Keown has lost all Arsenal perspective and respect after rejecting Madueke ‘doubt’ | OneFootball

Martin Keown has taken it upon himself to form a one-man barricade between Arsenal and what we largely agree has been some undue and outlandish criticism of Mikel Arteta’s side in recent weeks.

We might have dubbed Alan Pardew something other than a “schoolboy” for claiming an Arsenal title win should “come with an asterisk” and we took umbrage with Fabian Hurzeler’s self-satisfied response to Brighton’s defeat to the Gunners which Keown quite reasonably dismissed as little more than “sour grapes”.

But after Arsenal’s draw with Bayer Leverkusen on Wednesday, we fear that Keown has lost all perspective and is now mistaking his role as a pundit – on this occasion for TNT Sports – for a career as an Arsenal watchdog with a microphone he will use purely in defence of his beloved team no matter what.

As now appears to be the case for all Arsenal stakeholders, Keown is a staunch proponent of “winning football”. Fine. We don’t like watching them but he and they don’t care. Doth the Gunners guardian protest too much? Probably, but we can take him at his word and frankly, we don’t care that he doesn’t care.

He was right to hail the “dynamism” of Noni Madueke after his introduction to turn the game in Arsenal’s favour and while we were slightly more disparaging of Bukayo Saka’s performance as Keown labelled it “not one of his best nights”, we understand the reticence from Keown to hit out more vehemently at a current player of his former club.

What we can’t let slide is Keown’s take on the Arsenal penalty after taking a look at it several times through the red-tinted monocle covering his one big red eye. His point-blank refusal to accept that it might have been a tad soft and that maybe he would have had a problem with it had it been given against Arsenal, as was suggested by presenter Lynsey Hipgrave, paints him as an absurdly biased broadcaster.

“For me it was a penalty,” Keown said as we all watched replays of Madueke collapsing to the floor a step after he felt minimal contact in the box.

“You had to see it from different angles first but that left foot gets trapped in by the backside or torso of [Malick] Tillman. For me there’s no doubt about that.”

We don’t think it was a penalty but he can. It’s an opinion and one apparently shared by both the referee and VAR officials. Not a problem. But there’s definitely “doubt”. Even the most blinkered Gooner isn’t going to label that a stone-wall spot kick.

And from there Keown engaged in the punditry equivalent of shouting “la, la, la, I’m not listening” while sticking your fingers in your ears.

“If that was given against Arsenal though, what would you be thinking?” Hipgrave asked, before Keown expertly batted away the question with the poise of a pre-tantrum toddler.

“You’re turning things around though Lynsey, there wasn’t a penalty given against Arsenal…” Keown said.

Hipgrave then prodded him further by asking: “But would you be saying to me he hardly touched him?”

Amid chuckles from Hipgrave at the astonishing gall of an infamous football hard-nut, Keown responded: “What I will say is VAR won’t go against that if there’s any kind of contact and we can see there that there was contact.”

Keown is now so partisan that he’s rejecting the existence of nuance in refereeing decisions. Maybe what he needs is the earth-shattering demand from his mum to “stop showing off in front of your friends” or for a teenager to advise the pundit that Arsenal football club is “not gonna shag you, mate”.