Should Chelsea striker Diego Costa be handed more than a three-match ban for his recent behaviour? We discuss the options…
In Daily Debate, two TEAMtalk writers give their views on a hot topic and then invite readers to decide who has put forward the best argument.
You can vote for your winner using the story comment facility at the bottom of the article, or by declaring your support on Twitter.
Should the FA give Diego Costa more than a three-match ban?
Diego Costa has been charged by the FA with violent conduct after an incident with Arsenal’s Laurent Koscielny was caught on video.
Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger said Costa should have been sent off after grappling with Koscielny, pushing the defender in the face with his hands before catching him with a flailing arm, in the first half of Chelsea’s 2-0 win at Stamford Bridge – the incident not being spotted by referee Mike Dean.
The striker is likely to be handed a three-match ban if found guilty, but should the FA throw the book at the Chelsea forward?
Yes – he needs to be taught a lesson. James Marshment (@marshyleeds)
Diego Costa’s behaviour in this match was unsavoury to say the least and there’s only one way to describe his antics: it was cheating!
OK, so you can also criticise Gabriel for being naive and for getting involved; I’d certainly say the Arsenal defender was more than a little foolish for falling into Costa’s trap. But I’d also argue that the red card handed to Gabriel was the biggest factor in Chelsea gaining the upper hand over Arsenal and earning victory in this game.
No wonder Arsene Wenger was upset.
Just how crucial could this result be at the end of the season?
I notice the FA are only charging Costa though for his actions against Koscielny – but why has his spat with Gabriel been overlooked? You tot up all these offences and you’d surely be looking at more than a three-match ban? Despite his escape during the match, Costa could easily have been sent off three times over.
And it’s not as if the FA hasn’t set a precedent in the past for overly-aggressive behaviour on the pitch – Paul Davis was hit with a nine-match ban in 1988, while Paolo Di Canio was given 11 games for famously pushing referee Paul Adcock in 1998.
I’m not for one minute comparing the severity of these three incidents, but perhaps an additional one game or two – on top of the three he’ll likely receive – would be sufficient punishment and might possibly make the Chelsea man think twice about employing underhand tactics again in the future.
No – a three-match ban is adequate. Matt Briggs (@mattpbriggs)
It was handbags, nothing more.
It was also great timing from Costa, who has taken all the attention off Chelsea’s poor start to the season, with his actions on Saturday.
In the heat of a London derby battle, what Costa did was no worse than we’ve seen down the years. He caught Koscielny with a couple of flailing arms – whether intentionally or unintentionally we’ll never know.
He then chest barged him, before squaring up to Gabriel, who then kicked out at Costa and was dismissed.
Had Gabriel not kicked out, then the whole affair would probably have gone under the radar.
I do think the referee Mike Dean has a lot to answer for after allowing the melee to occur. His control of the game or lack of it was worrying.
Had Costa simply been booked immediately for his challenge on Koscienly the whole affair would have not developed.
But regardless of that fact, Costa is a fierce competitor and although he’s been widely criticised, there are certainly more Premier League managers who would have him in their side than wouldn’t.
A three-match ban is enough punishment for the player, who former defender Danny Higginbotham described as “an old school centre-forward playing against new age centre-backs”.