“I can’t see that as penalty” Lineker disagrees with Arsenal’s winner

Gary Lineker says Arsenal shouldn’t have been awarded a penalty for the foul on Alexandre Lacazette which the Frenchman converted for their winner.

The Gunners had fallen behind and responded through Martin Odegaard.

They were the better side in the game and continued to probe Spurs for another goal.

It eventually came in the second half when Lacazette scored from the penalty spot having been fouled by Davinson Sanchez.

Lineker reacted to the call by the ref on his Twitter account and said that he didn’t consider it to be a penalty.

He tweeted: “I can’t see that as penalty. He’s miss-kicked it completely and booted him in the follow through.”

His take wasn’t welcomed by most Arsenal fans who commented on the post and they made sure he knew what they also thought about the situation.

That win has boosted Arsenal’s chances of ending this season inside the top six and that is something to cheer about.

The Gunners will face Olympiacos next in the Europa League before a trip to West Ham in the Premier League at the weekend.

Tags Gary Lineker

17 Comments

  1. RSH says:

    Lineker needs to learn the basic rules of the game perhaps. Foul in the box = penalty. It doesn’t matter that Lacazette miscontrolled the ball, the play was not over and Sanchez very clearly fouled Laca. What a stupid opinion, salty spud fan.

    1. Theo says:

      Absolutely spot on reasoning & interpretation of the rules.

  2. Shortboygooner says:

    IMO it was a soft penalty. Arguments for and against are tough to decipher. But to be fair a foul is a foul. If that happens further up the pitch the ref blows and gives lacca a foul so for me it is a pen.

    I think arsenal have been shown these tougher rules several times this season and other teams have benifoted from soft penalties so its not so ridiculous. I think back to David lyiz red card I tbink it was against wolves and he actually got a red for trying to get out of the way.

    Right decision going by the other penalties that have been given this season.

    Well done to pepe for the set up all him for that goal

  3. Reggie says:

    What people ie Lineker needs to do is realise a player doesn’t have to have the ball or be in control of a ball to be fouled. If someone takes you out illegally its a foul wether you have the ball or not. The fact Lacca was fouled a fraction of a second after he mis kicked the ball makes no difference, he got to the ball before the defender, who then wrecklessly fouled him and it happened to be in the box, Penalty! What Lineker thinks doesn’t make the rules of football.

  4. Jo-Gunz says:

    He can bucket and bath, we don’t care.

  5. Sean Williams says:

    It was a penalty. The ball was still in play when Lacazette was scythed down. It’s not even opinion, it’s clear he was scythed down. If ever a game deserved to be won by the team who did win it, it was today. We dominated, outplayed and out-muscled the Spuds and showed Mourinho’s poor tactics.

  6. Joe. S says:

    As mentioned by others, if Luiz had been the defender he would most likely have been given a red as well. We’ve seen it all as Arsenal fans this season, so no sympathy there.

  7. Shine says:

    The contact was there and its was not just a touch. There’s pretty physical to me.

    Besides kane is lucky to escape from a red card on our Key Defender. Gabriel.
    Tottenham has been lucky with their yellow cards this season. Much more than Arsenal. Arsenal has not been treated fairly this season by the Var n Referees.

  8. PJ-SA says:

    Very soft penalty

    We’ve had them given against us often this season so I’ll take it

  9. Barber says:

    lets imagine the same situation happened in the middle of the field, it would have been a faul without any doubt. why wouldn’t it be a penalty then? laca manages the ball badly but that becomes insignificant when you see how early sanchez jumps laca and fauls him. it did seem like a soft penalty at first but having seen the footage again there is no doubt about it

  10. Val says:

    it was soft
    I have seen them given and not given
    we all know the consistency of referees in this country is shocking

    above all though

    I DO NOT CARE IF IT WAS OR NOT, WE GOT IT, WE WON = END OF DISCUSSION

    HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHHE

  11. Grandad says:

    Had it been at the other end, I would have been livid, but mostly this season we have been the victim rather than the benefactor.I do not feel one tinge of guilt.

  12. Dan kit says:

    Personally I didn’t thinking it was ,but oh well the amount that have gone against us and it couldn’t have happened against a nicer manager and team .

  13. siamois says:

    Exactly !

  14. LW says:

    Lineker is one biased fellow and a clout chaser. He can go and cry in the toilet as long as 3points are in the bag. Nothing like soft there, that challenge would have coursed a season ending injury to laca if you view the situation well closely. What game was he watching 🤦. Nanzenz!!!.😝😝

  15. LtDan says:

    Lineker, Rednapp, Hoddle, Dawson, Owen, they’re all full of 💩. I don’t need to reiterate some of the comments above that make a note of times when those decisions have gone against us in similar circumstances to Sanchez. But I will say Lineker is just a typical representative of the fickle and contrary nature of football pundits. Even in instances where players clearly impede an opposition player, makes no attempt to get the ball for example if it’s Eric Dier blatantly blocking and shoving a player to stop him getting the ball. The pundit will say ‘He used his body well, was very clever, read the situation’, when everyone else could see a foul was committed in order to gain an advantage. Whereas, if the roles are reversed, it’s an obvious foul and derided as dirty play ! Like I say, the fickle and contrary nature of egregious pundits. They should take a look at some of Kane’s exploits on pitch even yesterday with blatant forearm body smash on Gabriel after he’d cleared the ball. Or where Kane fakes to challenge for an aerial ball and bending downwards and forward, causing the opposing player to pivot over him dangerously head first to the ground. He nearly broke Declan Rice’ neck with that manoeuvre and has done used it continuously. All I’ve heard from pundits is ‘it’s clever play from Kane, using his body well’

    Like I say, they’re all full of 💩

  16. jon fox says:

    WHY DON’T WE ALL BE TOTALLY HONEST AND AT LEAST TRY PUTTING OUR NATURAL FAN BIAS ASIDE! The penalty could well be seen either way and there is nothing specific in the laws of the game to say HOW SOON after a ball is miskicked, an attacker needs a defender to foul him, in order to give away a penalty. It is a grey area therefore.

    That is fact and I have checked with three refs I know , since the incident yesterday. All three say the same thing, just as I report. It was therefore a subjective decision and whichever way it had been seen by Michael Oliver, it would not have been overturned by VAR.

    My own view is that we were fortunate and it was a soft penalty. Though the games result was clearly the deserved one. For both sides, BTW!

Comments are closed

Top Blog Sponsors
JustArsenal Top Ten UK Blogs