Arsenal secured a late equaliser against Bayer Leverkusen in their Champions League round of 16 clash after being awarded a penalty that has since sparked debate about whether the decision was harsh on the German side.
The Gunners were given the spot kick late in the contest following a challenge on the lively Noni Madueke inside the penalty area. Kai Havertz stepped up to convert the opportunity, ensuring Arsenal left Germany with a draw rather than defeat.
Both Madueke and Havertz had been introduced as second-half substitutes, and their involvement proved significant as Arsenal attempted to regain control of a match that had been slipping away from them.
Arsenal Fight Back After Falling Behind
Leverkusen had taken the lead early in the second half and appeared to be on course for an important victory. The German side produced a disciplined performance and managed to frustrate Arsenal for long periods of the match.
Their organisation and determination limited Arsenal’s attacking effectiveness, forcing the visitors to work hard for openings. As the game progressed, it looked increasingly likely that Leverkusen would hold on to secure the win.
Many observers felt the home side deserved credit for the way they controlled large portions of the match and prevented Arsenal from finding any sustained rhythm in their attacking play. For that reason, some believed it was unfortunate for Leverkusen that they did not manage to see out the victory.
Debate Surrounds Late Penalty Decision
The decisive moment arrived when Madueke drove forward and went to ground inside the penalty area following a challenge from a Leverkusen defender. While some felt the decision was soft, the referee awarded the penalty, which Havertz converted to secure the equaliser.
The incident has remained a talking point after the final whistle, with differing opinions on whether the contact justified the decision.
Matthew Upson offered his view on the incident, explaining that although the fall appeared soft, there was still sufficient contact for the decision to stand.
He said, as cited by the BBC: “It stems from Madueke doing what he’s done since coming on the pitch, he drives at players.
“Madueke goes down a little bit softly for me but there is contact and there’s enough for VAR to say ‘we’re going to stay out of it’.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
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, don’t hesitate to get in touch with us through this link…
Rubbish.
That was one of the worst penalties ever given on a football pitch.
I was however happy we got it but that doesn’t change the fact that it was an absolute dive from Madueke.
We’ll beat them at the Emirates
It was a well-earned penalty.
It was a penalty. People may want to call it soft but the player clearly caught Madueke and didn’t get the ball. Really odd to call it one of the worst penalties ever given.
David, he’s probably seen them all😏.
Exactly that. He caught Maduekes foot twice in the challenge. Both can be clearly seen from one of the angles. They weren’t hard impacts but I’ve seen plenty of penalties given for complete dives with no contact (Rooney I’m looking at you!).
After careful review. See how the offenders torso impacts Madueke’s balance – seems the penalty is both fair and honest.
No way a penalty and I’m glad some posters on here aren’t referees or there would be 3 or 4 pens every game and football turned into a completely non contact sport.
100%
I think Madueke dived but the dive came after contact- virtually every footballer would have dived in the circumstances by the way. It’s difficult in real time to see the contact but looking at the replays, you can see it.
It was one of those which could have gone either way-as long as the on pitch ref gave it,there’s no way VAR could overturn it.
That said, I think the referee generally had a terrible game. He ran the game in a militant way and made some terrible decisions for both sides. I think he’d fit right in the PL considering how terrible he was.
I’ll take Upson’s educated opinion any day. Noni knew what he was doing, and good on him for a well-earned penalty.
I wonder if the “not a penalty mob” would have wished Havertz to miss his kick🤔.
For me anyone who condones a player from their team diving to win a penalty, can no longer complain if an opposition player dives.
As the saying goes, if you live by the sword you also die by it.
Not all dives are created equal though. Sometimes players dive when there’s absolutely no contact. Then there are others where players go down when they feel minimal contact,like the Madueke one- young Dowman is quite good at this too and has been lauded for it. City did it a lot in their title winning seasons through players like Bernado Silva.
At the end of the day,it’s a subjective thing and footballers will do what they have to do to gain an advantage.
There’s a saying that, if you can’t beat them, join them. Everyone bends the rules when it suits them, and if you insist on following the rules when no one does,you’re bound to be at a disadvantage.
For instance, the Leverkusen Coach admitted that the rules are not clear regarding the tussling that goes on during corners, yet everyone does it since time immemorial. Remember Eze being taken out for the Leverkusen goal?
Onyango,
Yes if a player goes down when feeling a touch he could gain a penalty. But in a fair amount of these touches the player can stay on his feet.
You say that Dowman is quite good at going down from being touched. Lets call it what it is, and don’t dress it up. It’s called cheating, plain and simple.
Comment on the money as usual DEREK, well sometimes mate😊
Any fan agreeing with that decision is basically saying they don’t mind us cheating.
Yes there was minimal contact, twice. The first contact was just that, on its own, no enough. The second was more a contact of the two coming together, on its own not enough to give a penalty away. Neither contacts caused Madueke to fall. I am going to be kind here (not to offend the sensative people on here) Madueke went down on his own. The ref gave a penalty (thank him) and because there was minimal contact and not a full blown mistake VAR could not change it. Thats the rule. BUT if the ref had not given it, VAR would not have shown it to the ref for review. We were lucky, lets thank the ref and move on.
Reggie,
Where do want me to move to?. 😂👍
Reggie,
I like you thank the ref. But it was still a soft penalty wasn’t it. 🤷♂️
It was soft. If it had been the otherway round? Definitely no penalty 🤣🤣🤣
Very soft, Derek. I was surprised it was given (wouldn’t have been in the prem). Initially I thought he’d dived. It got us back into the tie though and let’s hope we put it to bed next week (& please come out from behind your sofa 🤣🤣)
Sue,
Good evening. Yes I hope you’re right and we can finish the job at home.
And thanks for the heads up regarding my sofa. 😂👍
🤣 Have a good evening, Derek 👍
Reggie, VAR could have changed it. Remember our game at Newcastle earlier this season ? The ref gave us a penalty and VAR told him to go to the screen, which he did and then cancelled our penalty.
My opinion (and it is my opinion) as an ex referee, it would not have been enough to be reviewed by VAR. There was a dive at the end, to be honest.
But it was reviewed by VAR. The commentator said it was being looked at, and the ref was pointing to his ear piece to the Levekusen players.
I am talking about if the penalty wasn’t given.
But going back to the VAR Wednesday, there was contact, twice, so there wasn’t an obvious error by the ref, so it wouldn’t be changed. Opinion again, anything could have happened because European refs have slightly different opinions, it seems. But thats my take on it.
I can’t believe how (probably) intelligent people are getting up themselves over this. We’ve had very questionable goals given in the past and will in the future. Let’s just accept it, right or wrong, and be thankful that we came away with the draw.
👍
And it’s hardly the most infamous penalty in Arsenal’s history, is it Sue?😉
Jax Players from all clubs feign injury, dive, employ all sorts of questionable tactics to gain advantage and I can’t see why almost everyone is up in arms about it.
Of course, it’s a blight on the game but everyone is at it. It’s cheating but I can’t see referees having the strength of character to act in unison. The season starts with diktats from PGMO and by October it’s gone out of the window
Yes Sue, and how often do you see a yellow card given for obvious simulation?
I can remember Theo putting his hand up and admitting he dived, and promising that he’d never do it again, and Robbie Fowler attempting to dissuade the ref from awarding the penalty which he’d been given for falling over Seaman. Sounds so naive when you look back.
SueP,
You say all clubs do it, and you’re right they do. But if a person put their head in an oven, would you.
Just because other’s do it, doesn’t mean you have to follow.
my opinon is we can’t as a fanbase cry there is a conspiracy and a bias against us but ignore it when we benefit
We shouldn’t, but we will.
It’s just the rules guys. Minimal contact is still a fault coz there is no machine to measure impact of contact. As long as there is a touch on a player from the opposing side, the referee is free to take action. Same reason you can’t say there it was a minimal offside. Minimal ball crossing the line. Still a goal. Simple.