Gabriel escapes red card: Are VAR protecting Arsenal or breaking football's rules?

On the fifth minute at the Emirates, the London derby exploded in an unexpected way. Chelsea took the lead after two minutes through Morgan Rogers, and in a scramble inside the box, the ball ended up in goalkeeper Martinez's hands. Arsenal defender Gabriel swung his leg high and kicked the keeper in the head. Martinez lay in pain, requiring medical attention. Referee Chris Kavanagh's view was obscured, but VAR, with all the camera angles, chose not to recommend a review. Arsenal later came back to win 2-1, but English football had a bigger crack than the comeback. Wayne Rooney, on BBC's Match of the Day, was furious. He said: "You don't really see it at first sight but then when you see a replay and they slow it down, Martinez has got the ball in his hands and Gabriel boots him in the head. He swings a leg and goes way over the top. He's extremely lucky to stay on the pitch." Ashley Young echoed that, criticising the whole VAR process: "I agree. When the ball is on the floor and Martinez has it, Gabriel kicks so high. I'm not sure why it hasn't gone to VAR or if they've properly studied it because he's nowhere the ball. He's got away with one there." Both legends reached the same conclusion. This was a kick to the head of a goalkeeper who had the ball under control. There was no intention to play the ball, no chance of reaching the ball. Under IFAB Law 12, serious foul play endangering the opponent's safety must be punished with a red card. Intent is not a prerequisite. The outcome and the nature of the challenge decide the punishment. A direct kick to the head like that could only mean a red card. I'm not suggesting this was a planned scandal. But when the bright stadium lights come on, it's easy to forget that VAR was created to correct mistakes, not protect the referee's decision. Here, the error was so clear that no expert was needed: the ball was in the keeper's hands, the replay showed everything, and Gabriel still kicked far higher than any normal clearance. The VAR room saw it all. They still chose not to react. If you have followed English football long enough, you notice a pattern: big teams, especially title contenders, tend to benefit in 50-50 situations. No one openly admits it. But through my years of watching the Premier League, I'm confident enough to say that pressure from trophies, media interests and the power of the rich clubs outweighs the pursuit of justice. Arsenal's escape against Chelsea is another piece in a picture called "soft power" of wealthy clubs. The match started with Morgan Rogers putting Chelsea ahead. It was a shock that silenced the Emirates. Xabi Alonso's Chelsea arrived in north London with a perfect record. Arsenal responded with calmness. Kai Havertz, a former Chelsea player, equalised before half-time. Captain Martin Odegaard completed the comeback with a decisive goal in the second half. 2-1, all three points to the reigning champions. But imagine if Gabriel had been sent off in the fifth minute. Arsenal would have played with ten men for more than eighty minutes, already trailing Chelsea. Their whole structure would have collapsed. Tactics, pressure and the comeback would only have been hypothetical if the referee had done his job. Therefore, this victory, though valuable, has an unbridgeable gap. Arsenal proved nothing except that they know how to use luck. Chelsea left with justified anger. Let me be clear: maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps Gabriel was just a defender trying to clear the ball in chaos, acting on instinct, with no intention to hurt Martinez. But football law does not punish based on intent. It punishes based on risk. A kick to the head of a goalkeeper when the ball is in his hands is a serious risk, whatever the kicker intended. If we make an exception here, we are setting a dangerous precedent. Next time, someone will raise his foot and say "I was only clearing the ball." When the lights turn off, I found the hero where nobody looks. Here, the hero was not a goalscorer, but a correct decision that never happened. VAR could have spoken, but they stayed silent. They let Gabriel continue, let the match proceed in favour of the home side, and left the media to deal with the rest. In an empty stadium, like during the bubble football era, the market speaks louder than the crowd. So let's look at VAR's operating logic: they are allowed to be wrong, but they are not allowed to be cowardly. This time, they were cowardly. What worries me most isn't the red card that was not shown. It's the way the whole system reacted afterward. Chris Kavanagh didn't see the incident; that is normal. VAR had the power to intervene, but they chose to trust the referee completely. The question is: was that trust earned? If VAR cannot identify a kick to a goalkeeper's head as a clear and obvious error, then what is their "clear" criterion? Even clearer? Perhaps they need a player with a broken leg or unconscious before realising the severity. I bet with myself that the hottest twist is the truth. The truth here is that Arsenal benefited from a mistake, but the media will quickly turn to Havertz's performance, Odegaard's intelligence, or the manager's pressing tactics. They don't want to dig into a controversial VAR decision that tarnishes a big team's victory. Sports media always does that: they create safe easy-to-digest stories and ignore inconvenient truths. Don't tell me about tactics. Tell me who dares to take responsibility for a goalkeeper being kicked in the head in the box with no punishment. Xabi Alonso may feel unfairly treated, but he knows that complaining about referees in the Premier League leads to sanctions. Chelsea have the right to be furious, but they also know VAR decisions cannot be appealed. They have to swallow the bitterness and focus on Leeds United in the League Cup in midweek. Arsenal, with three points and no suspension for Gabriel, will prepare for Napoli in the Champions League – where a similar defensive mistake could cost far more than a London derby. The story doesn't stop at three points. It opens a big debate about how VAR works. When modern football relies so much on technology, the line between fairness and abuse of power becomes too thin. A challenge that should have changed the game was dismissed, and Chelsea fans left the Emirates in anger. But they are not the only ones who feel betrayed. Everyone who believes in football fairness should feel that way. Gabriel may continue to play, and he may even score or play well against Napoli. But his action will always be seen through the lens of a lucky man who escaped justice. And every time Arsenal receive a controversial decision in their favour, people will remember the incident with Martinez. That is the price Gabriel must pay. Not today, but soon. Football has a very long memory. As for VAR, the problem is not technology. Technology is never lacking. The problem is the people operating it. They are afraid to go against the referee. They are afraid to disrupt the match. They are afraid of being criticised for sending off an away player in the fifth minute at a big club's stadium. And that fear has stolen fairness. In modern football, technology is no longer the issue. Human courage is the issue. When we ask whether VAR is protecting Arsenal or breaking the laws, we should not punish technology. We should question those in the VAR room – those who saw everything but chose to see nothing. This week, watch if UEFA reacts when Arsenal enter the Champions League. If Gabriel still starts, the story will fade. But in Martinez's mind, that kick will never go quiet. And if one day a similar wrong decision goes the other way, Arsenal will be the ones complaining. Then, they will forget that they were once the beneficiaries. Football pays with irony. Be ready.