Premier League KMI panel rules Arsenal were wrongly denied penalty vs Aston Villa

The five-person panel found Arsenal should have had a stoppage-time spot kick for an Ian Maatsen foul on Bruno Guimaraes.

The Premier League admits Arsenal were wrongly denied a penalty against Aston Villa (AMA/Getty) The Premier League has acknowledged that Arsenal were wrongly denied a penalty in their 1-0 win against Aston Villa last week. Bukayo Saka’s second half goal sealed the victory for Mikel Arteta’s side at Villa Park. However, the Premier League champions were denied a penalty in injury time when Ian Maatsen slid in on Bruno Guimaraes and failed to win the ball. The incident was checked by VAR James Bell, who stuck with the on-field decision of referee Jarred Gillett, who opted not to award a penalty. Sign up for In The Mixer, Metro's football newsletter Get exclusive analysis and previews of the biggest games every Friday. Sign up now for free. But a review by the Key Match Incident (KMI) Panel, which provides an independent assessment of major decisions in every Premier League match, has ruled that Arsenal should have been awarded a penalty for the incident, while Maatsen should have been sent off. ‘The panel felt that a penalty should have been awarded on-field for Maatsen’s reckless challenge on Guimaraes,’ the panel said. Arsenal and Bruno Guimaraes were denied a penalty following a challenge from Ian Maatsen (Getty) ‘Clear contact was made on the attacker’s standing leg and Maatsen made no contact with the ball. ‘They also felt that VAR should have intervened as the non-penalty awarded was a clear and obvious error. The panel felt that the challenge was reckless and therefore a second caution should have been awarded.’ The Premier League added in its own statement: ‘One of the Premier League’s Football Principles is to maintain a high threshold for VAR intervention. ‘VAR is not in place to re-referee incidents and clear evidence is required to meet the high threshold for subjective interventions, taking into account what football expects. Applying a high threshold for intervention also helps to enhance the consistency of VAR decision-making. ‘However, in this instance, it was deemed that a penalty kick should have been awarded on-field following a reckless challenge, and that the threshold for VAR intervention had been met. As a result, the VAR should have intervened to recommend an on-field review for a clear and obvious error. ‘In addition, the panel felt that Maatsen should have been shown a second yellow card for the challenge on Guimaraes, deeming it reckless. ‘In this situation, had the VAR recommended an on-field review, the Referee would have retained all options, including the ability to issue Maatsen with a second yellow card.’ For more stories like this, check our sport page. Follow Metro Sport for the latest news on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Comment now Comments Add Metro as a Preferred Source on Google Add as preferred source