(Photo by Stuart Franklin/Getty Images)

Matthew Upson insists there was contact for Arsenal’s penalty against Leverkusen

Originally posted on Just Arsenal | Last updated Mar 11, 2026 7:00 PM ET

Arsenal secured a late equaliser against Bayer Leverkusen in their Champions League round of 16 clash after being awarded a penalty that has since sparked debate about whether the decision was harsh on the German side.

The Gunners were given the spot kick late in the contest following a challenge on the lively Noni Madueke inside the penalty area. Kai Havertz stepped up to convert the opportunity, ensuring Arsenal left Germany with a draw rather than defeat.

Both Madueke and Havertz had been introduced as second-half substitutes, and their involvement proved significant as Arsenal attempted to regain control of a match that had been slipping away from them.

Arsenal Fight Back After Falling Behind

Leverkusen had taken the lead early in the second half and appeared to be on course for an important victory. The German side produced a disciplined performance and managed to frustrate Arsenal for long periods of the match.

Their organisation and determination limited Arsenal’s attacking effectiveness, forcing the visitors to work hard for openings. As the game progressed, it looked increasingly likely that Leverkusen would hold on to secure the win.

Many observers felt the home side deserved credit for the way they controlled large portions of the match and prevented Arsenal from finding any sustained rhythm in their attacking play. For that reason, some believed it was unfortunate for Leverkusen that they did not manage to see out the victory.

Debate Surrounds Late Penalty Decision

The decisive moment arrived when Madueke drove forward and went to ground inside the penalty area following a challenge from a Leverkusen defender. While some felt the decision was soft, the referee awarded the penalty, which Havertz converted to secure the equaliser.

The incident has remained a talking point after the final whistle, with differing opinions on whether the contact justified the decision.

Matthew Upson offered his view on the incident, explaining that although the fall appeared soft, there was still sufficient contact for the decision to stand.

He said, as cited by the BBC: “It stems from Madueke doing what he’s done since coming on the pitch, he drives at players.

“Madueke goes down a little bit softly for me but there is contact and there’s enough for VAR to say ‘we’re going to stay out of it’.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

This article first appeared on Just Arsenal and was syndicated with permission.

More must-reads: