nomadichedgehogB
You have a panel voting 4-1 that it wasn’t a foul.
You have two former defenders on commentary saying it wasn’t a foul.
You have the on the pitch referees deeming it not a foul.
You have the VAR team deeming it wasn’t a foul.
Do people here honestly think so many people are corrupt or inept?
Anyone who’s had some experience of playing football at even a semi competitive level will know that Gabriel was ducking in an attempt to head the ball over. In the immediate aftermath of the goal he didn’t even complain about the foul, he complained about the ball being out.
I honestly think had this incident happened in isolation—outside the two other incidents—then no one would be talking about this anymore. Yet somehow Arsenal fans seem to think that because there were three 50/50 decisions involved in the goal it should somehow amount to 150% certainty that the goal should be disallowed.
Thanks for an actual reasonable take from an arsenal fan. Don’t think any Newcastle fan would’ve complained with a draw. It was a tight game between two evenly matched teams decided by some very tight decisions. This is more often than not the way things go between two good teams playing for a win.
As a Newcastle fan I’m happy to admit Bruno’s arm could have been a red, but I find a bit pathetic that Arsenal fans seem to think it was anywhere near as dangerous as Kai’s tackle, which could have been career ending. Another important point: context matters. Bruno lost it after Kai’s tackle, and if Kai is sent off, it’s unlikely the elbow happens.
People really could do with a lesson in anatomy, because it was a forearm, not an elbow.
To answer your question: the one is a leg-breaking and potentially career ending tackle. The other one is childish and petulant, with less severe consequences to the player’s health (because it’s the forearm, not elbow).