REVEALED: Why Arsenal Star Gabriel Escaped Red Card for Emi Martínez Incident as Premier League Panel Reaches Unanimous Verdict
Premier League

REVEALED: Why Arsenal Star Gabriel Escaped Red Card for Emi Martínez Incident as Premier League Panel Reaches Unanimous Verdict

Author
SevensSportsArena
2 comments

Arsenal defender Gabriel has escaped retrospective punishment for the controversial incident involving Emi Martínez during the Gunners’ 2-1 victory over Chelsea.


Gabriel’s boot made contact with Martínez’s face while several players were competing for a loose ball inside the penalty area, leaving the Chelsea goalkeeper requiring medical attention.

Referee Chris Kavanagh did not show Gabriel a red card at the time, and VAR did not intervene.

Now, the Premier League’s Key Match Incident Panel has reviewed the incident — and all five members agreed that the decision was correct.

Panel Explains Why Gabriel Was Not Sent Off

The crucial factor was the nature of the challenge.


According to the panel's assessment, several players were on the ground competing for the loose ball when Gabriel's boot made contact with Martínez.

The panel therefore concluded that the Arsenal defender's action did not constitute violent conduct or serious foul play.

All five members unanimously supported the original decision not to issue a red card.
That means Gabriel will face no retrospective suspension over the incident.

Martínez Needed Treatment After the Contact

Article image

The incident occurred during Arsenal's comeback against Chelsea at the Emirates on September 6.


Chelsea had taken an early lead through Morgan Rogers before Arsenal responded through Kai Havertz.

Gabriel's clash with Martínez then became one of the most debated moments of the match, particularly because of the location and manner of the contact.

Martínez received medical treatment before continuing, while Gabriel remained on the pitch.

Martin Ødegaard later completed Arsenal's comeback, securing a 2-1 victory.

Why VAR Did Not Recommend a Red Card

The referee's decision was effectively supported by the VAR review because the panel subsequently determined that the incident did not cross the disciplinary threshold for a straight red.


The distinction is important.
A player making contact with an opponent does not automatically constitute violent conduct or serious foul play. 

The circumstances surrounding the challenge, including the fact that multiple players were contesting the loose ball, were central to the panel's assessment.

The unanimous verdict therefore confirms that the officials' interpretation was consistent with the league's post-match review.

It Would Have Been Gabriel's First Straight Red for Arsenal

Article image

The decision also prevented what would have been Gabriel's first straight red card since joining Arsenal.


The Brazilian defender has previously been sent off twice for the Gunners, but both dismissals came after he received a second yellow card.

Gabriel has made 265 appearances for Arsenal since arriving from Lille in 2020 and has accumulated 32 yellow cards during that period.

His disciplinary record therefore made the incident particularly notable, but the panel's ruling means there will be no further action.

Arsenal's Chelsea Victory Remains Crucial

Beyond the controversy, the incident was part of a significant Arsenal comeback.


Chelsea struck first through Rogers, but Havertz restored parity before Ødegaard's second-half goal completed the turnaround.

The victory handed Chelsea their only Premier League defeat of the campaign so far, according to the panel report.

For Gabriel, however, the biggest relief is that the incident will not result in a suspension.

The verdict is now clear: the Premier League's five-member Key Match Incident Panel unanimously agreed that he should not have been sent off.

⚽ FAN DEBATE

⚽ Goal: Was the referee right not to show Gabriel a red card?


🔥 Fire: Should incidents like this receive a different VAR interpretation?

😲 Shock: Were you surprised by the panel's unanimous decision?

👍 Like: Does the panel's explanation settle the controversy for you?

💬 Comment: What would your decision have been if you were the referee?

Comments (2)

E

EVA

9/22/2026 at 09:57 PM

ᴄᴀꜱʜ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ᴊᴏʙ ᴛᴏ ᴇᴀʀɴꜱ ᴍᴏʀᴇ ᴛʜᴀɴ $700 ᴘᴇʀ ᴅᴀʏ. ɢᴇᴛᴛɪɴɢ ᴘᴀɪᴅ ᴡᴇᴇᴋʟʏ ᴍᴏʀᴇ ᴛʜᴀɴ $3500 ᴏʀ ᴍᴏʀᴇ ꜱɪᴍᴘʟʏ ᴅᴏɪɴɢ ᴇᴀꜱʏ ᴡᴏʀᴋ ᴏɴʟɪɴᴇ. ɴᴏ ꜱᴘᴇᴄɪᴀʟ ꜱᴋɪʟʟꜱ ʀᴇQᴜɪʀᴇᴅ ꜰᴏʀ ᴛʜɪꜱ ᴊᴏʙ ᴀɴᴅ ʀᴇɢᴜʟᴀʀ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ꜰʀᴏᴍ ᴛʜɪꜱ ᴀʀᴇ ᴊᴜꜱᴛ ᴀᴡᴇꜱᴏᴍᴇ. ᴀʟʟ ʏᴏᴜ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ɪꜱ 2 ʜʀꜱ ᴀ ᴅᴀʏ ꜰᴏʀ ᴛʜɪꜱ ᴊᴏʙ ᴀɴᴅ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ᴀʀᴇ ᴀᴡᴇꜱᴏᴍᴇ. ᴇᴠᴇʀʏ ᴘᴇʀꜱᴏɴ ᴄᴀɴ ɢᴇᴛ ᴛʜɪꜱ ʙʏ ꜰᴏʟʟᴏᴡ ᴅᴇᴛᴀɪʟꜱ.,.. COPY HERE AND JOIN IT➤➤ ­P­a­y­A­t­H­o­m­e­1­.­C­o­m

E

Emma

9/17/2026 at 12:25 PM

I am making a good salary from home $4580-$5240/week , which is amazing und­er a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now its my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is I started_______ N­e­t­P­a­y­1.C­o­m

Leave a Reply