Diego Costa charged with violent conduct for stamp on Liverpool’s Can
• Striker set to miss top-of-table game against Manchester City
• Spain forward has until 6pm on Thursday to respond to the charge
• Brendan Rodgers accuses Costa of ‘double stamp’
• José Mourinho fined £25,000 for alleging ‘campaign’
• Match report: Chelsea 1-0 Liverpool
Diego Costa is set to miss Saturday’s critical Premier League collision with the champions, Manchester City, after the Football Association charged the Chelsea striker with violent conduct for his behaviour during Tuesday’s Capital One Cup semi-final second-leg victory over Liverpool.
The Spain international has been sanctioned after the FA’s governance department reviewed video footage of two incidents from the hosts’ 1-0 extra-time win. They deemed he had been guilty of a stamp on Liverpool’s Emre Can 12 minutes into the tie, an offence that went unnoticed by the referee, Michael Oliver.
A second alleged stamp, on Martin Skrtel after the interval, was considered accidental and did not prompt sanction. However, the three-game ban associated with the first offence would rule out Costa against City, the visit to Aston Villa on 7 February and the midweek game against Everton four days later.
The player has until 6pm on Thursday to respond to the charge and is expected to appeal. He technically risks the ban being extended if the panel deem his challenge had “no grounds for success”, though that scenario is unlikely. An independent FA commission will sit on Friday to hear evidence under the governing body’s fast-track system.
“Diego Costa has been charged by the FA for violent conduct following an on-field incident which was not seen by the match officials but caught on video,” confirmed the FA. “The charge is in relation to an incident involving the Chelsea forward and Liverpool’s Emre Can in the 12th minute of the League Cup semi-final second leg. Following a review of an incident during the game involving Costa and Liverpool’s Martin Skrtel, the FA will not be taking any further action.”
Oliver confirmed to the FA on Wednesday that he had not witnessed the two incidents which had so incensed the Liverpool manager, Brendan Rodgers, and his visiting players but which José Mourinho insisted were “accidental”. The referee was then asked by the FA what punishment he would have considered necessary had he seen them first-hand – as per Football League rules – with Oliver confirming he deemed the stamp a red card offence.
Mourinho himself has been fined £25,000 and warned as to his future conduct by the FA after claiming a “campaign” was being mounted against Chelsea in the wake of last month’s draw at Southampton, though the manager has avoided a touchline ban for the comments. An FA hearing was convened before Tuesday’s semi-final, with Mourinho found guilty in absentia of improper conduct for his comments about referees in December, though they concluded the Portuguese had not implied bias.
The Chelsea manager, who was fined three times last season after incidents in games against Cardiff, Aston Villa and Sunderland, had been incensed that Fàbregas had been denied a penalty at St Mary’s following a foul by Matt Targett, with the Spaniard booked by Anthony Taylor for diving. The caution was awarded after several other perceived instances of simulation had been highlighted over previous weeks – involving Costa, Willian, Gary Cahill and Branislav Ivanovic – with Mourinho moved to suggest a media campaign was being instigated against his team, with the inference that it was potentially influencing match officials.
“That’s a campaign, that’s a clear campaign,” he said at the time. “People, pundits, commentators, coaches from other teams – they react with Chelsea in a way they don’t react to other teams. They put lots of pressure on the referee and the referee makes a mistake like this. We lose two points, Fàbregas earns a yellow card. In other countries where I worked before, tomorrow in the sports papers it would be a front-page scandal because it is a scandal.”
Chelsea are awaiting the full written reasoning from the FA before they comment on that sanction.
Guardian
