Mark Clattenburg insists West Ham were robbed at Arsenal after Nuno admission

Add as preferred source on Google

Nuno Espirito Santo had few complaints about the so-called ‘penalty’ El Hadji Malick Diouf gave away in West Ham United’s 2-0 defeat by Arsenal, but former Premier League referee Mark Clattenburg was not so forgiving.

With the Hammers already 1-0 down thanks to a fierce finish from their former club captain – Declan Rice could not resist a subtle goading of the fans who used to adore him – Jurrien Timber broke forward and tumbled inside the box after Malick Diouf was once again left chasing a ball in behind.

At full-time, Nuno Espirito Santo explained that Diouf had been punished because of the fact the contact continued inside the penalty area.

At least, that is what referee Jarred Gillett told the West Ham United boss following his first defeat in the dugout.

Clattenburg, though, was much less willing to accept such an explanation.

Mark Clattenburg says Malick Diouf should not have given away a penalty in West Ham United loss

Speaking on the Beyond the Back Four podcast, Clattenburg insists that Gillett’s reading of the rulebook left West Ham unfairly penalised when a free-kick right on the verge would have been the correct decision.

“I want to break the law down,” says Clattenburg, who officiated just shy of 300 Premier League matches between 2004 and 2017. “The contact on Timber was just outside the penalty area. So, the initial contact by the defender of West Ham was just outside.

“We all accept when we slow it down, the referee only has one view. Because the attacker falls inside the penalty area, I can understand why the penalty was given originally. But when you watch it in slow motion, which Michael Oliver and the VAR have, you can clearly see the contact is outside and it carries on inside.

“But what we have to remember in the laws of the game; if the tackle starts outside and carries on inside, the law states that the tackle needs to be punished at the moment of the contact.

“There’s two points to this. If after that tackle, the defender makes a secondary action of a say a tripping action, then it can be a penalty. But if it’s only one action of the tackle that starts outside and comes inside, then the contact is outside and it should have been a free kick.”

Diouf struggled against Bukayo Saka but Clattenburg takes aim at Michael Oliver

While much of the pre-match discussion from a Hammers perspective was dominated by the swashbuckling Senegal international – Diouf was even likened to Gareth Bale following his buccaneering display against Everton five days earlier – the defensive deficiencies in his game were exposed brutally by a dominant Arsenal side.

Diouf had Bukayo Saka ‘in hell’ when Senegal became the first African nation ever to beat England back in June. There would be no repeat of that at the Emirates.

Saka’s electrifying movement caught out the youngster frequently, though Clattenburg insists that Diouf did not deserve the fate that would befall him just past the hour mark.

“[VAR official] Michael Oliver has seen [the incident] and maybe he’s forgot the law. The law is clear and I think they’ve forgotten the law,” Clattenburg adds, comparing this decision to one made during Inter Milan and Barcelona’s totemic clash in the Champions League semi-finals last season.

“Siman Marciniak, the Polish referee, awarded Barcelona a penalty. I think the foul was made by [Henrikh] Mkhitaryan of Inter Milan, where he fouled outside the penalty area and it carried on inside.

“The referee awarded a penalty. That went to VAR and the decision was changed, and that was based on the laws of the game because of exactly the same situation which happened in Arsenal v West Ham on Saturday.

“So there’s a difference. Many people forget the law but the law is clear. And I think some people think, because the tackle still carries on inside, it must be a penalty. But the law is clear. It should have been punished by a free-kick.

“So the referee gets this one wrong. And also the VAR gets this one wrong. So it shouldn’t have been a penalty, I think is what we were saying there. Perhaps we need AI VAR who knows all the rules!”