Senba's Red Card: Not a VAR Decision, but a Victory for Football's Laws

Whenever a player is sent off in the tenth minute of a match, the average fan and most journalists ask the same question: "Don't you think the referee made a harsh decision?" Or, "Didn't VAR just ruin the joy of the match?" But the incident in the J1 League Round 10 clash between Mito HollyHock and Urawa Reds actually raises a different question for us. The event: Mito midfielder Taishi Senba, in a midfield duel, stepped on the foot of Urawa's Itsuki Seko. Referee Takafumi Mikuriya initially showed a yellow card, but after VAR intervention and an on-field review, it was upgraded to a red card. What strikes me most about this incident is that the decision-making process is far clearer than the football law itself. The core story of this match isn't the result, but the imbalance created on the pitch during a specific period. Mito HollyHock lost a player in the tenth minute of the first half, reducing them to ten men. This means they were forced to play with a one-man deficit for over eighty minutes. In football, this is considered one of the most adverse situations. Because when a team plays a man down, their possession share, shot volume, and attacking output naturally decrease. Conversely, their defensive duels and foul counts increase significantly. As a result, the match is no longer a contest between two evenly matched sides, but rather Urawa's attack versus Mito's ten-man defense. In such situations, fans often forget that a red card isn't just the application of a rule, but a complete shift in the match's trajectory. From my experience, a ten-man team often withdraws an attacking player in the first half and brings on a defensive midfielder to restructure. This change is tactical but essentially forced. Judging this incident through the lens of football law, Senba's foul falls into one of the most high-risk categories in modern football. According to the International Football Association Board (IFAB) guidelines, when a player's foot lands on an opponent's foot, especially when the studs are exposed and the challenge is made at speed, it is considered 'serious foul play.' In such fouls, the player has no realistic possibility of playing the ball. That's exactly what happened with Senba. The act of stepping on an opponent's foot in a midfield duel is known in football parlance as 'stamping.' In most cases, referees tend to show a yellow card first for such fouls because the incident happens very quickly. But VAR technology provides the opportunity to view that moment repeatedly in slow motion. And when the exposure of the studs and the improbability of playing the ball become clear in that repeated viewing, the upgrade from yellow to red is not just natural, but legally expected. However, there is one aspect that interests me most. It's the misconception people have about VAR's role. After this incident, many said, "VAR gave the red card." But technically, that is a completely wrong sentence. According to football rules, VAR never makes a decision directly. VAR's job is only to advise the referee to conduct an on-field review when there is a possibility of a clear and serious error. The final decision always rests with the on-field referee. Referee Mikuriya went to the monitor beside the pitch, viewed the incident, and then changed the decision himself. This process is fully compliant with Law 5 of the Laws of the Game and the VAR Protocol. So, those blaming VAR are essentially blaming the technology, when technology is just a tool. The real decision was made by the referee. Now comes the part where I want to question my own analysis. The source article does not mention the final result of the match. We don't know if Urawa capitalized on the extra man to score. Not only that, but where the match was played, what Mito's lineup was, or who came on in place of Senba—none of this is known. Without this information, it's impossible to paint a complete picture of the match. So, as an analyst, I've concluded that the most certain and long-term impact of this incident is Senba's suspension, not the match result. The Japan Football Association (JFA) or the J1 League disciplinary committee will impose an automatic ban due to the red card. And if the foul is classified as serious, the ban could be extended. In the previous meeting between Mito and Urawa earlier this season, a Mito player was also sent off. Two red cards in two matches is a small sample, but it hints at a possible disciplinary issue for Mito against this opponent. Ultimately, this incident reminds us of a fundamental truth about football. Football is a game, but it stands on rules. Whenever a player breaks the rules on the pitch, both technology and the referee try to catch it. The question is, are we ready to accept the technology's decision, or do we only support the decision that favors our team? Urawa fans were certainly happy with this decision, while Mito fans were furious. But the rules of the game are equal for everyone. And the beauty of football lies in these equal rules.