For smooth red, 2 locks are the minimum. In my opinion, Diaz’s foul was so hard that the minimum is absolutely not enough! Of course it wasn’t intentional, but that should never play a role. An unintentional foul can injure the opponent just as seriously as an intentional one. But what am I really wondering about… when a Top10 club objects, it is always toned down. If Stuttgart, Frankfurt or anyone else objected, the rulers would just laugh contemptuously about it… a 4-game ban would have been the just punishment!
Do you have evidence that confirms your theory? So fouls by players from clubs like you mentioned that are similar to Diaz and were punished more harshly? Punishments in which the association’s appeal was rejected? Or is this just an offer against the clubs you represent or specifically against FC Bayern?
Don’t get me wrong – even as a fan, I’m of the opinion that the three-game suspension is fine. However, I also think two is justifiable, since sometimes intentional assaults are punished with three games. And you said it yourself – Diaz’s serious foul was certainly not intentional. But just hard. So two or three games suspension.
But this superficial assessment on your part, culminating in encouraging the penalty to be increased even to one more game, sounds a little ridiculous in my opinion.