The reason Virgil van Dijk was so fuming with red card at Newcastle as referee notes are revealed Load News

VIRGIL VAN DIJK did not accept he deserved a red card at Newcastle – because he had got away with a similar tackle a week earlier.

Liverpool skipper van Dijk will serve an extra one-match ban against Wolves on Saturday for his reaction after being dismissed for bringing down Toon striker Alexander Isak.

Virgil van Dijk has been given an extra one match banCredit: Rex

Van Dijk picked up a red card against Newcastle for a tackle on Alexander IsakCredit: Reuters

And the full written reasons of the FA commission where Dutch defender van Dijk admitted his misconduct charge – also leading to a £100,000 fine – show the Liverpool skipper felt he was the victim of inconsistent officiating.

But van Dijk WOULD have been hit with a second extra game and additional £50,000 were it not for his clean disciplinary record.

While there was dispute between Liverpool and the FA over whether the player was calling referee John Brooks “an absolute f***ing joke” – or merely showing his anger at the decision, the commission deemed that immaterial.

In his submissions to the commission, van Dijk confirmed he had “immediately” apologised to both Brooks and fourth official Craig Pawson in the St James’ Park tunnel at the end of the game.

Get £20 in free bets when you stake £5 on football with Ladbrokes

Van Dijk said: “Mr Brooks and Mr Pawson accepted my apology and acknowledged that they understood the emotion of the game had been a significant factor.”

On his behalf, Liverpool, though, explained: “The player wishes to convey that his frustration arose from his genuine belief that his tackle on Alexander Isak was a fair challenge and not a foul.

“In our discussions with the player about the incident, he has explained to us that he did the same or a very similar tackle against Dominic Solanke during the match against Bournemouth the week before and that tackle was not deemed a foul.

“This seemingly inconsistent approach contributed to the player’s frustration.”

Liverpool added: “He is adamant that he did not call the Referee a ‘f***ing joke’ and that he was referring to the referee’s decision and the subsequent decision by the VAR not to overturn the decision when he said ‘absolute f***ing joke’.”

Although Liverpool pointed out that van Dijk was awaiting VAR confirmation of Brooks’ call before leaving the pitch, he was found to have ignored orders to go off “for approximately 15 seconds”.

John Brooks was the man who gave van Dijk his marching ordersCredit: Alamy

The Liverpool defender vented his frustration at Brooks regarding the decisionCredit: Reuters

The three-man commission of Bradley Pritchard, former Sheffield United striker Tony Agana and Mick Kearns explained: “This contributed to the prolonged nature of the incident.

“We further noted the impact of the actions used by Virgil van Dijk.

“Despite the clear frustration he felt at the time, it was inappropriate to display it in the manner he did; specifically his body language and hand gestures towards the referee.

“This was further exacerbated upon leaving the field of play when he continued to protest to the fourth official on the touchline, and only ceasing when his manager intervened.

“Such actions are highly inappropriate and avoidable. His actions and words fell significantly short of the core principles of behaviour.”

Explaining the punishment, the commission ruled to accept the FA’s “starting point” of a two match ban and £150,000 fine, reducing the sentence because of van Dijk’s admission of the charge and previous good record.