Virgil van Dijk facing additional ban as Liverpool captain is hit with FA charge
Posted by  badge Boss on Aug 29
Virgil van Dijk was sent off in Liverpool’s 2-1 win over Newcastle United on Sunday (Getty)

Virgil van Dijk is facing an additional ban for his reaction to his red card in Liverpool’s 2-1 win over Newcastle United on Sunday.

The new Liverpool captain was dismissed in the first half at St James’ Park for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity after fouling Alexander Isak.

Van Dijk, who will serve a one-game ban for his red card, was furious with the decision and reacted angrily to referee John Brooks as he left the pitch.

The FA has been keen to clamp down on abuse towards match officials and have now charged Van Dijk for his conduct.

A statement from The FA read: ‘ has been charged with a break of FA Rule .1 following Liverpool’s game against on Sunday, 27 August.

‘It’s alleged that the defender acted in an improper manner and/or used abusive and/or insulting words towards a match official after being sent off in the 29th minute.

‘Virgil van Dijk has until Friday, 1 September to provide a response to this charge.’

Virgil van Dijk is charged with using abusive language towards referee John Brooks (Allstar via Getty)

Meanwhile, former Premier League official Mark Halsey believes Van Dijk deserves a longer ban for his conduct.

‘Van Dijk’s abusive actions at St James’ Park also have an impact on the wider footballing world,’ Halsey wrote in his column for .

‘Van Dijk refused to accept the decision and took a total of two minutes 28 seconds to get down the tunnel from the moment he was dismissed.

‘Van Dijk will rightly receive a one-match ban for the straight red card but I believe his suspension should be increased.

‘Of course, this will depend on Brooks’ official report but the abusive and insulting language used by the new Reds leader could be worthy of another RED CARD and result in an additional three-match ban.

‘That would rule out Van Dijk for four matches in total – a fitting punishment for his poor conduct.’


 and .