Mikel Arteta, the 41-year-old manager of Arsenal, found himself in hot water after his post-match comments following his team’s 1-0 defeat at the hands of Newcastle United last month. The frustration was evident in Arteta’s remarks as he expressed his disbelief at the decision to allow Anthony Gordon’s goal despite multiple VAR checks. The passionate outburst led to Arteta being charged by the Football Association (FA).
Arteta’s choice of words came under scrutiny, with the FA accusing him of breaching Rule E3.1 by making insulting and detrimental comments about match officials. However, an independent commission, after conducting a thorough investigation and a personal hearing with Arteta, deemed the charge “not proven.” In their written explanation, the commission stated that Arteta’s comments were not directed at any specific official but rather reflected his frustration with the VAR process and the standards of refereeing in the Premier League.
The commission recognized Arteta as an “impressive witness” who successfully argued that his comments were a reflection of the widespread frustration regarding the VAR decision-making and officiating standards within the league. It was clear that Arteta’s remarks were not intended to insult or cast aspersions but rather to express his reasonably held view that improvements need to be made. The commission acknowledged the support Arteta received from others who shared his sentiment.
Interestingly, it was revealed during the investigation that Joe Willock, a former Arsenal midfielder now playing for Newcastle, had informed his ex-teammates that he believed the ball had gone out of play in the build-up to Gordon’s goal. Furthermore, the commission shed light on the interpretation of Arteta’s use of the word “disgrace.” They noted that the Spanish word “desgracia,” which bears a striking resemblance in spelling and pronunciation, has different connotations. While the English equivalent suggests contempt and dishonor, the Spanish word carries connotations of misfortune, tragedy, or bad luck. This linguistic insight offered a fresh perspective on Arteta’s choice of words, indicating that his intention may have been misunderstood.
This episode involving Mikel Arteta’s post-match comments and subsequent FA charge serves as a reminder of the passion and intensity that often engulf the football world. It highlights the need for clearer communication and understanding, both in linguistic terms and in comprehending the frustrations managers face with respect to VAR and officiating standards.
Above all, this incident should be seen as an opportunity for the FA and the footballing authorities to reevaluate and improve the VAR process and the standards of refereeing. The widespread frustration expressed by Arteta and others is indicative of a need for change. Rather than viewing such outbursts as acts of disrepute, it is essential to listen to the concerns and strive towards enhancing the integrity and fairness of the game.
Mikel Arteta’s cleared charge by the FA sheds light on the complexities surrounding post-match comments within the footballing world. By examining the incident from a different perspective, considering linguistic interpretations and the broader frustration with VAR and officiating, we are compelled to reflect on the need for continuous improvement in football’s decision-making processes. It is only by listening and learning from such episodes that football can evolve and thrive.
Leave a Reply