Home » today » Sport » Super League: Referee boss Wermelinger on the “Tosin case”

Super League: Referee boss Wermelinger on the “Tosin case”

VIEW: Dani Wermelinger, the scenes after the 2-0 win by FCZ wing Aiyegun Tosin cause a huge stir. A video has appeared in which one can clearly hear how a St. Galler fan insulted Tosin racially and called him “Scheiss-Mohrenkopf”. Didn’t referee Lukas Fähndrich hear anything?
Dani Wermelinger: No definitely not. Otherwise he would have interrupted the game and acted according to the guidelines of the international guidelines. The referees are encouraged to intervene immediately in the event of racist statements or events. Such things have lost nothing in our stadiums.

There were only around 800 fans in the stadium. Is it really possible to ignore such exclamations?
Yes. The referees have a button in their ear that connects them to the VAR and the assistants. Especially after a gate check, communication is in full swing, it’s hectic. It is therefore understandable that a referee does not register any calls from the stands at this moment.

And what about the referee coach who is sitting in the stands?
The same applies to him.

Another question: why did Tosin actually see yellow after his cheers? He only reacted to the provocations and put his index finger to his mouth.
I talked to Lukas after the game, he interpreted Tosin’s cheering gesture with his index finger in front of his mouth as a provocation towards the audience and showed yellow without knowing what caused Tosin’s reaction.

This gesture has been seen hundreds of times without being punished. The regulations state that you cannot take off your shirt. But since when has the Psst gesture been banned?
Basically it is not. But it is at the discretion of the referee to interpret cheering as a provocation or not. In the case of Lukas, he unfortunately did not know the situation surrounding the provocations of the spectators on the player Tosin.

FCZ coach Ludovic Magnin believes that the yellow card could also be withdrawn due to the events that emerged in retrospect. What do you think?
Since it was a factual decision, this is not possible under the regulations. But I agree with Ludo that the wrong man was punished for once. In this case there is only one clear sanction: red against the grandstand spectator.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.