Szoboszlai 25 yards from goal and looked certain to win the race – but he was pulled back.

It was a clear foul which referee Craig Pawson identified, but he played an advantage.

As the ball rolled towards the goal with the same two players still jostling to reach it, Liverpool‘s Hungary international was about to slide in and clear it off the line.

Before Szoboszlai could do so, however, Haaland pulled him back, and that stopped the home player from keeping the ball out of the net.

The first pull on Haaland muddies the waters. After all, it seemed Haaland was definitely going to score.

But they are two distinct situations. You have to separate the first foul by Szoboszlai and the subsequent offence from Haaland.

Would Szoboszlai have prevented the goal had he not been fouled? There is a high chance.

On that basis it is impossible for the goal to stand.

Remember that Pawson played advantage. Had Szoboszlai been allowed to successfully keep the ball out, the play would have been brought back and he would have been sent off.

The end result would be the same as the outcome of the VAR intervention: no goal and Szoboszlai sent off for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

If you take out the first pull on Haaland, it is hard to see how anyone could have a problem with the goal being disallowed.

This is not the first time, or the last, that the VAR has correctly disallowed a goal and people really struggle to stomach it.

Yes, the goal could be important for Manchester City at the end of the season. But the goal conceded could also turn out to be vital for Liverpool.