Panel backs Arteta over 'unacceptable' Sunderland penalty call

Credit: Getty Images

The Premier League's Key Match Incidents panel has unanimously ruled that referee John Brooks was wrong to award Sunderland a penalty against Arsenal, agreeing 5:0 that Ezri Konsa did not foul Dan Ballard in the box during the Gunners' 2-0 win on Wearside.

The spot-kick, given on 12 September, ultimately cost Sunderland nothing on the scoreboard — David Raya saved the penalty before Bruno Guimaraes and Bukayo Saka struck to seal the three points for the visitors.

But the decision itself dominated the post-match conversation, with Mikel Arteta making his feelings clear in no uncertain terms.

Arteta's verdict now supported

"Look, the first question that we have to discuss is, and this is not acceptable at this level, because it was a beautiful game of football, with two teams, with an atmosphere in this stadium, it was unbelievable," Arteta said after the match.

"With Sunderland they are so well organised, they are so good in so many phases, they have great players, they create a lot of issues. We have to cope with all of that, because it was a lot in a really difficult week, after Chelsea and Napoli.

"And on top of that, we have to go through what we've done today, that in my opinion is not acceptable. And I watched it 20 times, and I cannot find a way to understand how we even think to give a penalty in that situation, or the way the VAR has to intervene. So I don't know what to think, really."

Football.london understands Arsenal were in dialogue with PGMOL chief Howard Webb over the incident.

VAR call splits the panel

The panel's statement explained the reasoning behind the unanimous verdict on the on-field call. "The panel unanimously felt that the referee's call of a penalty for a holding offence was incorrect. Although it was a very untidy challenge in which Konsa initially had arms around Ballard, Ballard engages in a holding action, which pulls Konsa onto him, so they both fall to the floor."

Where the panel was not unanimous was on VAR. The decision not to intervene and overturn Brooks' call was supported by a 3:2 margin.

"The non-VAR intervention was supported, 3:2, with the majority considering that the on-field decision was not a clear and obvious error, given the combined actions from both players," the statement read.

Two other flashpoints from the afternoon were also reviewed. The late penalty awarded to Arsenal for a foul on Saka — which drew complaints from sections of the home support — was backed unanimously.

"The on-field award of a penalty was supported with an initial holding action by Reinildo followed by a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball - tripping Saka inside the penalty area," the panel said.

A separate coming-together between Tzolis and Mukiele was also judged correctly as no penalty by a 5:0 vote, with the contact deemed "below the threshold for a foul".

The retrospective ruling does not change the scoreline, and in this instance Arsenal did not need it to. The wider question of the VAR threshold for intervention, however, is one the panel itself could not agree on — and it is unlikely to be the last time it is raised this season.