Well let’s unpack this logic here:
Gabriel is already going for the ball so he can’t be fouled, right?
So, given that logic, Kai Havertz then should NOT see red because his opponent too had already made a move for the ball? Can’t have it both ways ya?
Correct.
But, using their logic:
Gabriel is already in motion to play ball so 2 hands pushing on the back of his neck, which is a foul everywhere on the pitch, has no consequence whatsoever to his ability to play the ball.
Why would we then not judge every foul the same way? Kai only went in on a guy that was already in motion to play a ball.
I’m picking on the logic they’re using to define the non foul on Gabriel.