Mikel Arteta may soon need a bigger hard drive.

Arsenal’s details obsessed manager recently revealed that he has a “massive storage of images” stuffed with evidence to prove the apparent hyprocrisy and injustice befalling himself and the club at large. Be it the number of times managers leave their technical area or, as he pointed out after last week’s win over Liverpool, “a lot of clips about shirt pulls and grabs.”

In the Anfield press room, Arteta was defending Jurriën Timber’s blatant tug of Alexander Isak’s shirt which somehow didn’t result in a penalty. The implied argument was that Arsenal have suffered the same fate, time and again. The Basque boss was vindicated within a week.

In a reversal of roles, it was an Arsenal forward, Kai Havertz, being tugged down by a handsy opposition defender, Hull City’s Nobel Mendy, at the Emirates on Saturday. Once again, there was no immediate whistle from the referee as play was allowed to continue for multiple minutes.

Eventually, after a promising forward foray from Hull, referee Farai Hallam brought the game to an abrupt halt. A befuddled set of 60,000 fans watched the official review the footage at the touchline monitor before a hush descended as he took to the microphone.

“After review, there is a holding offense by Blue No. 32 on Red No. 29,” Hallam announced to large cheers. They soon faded. “However, Red No. 29 is in an offside position, so the final decision will be a free kick for offside to Hull City.”

This bizarre bait-and-switch was dismissed by many in the ground as an unnecessary interruption. Havertz had led a frustrated appeal which wasn’t entirely supported by his teammates who were more preoccupied with defending a Hull breakaway. However, the laws of the game expose quite how significant—and erroneous—that intervention was in a match which Arsenal only won by the most slender of margins.

Why Arsenal Should Have Won a Penalty Against Hull

Law 11 in the FA Handbook is quite clear: “In situations where ... a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalized as it has occurred before the offside offense.”

The fact that Havertz had strayed beyond the last Hull defender was irrelevant. As the run occurred “before playing or attempting to play the ball,” he wasn’t offside in that moment. Mendy’s foul, therefore, should have taken precedence.

“This should really have been given as a penalty kick,” Darren Cann, the former World Cup final assistant referee, told BBC’s Match of the Day.

Fortunately for the officials, Martin Ødegaard ensured Arsenal escaped with all three points thanks to a snaffled effort in the 72nd minute.

Mikel Arteta Offers Uncharacteristic Response to Referee Injustice

Rather than rage against the figures in black, Arteta would not stray beyond gentle surprise at the incorrect decision—chiefly because he wasn’t sure if it was incorrect.

“I was surprised because when they sent the referee to the monitor, I was being told it was a clear penalty for a pull,” the Arsenal boss admitted after his side prevailed with a 1–0 win. “They decided not to give it because of the starting position of Kai—he was offside—so I’m not sure what the interpretation is, I’m sure they will make it clear to understand.”

Arteta’s lack of fury likely came from a place of confusion. “I don’t know,” the retired midfielder admitted when quizzed on whether it was a correct decision. “I need to understand the decision, what is overruling and in terms of the decision-making.”

Perhaps when he realizes how wrong it was there will be a different reaction.