‘Not having it’ – Former PL star disagrees with Arsenal recent dismissal

Paddy Kenny has claimed that Arsenal should feel hard done-by after their recent dismissal which saw Gabriel Martinelli sent off against Wolves.

The Gunners managed to hold onto their 1-0 lead, despite losing the Brazilian mid-way through the second half and having to play with a man less, but this latest red card shined further light on our dreadful disciplinary record of late.

This was our fourth red in six matches, and manager Mikel Arteta claimed that he intended to sit down ‘soon’ and communicate with the officials about it.

“It is a tough one,” Kenny told the Football Insider.

“For me, I’m not having it as a red card. I think the ref should just give him the one yellow.

“I think it’s harsh. Arsenal’s discipline record isn’t great, they seem to get one every month.

“It’s something that needs to be addressed. Things happen quickly and you do get some daft red cards.

“But, for me, I think just give a yellow there and let the game go on.

“Like I said, I think it’s harsh.”

I definitely agree that the red was harsh, especially as I’ve always viewed a yellow card as a warning not to go and get yourself sent off, with Gabi simply given two cards together in a rare event which I can’t recall ever happening before.

Do you agree that the red card was harsh? Would more be said on the subject if we hadn’t managed to hold on for the three points?

Patrick

WATCH – Mikel Arteta discusses the Wolves win and Arsenal’s red cards

Tags Gabriel Martinelli paddy kenny

18 Comments

  1. The incident was completely launched campaign against arsenal,why it’s always harsh decisions against arsenal?

  2. Gabriel just pushed the wolves players arm and he went over screaming like a stuck pig. Rolling around in agony, like a little girl. Same old wanderers always cheating

  3. Was Martinelli stupid? It was within the laws of the game what the ref did. We need to learn and quick. Oh and Paddy Kenny wasn’t the ref.

    1. Technical it was within the laws, but some common sense needed. Martinelli didn’t know he was already on a yellow when he made that second challenge. He gently pushed the guy at the throw, so had no reason to believe that was a bookable offense.

      We need to be smarter because the refs and VAR are a joke, but that’s the first time I have ever seen that, and it seems even more harsh when you consider neither foul was serious foul play.

    2. How do you get penalized without a prior caution?
      If he was getting a caution for pushing the player with the ball in hand, he should have been cautioned immediately.
      It’s like cautioning your secretary’s typo and firing her in the same spot. It’s like the ref needed an excuse to send him out and he unfortunately gave it to him.

  4. nonsense Pat, so please stop encouraging this sort of conspiratorial blabber…two yellows can be given in consecutive fashion, even after the ref has allowed the opposing team to play on…in those situations the ref simply has to point individually to each separate yellow card violation, then show the red card to the offending player

    the fact that you’ve personally never witnessed such an occurrence has no bearing whatsoever in this debate, although I can understand why it might make you question the validity of just such a situation…according to your “belief”, the offending player could then proceed to foul again with no recourse whatsoever, simply because he was already going to be receiving one

    it was reckless on Marts part, which is a bit surprising considering his normal demeanor on the pitch, but the weirdest part isn’t the fact he got two yellows, it’s that he actually could have received 3, as he proceeded to pick up the ball following the second foul(or that’s what the commentator said, as he was trying to make sense of what had transpired)

    I personally believe that the needless and senseless time wasting so early on in this affair certainly didn’t help matters, as this kind of behaviour can get under the skin of any official, as the game tends to get chippy whenever this occurs…although such speculation isn’t rooted in fact, I know from my personal experiences, on both sides of the argument, how these types of things can negatively effect the mindset of an official, which in no way legitimizes any counter argument, as there’s no doubting that both of his fouls were yellow card worthy

  5. The linesman should have signalled a foul throw from Wolves on the first passage of play. Martinelli forced this to occur and should have received a yellow card. The Wolves player whilst off balance from the push threw the ball from the side of his head and not over his head. He also had one foot off the ground at the same time. Therefore the second phase should not have happened, resulting in not receiving a second yellow and red card.

  6. I’m sorry but it was not within the laws of the game … I agree it was or could have been two cautionable offenses but Michael Oliver misapplied advantage leading to the second yellow. Advantage can only be applied when there is a foul. For an offense to be a foul, the ball must be in play. Gabi clearly pushes the Wolves player while the ball is out of play and therefore this must be treated as misconduct and not a foul and thus advantage cannot be applied. The correct action would have been to whistle to bring the ball back, caution Martinelli, and restart with a Wolves throw in. The sensible action would have been to show Martinelli a single yellow and restart with a Wolves FK for the foul on the attacking player.

      1. Zamind, there is no doubt that what Joe says is a “sensible” application of the rules. It is also in the strictest sense probably the most “correct”.
        However, others are defending the referee based on certain technical aspects of what constitutes an individual yellow card; for which there is some validity. A number of people have posted this perspective on this site. Some of them perhaps because they believe this to be true, others perhaps to score points.
        Referees have considerable discretion which most use sensibly to allow games to flow and maintain the overall integrity of football otherwise there would be far more cards given out than we see. You may have seen Keown commenting that the referee was “pedantic”, which is a useful description of his application of the rules in that particular instance; although one may quibble over whether such pedantry was justified.
        Although yellow cards are normally given as a caution in the first instance there is actually nothing in the rules that precludes a referee from giving yellow cards in quick succession as happened.

    1. that’s not within the rules, that’s simply an opinion, which is rife with your own self-serving bias…that said, I can see why you would suggest that this would have been a more sensible course of action

      1. @The-Real-Vieira-Lynn-4ever …
        Please tell me which statements are opinions:
        Advantage can only be given when there is a foul. [FACT: Law 5 – The Referee; Law 12.3 – Disciplinary action; IFAB Other Advice, 1 – Advantage]
        There can be no foul when the ball is out of play. [FACT: See Law 9 – Ball in and out of play; Law 12 – Introduction and 12.4 – Restart of play after fouls and misconduct]
        The offense must be treated as misconduct and sanctioned accordingly. [FACT: See Law 12 .3 – Disciplinary action]

    2. Joe, stop making things up and dont say things you know nothing about. IT WAS WITHIN THE LAWS OF THE GAME TO BOOK MARTINELLI TWICE FOR TWO CONCURRENT MISDEMEANOURS. That all coming after Martinelli miscontrolled the ball fwll over and tried to cheat a foul (dive) so arguably three yellow card offences. Michael Oliver was 100% right and Joe whoever you are is 100% wrong.

      1. LOL .. I never said that they were not both cautionable offenses on their own. I did state that Michael Oliver misapplied the LOTG as he cannot apply advantage when the ball is out of play. If he had brought the ball back, cautioned Martinelli, added time if warranted, and restarted play with a throw in there would have been no scenario where there was a second caution. The examples others have cited of the same player receiving two cautions have been when the referee applied advantage when the ball was in play. This was not the case here.
        The fact you suggest Martinelli was simulating says all in need to know …
        I don’t subscribe to conspiracy theories but for those who do, look at how Stuart Atwell dealt with Pogba in the 85′ of the match againt Southampton after committing a cynical foul and then pushing a player. All I expect is consistency from PGMOL referees. The players, managers, and fans deserve nothing less.

      2. Actually, Joe is not making things up. This was, at the very least, a disputable decision and his points are consistent with the laws of the game.

  7. As well as the inconsistency of refereeing decisions which seem spoil many games and can impinge on the reputations of clubs. What also should be taken into account is the contrary manner in which officials themselves makes the decisions and also, the freedom and ease they are afforded by their governing body to allow them to decide on a whim when, if and how they wish too apply the rules.

    The game itself is played at a hundred miles an hour. It’s very physical as we have seen when Saka was volleyed in the air by James McArthur. Sometimes collisions are accidental, sometimes collisions are contrived by players in order to impede play and gain an unfair advantage. Sometimes these contrived events are viewed as being clever and canny, other times depending on who is ‘todays darling’ they’re seen most horrendous. If you were a team in your pomp, you would almost be wrapped in cotton wool by the ref and even the slightest of slights against you would be an offence.

    The referees have the problem of not only having rules that seemed to be littered with varying methods of application by their loose design. But, also the latitude to apply already, loose fitting rules as and when they wish. I say they have a problem but they don’t really. I dare say they enjoy the power they have! They also enjoy the security of never having their decisions and actions being called to question in any real tangible form by their governing body. For fear of any action being taken against them regards to their decision making, brings into question bias or incompetency that would also undermine the integrity of that governing body!

    There have been many articles written on this forum and being discussed in the main stream press about arsenal’s disciplinary problems. I don’t believe we have a disciplinary problem at all. I don’t believe either that we are the subject of a conspiracy. However, I do believe that because of the way that some of the laws that govern the game are so loosely put together and they way they can be whimsically applied, which can then leave the door open for interpretation and misuse, this is the problem.

    We are not a dirty team and the infractions we commit are no more heinous than the next team. The so called problem pertaining to our perceived lack of discipline, is due to the laxed nature of officiation in the premiership. The way the rules are constructed and moreso, how they are applied seem to spotlight us. Our indiscipline is pretty much forced upon us at this point.

Comments are closed

Top Blog Sponsors
JustArsenal Top Ten UK Blogs