Liverpool Denied Two Penalties as Arsenal End 14-Year Anfield Wait

Arsenal won at Anfield for the first time in 14 years, and Liverpool left the ground arguing about two penalties they did not get. Kai Havertz’s 16th-minute goal settled a 1-0 win that moved Arsenal three points clear of Manchester City at the top of the Premier League, but the first half produced the game’s real talking points: a shirt pull on Alexander Isak in the 21st minute and a tangle involving Cody Gakpo in the 29th, both waved away by referee Andy Madley and both backed by VAR. Liverpool boss Andoni Iraola called the Isak incident a clear penalty. Sky Sports pundit Gary Neville agreed with the officials on Gakpo. The split verdict is why this row will run all week.

What happened in the Isak incident?

A fistful of shirt, spotted by the pundits but not by the officials. Bradley Barcola delivered a teasing cross in the 21st minute and Isak glanced it wide of the post, but as he moved to meet the ball, Arsenal defender Jurrien Timber had hold of his shirt. The officials did not spot the foul, and Jamie Carragher told VAR to do its job during Sky Sports’ coverage. Iraola was blunt afterwards: the Isak one is a clear penalty, you hold the shirt, we can all see that he holds the shirt, and the ball went one centimetre in front of Isak. His sharper point was about honesty. Isak stayed on his feet and played for the goal, and Iraola said that if he had gone to the floor, the penalty would have been given 100 per cent. He added that he would definitely instruct his players to go down in future, a remarkable admission from a manager that the game’s incentives now punish staying upright.

What happened in the Gakpo incident?

A clumsy challenge that split the room. In the 29th minute, Gakpo attempted to reach a lofted pass from Alexis Mac Allister, only to run into Arsenal winger Christos Tzolis, who was on the wrong side of him and placed his hands on the Liverpool forward. Madley waved away Liverpool’s protests instantly, and VAR conducted a review before backing his call. Neville’s verdict was that the challenge was clumsy but short of a penalty: Gakpo would not have got there, Tzolis was well ahead of him, and there was not enough in it. Neville’s point was about position as much as contact: Tzolis was well ahead of Gakpo, who would not have reached the ball whether he was pulled or not. The contrast with the Isak incident matters. One was a visible shirt pull on a striker attacking a cross. The other was a coming-together where the fouled player was unlikely to reach the ball anyway, and that difference is why even Liverpool’s sympathisers split on this one.

How did Arsenal win without scoring again?

By defending a lead the way champions are supposed to. After Havertz steered Declan Rice’s low cross home at the back post, Arsenal absorbed everything Liverpool threw at them. Liverpool had 17 efforts in total, but none forced goalkeeper David Raya into a save. Florian Wirtz smashed a free kick against the woodwork, Mac Allister ballooned a header over the bar unmarked from eight yards, and Alisson brilliantly denied Tzolis’s low strike in the 73rd minute to keep Liverpool alive at the other end. The Times noted the historic oddity: it was the first time on record that Liverpool had failed to muster a shot on target in a league game at home, a sequence dating back 442 matches to the start of 2003-04. Neville called it a defensive masterclass, and Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta said winning at Anfield felt better as a manager precisely because the club had waited 14 years to do it.

What did Havertz’s goal mean for the record books?

It made him the Premier League’s top-scoring German. Havertz’s finish took him to 46 goals in the competition, overtaking former Manchester City midfielder Ilkay Gundogan, according to Sky Sports. The goal also carried the weight of the occasion: Arsenal arrived at Anfield needing to prove they could win the hard away games in a title defence, and they did it days after a defeat to Fleetwood that Arteta said the squad had to pick themselves up from. The Times traced the goal itself to a chancy pass out from Alisson after Virgil van Dijk played him in, with Tzolis breaking to force the goalkeeper into the error. Small margins, ruthlessly punished: that is the story of Arsenal’s afternoon in one passage of play.

Is this part of a wider refereeing pattern?

Yes, and Liverpool fans will recognise the shape of it. The season has already produced a string of penalty and VAR rows that turned on an official’s judgment and a VAR that declined to intervene, from the deliberate handball that former referees chief Keith Hackett said should have given Manchester City a penalty against Brighton to the VAR elbow row that also drew a Hackett verdict and the subjective offside that cost Brennan Johnson a goal at Hull. West Ham’s demand for answers after the penalty row against QPR belongs in the same file. The Anfield incidents fit the pattern precisely, with one twist: this time the two appeals in the same game produced opposite verdicts from the same punditry team, which is why the debate is about the laws themselves rather than one official’s bad day.

What did the former referees’ chief say?

Former PGMOL chief Keith Hackett went further than Iraola after the game, calling the Isak incident a clear penalty kick. Reviewing the footage, Hackett said Timber had a fistful of Isak’s shirt and prevented him from making contact with Barcola’s cross, and that VAR should have intervened if the referee had not seen the offence. His verdict, delivered via Football Insider, leaves the officials with two separate criticisms: a missed penalty, and a VAR that declined to correct it.

What happens next?

The table does the talking from here. Arsenal sit three points clear of City and nine clear of Liverpool, and Liverpool have scored just four league goals in five home games this season. The watch items are any response from the refereeing body on the Isak or Gakpo incidents, any further comment from Liverpool or Arsenal on the decisions, and whether Liverpool’s home scoring problem becomes the story that outlasts the penalty row. A penalty at Anfield would not have fixed a performance that produced 17 shots and none on target, but it might have changed the mood around a team that is now watching the title race from nine points back.