Iraola: I'll Tell My Players to Dive After Isak Penalty Snub
Andoni Iraola has said he will tell his Liverpool players to go to ground in future after Alexander Isak was denied a penalty in Sunday's 1-0 defeat by Arsenal at Anfield. The striker stayed on his feet when his shirt was pulled by Jurrien Timber, and referee Andy Madley waved play on.
- Match: Liverpool 0-1 Arsenal, Premier League, Anfield
- Incident: Alexander Isak's shirt pulled by Jurrien Timber; no penalty given
- Referee: Andy Madley; VAR: Stuart Attwell
- Iraola's reaction: "Next time, the managers should tell Alex to go to the floor, otherwise they won't call it."
- At stake: Liverpool suffered defeat; Arsenal moved three points clear at the top
What was said
"There is a clear grab of the shirt. Alex [Isak] was just in front of him, he was going to head in front of the goal but couldn't because he grabbed the shirt. If he goes to the floor, they call the penalty 100%. It should be like this but it is what it is. Next time, the managers should tell Alex to go to the floor, otherwise they won't call it."
"The answer is you have to dive, if you don't dive they won't call it."
"Yes, definitely."
"It's a shame you ask me this question, but honestly, yes, we have to tell them, go down, because they're not going to call it otherwise. And then referees complain why they go down. Because if you don't go down, you don't call it. Then it's like, no, you are all the time going down. But I think Alex is honest. He tries to go for the ball, everyone can see live straight away that there is a clear, clear pull."
"Timber takes a huge risk by grabbing the shirt. It could easily have been given on another day. It's right on the limit. It has to be sustained holding - some will say it was sustained, some will say it wasn't. But it's interesting that Isak didn't even appeal."
"I think Arsenal got lucky. If Isak maybe makes a bit more of it. I hate to see players exaggerate, but he's going to score. It's a big moment in the game. I feel for the referee because it happened so quickly. I thought there was enough for VAR to have another look and give him another look. If he made more of it, maybe they would have given it on-field."
"The argument around Isak and whether he should have made more of it, it's unnatural not to make more of it. When you get pulled and you're just about to score a goal, you normally complain like crazy. It'd a very odd reaction from Isak not to react."
"We have 50 cameras. Why does he have to complain when there are so many cameras. Everyone has seen it. In the end it wasn't given and we lose the game unfortunately, so well done to Arsenal."
Iraola's stance is a striking admission from a Premier League manager. He is effectively saying the officiating system rewards simulation over honesty, and that he will coach his players accordingly. The comments come after Isak chose not to appeal despite clearly being impeded.
The reaction from pundits was mixed. Murphy and Neville both felt Isak should have made more of the contact, while Cann highlighted the fine line between a slight tug and sustained holding. Van Dijk, meanwhile, pointed to the technology available and questioned why his teammate needed to complain at all.
Why Iraola is right to be worried
Alexander Isak was through on goal and about to head at goal when Jurrien Timber grabbed his shirt. The striker stayed upright, the chance went, and Andy Madley was unmoved. Stuart Attwell on VAR decided the tug was not enough to overturn the on-field decision.
Iraola's argument is that had Isak gone to ground, the penalty would have been given 100%. That may be an exaggeration, but the underlying point is valid: officials are more likely to react to a player on the floor. The Liverpool manager's frustration is that his striker's honesty cost his team a clear goalscoring opportunity.
The wider issue is consistency. If players know that staying on their feet reduces their chances of winning a penalty, the incentive to dive increases. Iraola is essentially saying he will not let his players be disadvantaged by doing the right thing. It is a damning indictment of how the rules are being applied.
Talking points
- Should Isak have gone down? The striker was pulled and about to score. Honesty cost his team a penalty, but going to ground would have been simulation.
- Was the VAR right not to intervene? Cann says it was right on the limit. Minimal contact vs sustained holding is a subjective call that fans will argue about.
- Does Iraola's stance invite diving? Telling players to go down sets a dangerous precedent. But if referees only give penalties for falls, what choice does he have?
- Van Dijk's cameras comment The Liverpool captain questions why Isak needed to appeal when 50 cameras saw the incident. But if the officials missed it, does appealing matter?
What happens next
Liverpool's next fixture is not specified in the source, but the squad will have to adapt to Iraola's new instruction. The bigger question is whether the manager will face any sanction for encouraging simulation. The Premier League has yet to comment, and it remains to be seen if Iraola's words will prompt a review of the officiating guidance.
Frequently asked questions
Did Alexander Isak get a penalty against Arsenal?
No. Referee Andy Madley did not point to the spot after Jurrien Timber pulled Isak's shirt, and VAR Stuart Attwell decided there was not enough contact to overturn the decision.
What did Andoni Iraola say about diving?
Iraola said he will tell his players to go down in future, claiming that if Isak had fallen, the penalty would have been given "100%".
What did Virgil van Dijk say about the incident?
Van Dijk said there are 50 cameras and questioned why Isak needed to complain when everyone had seen the pull, adding that Liverpool lost the game and congratulating Arsenal.
Related Articles
Filed under: Manager News | LA Premier League Home
