Gabriel Martinelli has expressed his concern over a dangerous tackle from Christian Nørgaard during Arsenal’s Premier League match against Brentford, suggesting the challenge could have resulted in a serious injury.
The Arsenal forward was on the receiving end of a heavy challenge from the Brentford midfielder, which sparked immediate reactions from supporters and commentators alike. Despite the force and recklessness of the tackle, Nørgaard was only shown a yellow card by the match official. This decision has since caused debate, with many Arsenal fans believing a red card would have been more appropriate given the potential severity of the incident.
Fortunately for Arsenal, Martinelli avoided serious injury and was able to continue playing. However, the Brazilian was visibly frustrated by the nature of the challenge and did not hide his feelings when asked about the incident following the match.
Speaking to Sky Sports, Martinelli said, “I didn’t see that again but in my opinion, in the moment, if my foot was on the floor he could break my leg.
“He said he didn’t mean it, I believe him, but still, you know, he could have [broken] my leg.
“For me, it was red. I need to see it again to be sure. But yeah, for me, it was nasty.”
The tackle has reignited discussions about consistency in officiating and the interpretation of dangerous play in the Premier League. Incidents like this, when only met with a yellow card, raise legitimate concerns about player safety and whether referees are taking the appropriate actions to protect players from reckless challenges.
Arsenal supporters have become increasingly vocal when it comes to perceived injustices on the pitch, and many view incidents like this as examples of leniency towards opponents that could have serious consequences.
Martinelli is a vital part of Mikel Arteta’s squad, particularly as Arsenal continue to push on multiple fronts both domestically and in Europe. Ensuring the fitness of key players like him will be essential in the coming weeks, and such tackles only serve to increase anxiety over the physical toll of the season.
______________________________________________________________________________________
ADMIN COMMENT
So here are some simple rules which I must insist commenters follow….
You agree not to give any personal abuse to other Arsenal fans. Everyone is allowed to hold their own opinions even if you disagree with them. It COSTS NOTHING TO BE POLITE TO OTHER ARSENAL FANS.
CALLING ALL ARSENAL FANS! Anyone who would like to contribute an Article or Video opinion piece on JustArsenal, please contact us through this link…
The inconsistentcey in officiating continues, my take on the referees transgressions are well documented
Like when Skelley didn’t get a second yellow at PSV ?
Come on Dan, he too has been on the wrong end of very suspicious officiating recently
Or like when Mr Oliver didn’t want to spoil the spectacle of the game when it suited city115, but not when it suited The Arsenal eh Dan?
Should a red card have been shown for the tackle this article is on about Dan?
Truthfully seen them given
Wasn’t stonewall
Rice tackle at Newcastle was just as bad
Or when Mr Oliver didn’t listen to VAR and awarded our goal despite a clear handball ?
You are highlighting more inconsistencies and you are saying it… as if you think you’re refuting the case that refereeing is inconsistent.
Gotta wonder: what case are you trying to make exactly?
Simply that this idea it’s only Arsenal is simply not true
Going off the rails more then conspiracy theories and pretending Arsenal get picked on to hide we are not good enough to win the league?
Lol the irony
What exactly is “going off the rails” in this context?
All that’s really occurring is that some Arsenal fans believe the club suffers from the obvious refereeing inconsistency while other clubs benefit. It annoys them – which shouldn’t be a surprise.
Using such over-emotive language to describe their feelings really isn’t very helpful imo.
I happen to be one of those get the impression that Arsenal lose out on the rubbish refereeing standards. And it also seems to happen season after season.
I have no hard stats or empirical evidence to support that, as I said in my other post, it’s just based on reading game reports and forming an overall impression of how controversial decisions are affecting various clubs. Probably the same info that everyone else has, althoough some people will watch a lot more football than I do, they may be better placed to decide – but the controversial decisions do get reported, so it’s not a bad basis for forming a view.
Did anyone ever suggest that it’s “only” Arsenal?
It could be that Arsenal suffers more from bad decisions working against than any benefits from bad decisions that work in Arsenal’s favour.
It looks that way to many fans from seeing the reports (not many people watch every game and remember every questionable decision) but we’d need to see stats to be more sure – and everyone would need to agree which decisions are “bad” and which are “ok”.
All I can say is that it does feel that way, from what we see reported when you compare Arsenal to other clubs at the top. At the other end of the scale, some other clubs like Wolves seem to get a bum deal, but they’re not competing to win the PL – the worry for Arsenal fans is that their biggest rivals are getting the benefit of inconsistent decisions. That’s how it seems to me and many others, without empirical evidence, but assessing reports.
Note: When a game report has (say) a title “Liverpool win after controversial last minute penalty awarded” and another is “Arsenal lose after Martinelli uniquely sees two yellows in 2 seconds”… it creates a concern that Arsenal is suffering from this problem more than their rivals.
That’s without geting into the underlying reasons – I didn’t mention “corruption” or even “bias”.
Not you but yes many have either said or hinted that Arsenal get mistreated
Equally I shouldn’t be accused of going off the rails for my opinion
Try reading it again. You used the words “going off the rails” in the post I responded to. That’s why I asked what it meant in this context.
You wrote this:
“Going off the rails more then conspiracy theories and pretending Arsenal get picked on to hide we are not good enough to win the league?”
It wasn’t easy to understand what you were on about, but the only way ity made any sense is that you seemed to be accusing people who think Arsenal is getting a bad deal out of these inconsistencies of “going off the rails” about it.
No mate in response to someone else saying I was going off the rails
Reply @Dan – since the Reply button has disappeared now for some reason…
Your “going off the rails” post was a reply to one of my posts. I guess you pressed the wrong Reply button.
PSV isn’t the Premier League though. We haven’t had much complaints in the Champions League. The refereeing in the EPL is riddled with incompetence if we are being honest. It’s not just Arsenal complaining by the way.
Like Rice tackle against Newcastle?
I can’t remember that particular tackle; my memory isn’t my greatest asset. All I know is that every weekend we hear complaints by players,managers,fans and pundits about the standard of refereeing in the Prem. And it isn’t something new. Wenger was consistently mocked for bringing up such complaints. There won’t be change unless people are allowed to express their displeasure.
By the way if Rice was in the wrong,it’s still an injustice to Newcastle so the whole point of incompetence is still valid.
You are going off the rail now Dan
100 percent mate
As long as we agree it’s not just Arsenal which not everyone on here says
It’s not just Arsenal for sure, but this season, Arsenal have lost considerably more than they have gained due to refereeing errors. You’d expect they’d cancel out over a season but that hasn’t been the case. It’s such things that give room for conspiracy theories about bias/corruption.
That is the key point – many people believe that Arsenal lose more than they gain, and more so than most clubs. Wolves might have something to say about that.
I’ve not seen anyone suggest that it’s “only” Arsenal. Dan’s debating toolkit involves mis-stating other people’s position so that he has something to go at.
When you look at the record in the PL of Arsenal and Liverpool this season, Liverpool’s lost 2 games, Arsenal lost 3.
Arsenal had 5 more draws – that’s 10 points gone right there. One goal in a drawn game can make a massive difference.
Just looking at the recent game v Everton, the soft penalty cost 2 points. There were spurious sendings off early in the season which would affect the result of those games. What would Liverpool fans point to? I don’t know, I’m genuinely asking the question in the interests of balance.
If you were to add up the questionable decisions for each club… it feels to me as though Arsenal’s had another season where decisions affected their league position more than it has for Liverpool.
Would Arsenal be good enough to win the PL if all these decisions were made correctly? Dunno. But I’d like to have had the chance to find out.
Lastly, what really annoys Arsenal fans is that the refs making the bad decisions seem to be the same ones each season. Is that a coincidence? I wonder – who decides who refs each match?
But then i.can think of big decisions that went against Liverpool last season so it’s not another season
Please list them. That’s the sort of stats we want. Compare them to the number taht went against Arsenal, see how many for each club, how much they affected games etc.
Ofc last season Liverpool were not in the race, so it would be Arsenal stats v City stats we’d be looking at.
Well no because you could make the argument that big decisions cost Liverpool being in the title race ?
This idea that it’s always goes against Arsenal is just made up
Can think of massive decisions that went in our favour last season.
How many times does it have to be said to you? Nobody is saying that it’s ONLY Arsenal.
Try debating properly – don’t misrepresent what people are saying to give yourself something to go after. It’s a waste of everyone’s time.
P.S. your first sentence made no sense at all.
It wasn’t remotely in my thoughts to make that argument, only to see how bad decisions were affecting all clubs and see if some clubs are negatively affected more than others.
BUT… If I could make that argument, based on stats… then it would be correct, since it was based on the stats. So I have to ask myself why you would mind that…
The only explanation I can see is that you’re only interested in winning an argument, not to get at the truth of the matter.
Basically: wasting everyone’s time, as usual.
And you can’t do that as you would have to break down every decision
No you’d only have to list the controversial decisions, not all decisions.
Then categorise them so as to only conider the ones that affected the outcome of matches.