Violence Returns to V-League: Two Incidents in Dong Nai - CAHN and the Cards That Were Never Shown

In the match between Dong Nai and Cong An Ha Noi (CAHN) on 20 September, Dong Nai defender Le Van Son threw an elbow at striker Nguyen Dinh Bac. In the same game, Dong Nai centre-back Huynh Tan Sinh repeatedly kicked Dinh Bac from behind, striking twice. One attacker targeted by two opponents in a single match is an image that should stop anyone working in football. What makes it heavier is how both incidents were handled on the pitch, and that gap led directly to a meeting between the league organisers, the Vietnam Professional Football Joint Stock Company (VPF), the Vietnam Football Federation (VFF) and the VFF Referees Board. The two incidents did not arrive alone. In round 2 of the 2026-2027 V-League season, centre-back Doan Van Hau (CAHN) broke the leg of midfielder Doan Ngoc Tan (The Cong Viettel). In the same round, foreign player Ezequiel Santos Da Silva (Nam Dinh) stamped on the stomach of Vo Huu Viet Hoang (SHB Da Nang). Four incidents across three matches and two rounds, including two serious injuries. That density is enough to put the V-League at risk of a return of on-pitch violence, something that has eroded the competition's image for years. The response from the governing bodies was swift. Representatives of the VFF, the VPF and the V-League organisers met the VFF Referees Board directly. The message was wrapped in a single demand: referees must apply the laws correctly, preserve the discipline of the competition and stop violent behaviour on the pitch. The phrase "apply the laws correctly" has to be read in its narrowest sense, meaning missed fouls and missed cards cannot be tolerated. The discipline of a league is decided by whether its rulebook reaches the grass, not by how many pages it fills. And precisely there, the Dong Nai - CAHN match left a specific mark. For the challenge in which centre-back Huynh Tan Sinh played the man instead of the ball against Dinh Bac, referee Le Vu Linh only issued a yellow card. He did not produce a red, even though Tan Sinh kicked Dinh Bac twice off the ball. Missing a red card in a deliberate act of violence is the kind of error whose consequences last longer than the incident itself: it teaches players that the price of a bad challenge may only be a yellow card, and teaches the rest of the league that the laws can be relaxed depending on the moment. Former VFF Vice President for professional affairs and former head of the VFF Referees Board, Duong Vu Lam, told Dan Tri reporters after the match: "Referee Le Vu Linh missed a card in relation to this incident. Huynh Tan Sinh played the man far too blatantly, yet did not receive a red card." Lam then pushed the issue a step further: "If Tan Sinh is to be suspended retroactively for this foul, then referee Le Vu Linh must be suspended from officiating in the same way. In addition, the responsibility of the VAR team must be clarified. If the VAR team (comprising Mr Vo Hoai Thuong and Mr Nguyen Thanh Son) advised the main referee but was overruled by him, then the VAR team did its job. Conversely, if the VAR team did not advise main referee Le Vu Linh that a red card should be used for the foul described above, those VAR referees must also be dealt with." What stands out in that statement is the word "if". The responsibility of the VAR team is not presented as a conclusion but as a branch of investigation: either the VAR officials worked and were overruled, or they stayed silent. The two possibilities lead to opposite conclusions about individuals, yet both lead to one issue: a support system is operating without anyone being able to verify whether it actually operates. VAR was introduced to reduce errors, but any system only carries value when the public knows whether it intervened. Here, the way discipline is handled becomes the real subject. Sanctions against referees are usually not published widely. According to former VFF Referees Board head Duong Vu Lam: "just watch the list of referees in the following rounds and you will know whether the officials concerned have been suspended. If they are not appointed in the rounds immediately after the round just played, there is a strong chance they are being disciplined." In other words, the punishment exists, but it is only recognised through absence. A player who commits a foul and is suspended gets an announcement, a duration and a news line. A referee who errs simply disappears from the appointment list, and fans must draw their own conclusions. A disciplinary mechanism that the public can only detect by guessing is a mechanism weakening itself. The retroactive punishment mechanism in the V-League has long worked fairly clearly for players: footage is reviewed, the disciplinary committee issues a decision, the suspension length is published for the press. The problem is that this mechanism only runs in one direction. The same incident, the same footage, yet the player receives a public sanction while the referee receives a silent one. Nobody writes that asymmetry into the regulations, but everyone can feel it. I still remember the feeling of sitting through V-League match footage in recent seasons, based on my own experience watching matches from J.League stands to editing sessions in Nagoya. What lingers is not speed or physicality but the silence after a bad challenge. A player goes down, the whistle blows, the stands shout, and then it all drifts away. No explanation, no voice stepping forward to accept responsibility. The ball rolls across generations, yet the heartbeat of supporters never changes — they still wait for a clear answer, and often do not get one. Nagoya taught me that every voice longs for a stand, including the whistle. Referees do not need a microphone for every challenge, but they need a channel of explanation after the match, where their decisions are placed on the table and dissected by the same standard players must accept. The VFF and the VPF have asked the Referees Board to apply the laws correctly; the logical next step is to demand transparency as well. If VAR intervened, say so. If a referee is suspended, publish it. A professional football environment cannot manage discipline on the assumption that fans will not notice. There are sporting moments that never die, they only depart from the clock. A forgotten red card in the Dong Nai - CAHN match on 20 September may fade as the season moves on. But how the league responds to that error will last far longer: it decides whether the 2026-2027 season teaches young players that a bad challenge is forbidden, or teaches them that it only costs when someone is watching. Nguyen Dinh Bac escaped serious injury this time. The open question concerns the next time.