Following a goal-laden spectacle in Tuesday’s Champions League clash between Paris St-Germain and Bayern Munich, the spotlight shifted to the match officials in the second semi-final the following evening.
Mikel Arteta‘s side head back to the Emirates Stadium next week carrying a 1-1 result from the opening leg in Madrid — yet the scoreline barely scratches the surface of what unfolded.
Three spot-kicks defined the contest. Arsenal converted one, Atletico Madrid converted another, and a third was initially awarded to the Gunners before being controversially reversed.
Viktor Gyokeres gave the Premier League visitors the lead before the interval, stepping up to convert after being brought down inside the penalty area.
Julian Alvarez then levelled matters from twelve yards following a disputed handball ruling against Ben White — a decision that will be examined in detail below.
The flashpoint that dominated post-match discussion, however, came in the closing stages. Referee Danny Makkelie pointed to the spot after David Hancko made contact with Eberechi Eze’s foot. The video assistant referee intervened, directing Makkelie to the pitchside monitor. The call was subsequently reversed — leaving Mikel Arteta seething.
“There is no clear and obvious error,” Arteta stated. “And this changes the course of the game. At this level, I’m sorry, but this cannot happen.”
When pressed on whether any explanation had been provided, he continued: “No. A very clear explanation of the decision and what happens — a referee has to watch it 13 times. What’s more clear than that? It’s impossible, and we are all fuming about it.”
Was the Reversal of the Penalty Justified?
The overturned spot-kick will be a source of frustration for Arsenal for some time. Just weeks earlier, a comparable situation produced an entirely different outcome.
During the last-16 first leg against Bayer Leverkusen, the Gunners were handed a late penalty when Noni Madueke went to ground in the box under a challenge from Malik Tillman. The contact was minimal — Tillman landed on the forward’s boot as he fell — yet the decision stood.
Our editorial team discussed that specific incident with a senior official within Uefa‘s refereeing structure. The explanation given was that, while the preferred outcome would have been no penalty on the field, the degree of contact left the VAR with no grounds to intervene.
Applying that same logic to Wednesday’s match: David Hancko clearly made contact with Eberechi Eze‘s boot after the ball had already been played. Soft? Without question. A clear and obvious error? Based on the framework Uefa itself outlined in the Madueke case, the on-field decision should have been upheld.
The Premier League operates on the same principle. A call may appear lenient, but that alone is insufficient justification for overriding the referee’s judgment.
If the Madueke decision was deemed correct as a penalty, consistency demands the same conclusion for Eze. In a domestic Premier League fixture, this decision would almost certainly not have been reversed.
The Handball Question: Would It Have Been Given in the Premier League?
Two consecutive evenings of handball debate have gripped the Champions League — first involving Bayern Munich, now Arsenal.
In both instances, the ball deflected off the body before striking the arm, and many supporters have come to assume this automatically rules out a penalty. That assumption is incorrect.
What officials are actually assessing is whether there is a clear change in the ball’s trajectory. The reasoning: if the arm alters the ball’s path, it has functioned as a barrier to the natural direction of play.
When the ball continues broadly along its original course, contact with the arm becomes the decisive factor.
The penalty awarded against Alphonso Davies on Tuesday would not have stood in the Premier League, where the arm’s proximity to the body would have been considered too close.
Under Uefa‘s framework, however, the fact that the arm extended away from the body before impact outweighs the minor deflection.
Ben White‘s handball against Atletico was unambiguous by Uefa standards. His arm was positioned well away from his body and moved inward to meet the ball — a textbook penalty under European rules.
There is some room for discretion when a player is actively drawing the arm in to reduce their body’s profile, but Ben White‘s arm began from such an extended position that a spot-kick was the expected outcome.
The Premier League applies a more permissive standard than European competition, even in cases involving deflections prior to handball. That said, Arsenal defender Gabriel arguably should have conceded a penalty at Newcastle earlier this campaign — his arm was raised high while sliding, and the deflection off his body was negligible.
Would the deflection off Ben White‘s shin have been sufficient for VAR to stay out of it in a domestic context? Possibly — but the arm movement was too pronounced to ignore entirely.
A clear penalty by European standards; a borderline call in the Premier League.
Comments
Leave a comment