There was an irony that it was Calvert-Lewin who was involved in another potential hair-pulling incident in a high-profile match, this time as the perpetrator. Viewers watched on as, midway through the first half, there seemed to be downward contact from Calvert-Lewin\u2019s hand on Cucurella\u2019s hair.<\/p>\n
As the Leeds <\/a>forward moved his hand away, the long, curly hair also flicked up in the same direction, implying some form of pull. Cucurella additionally reacted immediately by grabbing the back of his head, as though he had felt force on his hair or scalp.<\/p>\n The incident was not dealt with in real time by on-field referee Jarred Gillett but the match was paused so VAR official Paul Howard could review. Calvert-Lewin was cleared off wrongdoing, with the reason seemingly given that contact was from \u201cthe flat of the hand\u201d\u2014rather than a clenched fist\u2014as relayed by TNT Sports commentator Darren Fletcher, who had real-time access to the VAR process and conversation.<\/p>\n Comparison With Lisandro Mart\u00ednez, Failed Appeal Man Utd lodged an appeal for wrongful dismissal, excessive punishment. | Richard Sellers\/Sportsphoto\/Allstar\/Getty Images<\/p>\n The comparison with the Mart\u00ednez incident was an obvious one to make.<\/p>\n Interim Manchester United manager Michael Carrick called that decision at the time \u201cone of the worst\u201d he\u2019s ever seen. The club lodged an appeal with the FA, claiming that Mart\u00ednez was victim of wrongful dismissal and that the associated three-match ban was \u201cexcessive.\u201d<\/p>\n That appeal was rejected<\/a> on the basis that the presiding regulatory commission did not feel \u201cwith any confidence\u201d that the \u201cforce exerted\u201d by Mart\u00ednez on Calvert-Lewin\u2019s hair\/scalp was \u201cnegligible.\u201d Taken into account was the reaction of Calvert-Lewin, which \u201csuggested that he had felt a certain amount of force exerted upon his hair\/scalp.\u201d As a result, the VAR interpretation of the incident as a hair pull was considered \u201creasonable\u201d and therefore not an \u201cobvious error.\u201d<\/p>\n #MUNLEE<\/a> \u2013 54\u2019 VAR OVERTURN<\/p>\n After VAR review, the referee issued a red card to Mart\u00ednez for violent conduct. <\/p>\n Referee announcement: \u201cAfter review, Manchester United 6 is guilty of pulling his hair – violent conduct. Final decision is red card.\u201d<\/p>\n \u2014 Premier League Match Centre (@PLMatchCentre) April 13, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n It was the conclusion of that verdict against Mart\u00ednez which is making Manchester United<\/a> fans feel particularly sick and the wider soccer world questioning the consistency of officiating in England\u2014a clear hair pull from Fulham\u2019s Kenny Tete on Manchester City\u2019s Antoine Semenyo during a Premier League match in February also went completely unpunished.<\/p>\n The Mart\u00ednez case effectively summarized that a hair pull, no matter how slight, is inherently bad and should be punished as such to erase it from of the sport: \u201cIn the wider interests of football \u2018hair pulling\u2019 ought not to be tolerated and should be discouraged through consistent punishment,\u201d the FA panel argued.<\/p>\n But an apparent hair pull from Calvert-Lewin, even very minor, was not treated in the same way.<\/p>\n READ THE LATEST SOCCER NEWS, ANALYSIS AND INSIGHT FROM SI FC![\"Lisandro](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/01kq5b8tyytwxpced7zz.jpg\" "\\"Lisandro")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.minutemediacdn.com\/platform\/google_discover_icon.svg\"){kind=icon}
Add us as a preferred source on GoogleFollow<\/a>