Referee’s Sunderland decisions raises fresh questions over treatment of Arsenal
Arsenal were punished for time-wasting against Sunderland despite the home side taking considerably longer over their throw-ins throughout the match.
Referee John Brooks overturned one Arsenal throw after deciding Riccardo Calafiori had taken too long to restart play.
That decision looks particularly hard to defend when set against the figures from the rest of the game.
According to Scott Willis of Cannon Stats, Arsenal took an average of 12.2 seconds over their throw-ins. Three took longer than 20 seconds and none exceeded 30.
Willis recorded that when it came to Sunderland’s throws, “12 that took longer than 20 seconds, 5 that took longer than 30 seconds, and 3 that took longer than 40 seconds.”
Even removing Sunderland’s long throws, which are not subject to the new five-second rule for ‘reasons’, the home side still had five throw-ins that took more than 20 seconds.
Brooks did not once reverse a Sunderland throw and award possession to Arsenal for taking too long.
The wider concern is that refereeing around Arsenal increasingly appears to be influenced by narratives that have taken hold in the media, whether or not the evidence supports them.
Just look at last season, when Sunderland moved their advertising hoardings closer to the pitch to disrupt Arsenal’s long throws that they weren’t even taking, or the Brighton manager complaining about David Raya taking too long to distribute the ball when he was one of the quickest in the league and Brighton one of the slowest.
Look at how they’ve changed rules at corners this season – largely deemed an ‘anti-Arsenal’ rule despite Arsenal not being the ones utilising the so-called ‘meat-wall.
The same problem was apparent in the penalty awarded to Sunderland. Dan Ballard was judged to have been fouled by Ezri Konsa, despite Ballard appearing to roll the Arsenal defender to the ground.
The incident was then described by the Match of the Day commentator as though Konsa had taken his eyes off the ball and concentrated solely on Ballard. TNT Sports were also keen to say it was the correct call, repeating the incorrect trope that Arsenal spent a large part of last season fouling in the box with impunity, something that just didn’t happen.
The footage showed otherwise and both MOTD pundits (Thomas Frank and Ashley Williams) agreed – it was not a penalty.
Konsa continued watching the ball until he was rolled by Ballard and then his gaze dropped towards the ground.
It was all part of a dreadful afternoon from the officiating team.
Brooks allowed Martin Odegaard to be stamped on without even awarding a free-kick, while Stuart Attwell on VAR did not intervene over Sunderland’s penalty.
Gabriel was even booked for playing peacemaker when Sunderland lost their s**t.
Fourth official Elliott Bell also reported Mikel Arteta for leaving his technical area, leading to the Arsenal manager being booked.
Taken together, Arsenal were being judged by one standard and Sunderland by another.
That matters because this is not an isolated complaint, and hasn’t been for years.
This season, the KMI panel has already admitted Arsenal should have been awarded a penalty, with a red card shown, when Bruno Guimaraes was brought down in the area against Aston Villa.
Arsenal have therefore been on the wrong end of two massive incorrect penalty decisions in only four Premier League matches.
But that concern is not simply that officials make mistakes. It is that assumptions about Arsenal are shaping what referees think they are seeing, even when the evidence on the pitch points in the opposite direction.