Shearer and Walcott differ on VAR decision in Sunderland vs Arsenal match, Arteta gets angry
Alan Shearer and Theo Walcott found themselves in firm disagreement over a major talking point during Sunderland’s 2–2 draw with Arsenal at the Stadium of Light. The moment in question came early in the game, when VAR decided that Dan Ballard’s aerial collision with Arsenal midfielder Mikel Merino did not warrant any further punishment.
The decision sparked outrage from Arsenal’s bench, with Mikel Arteta visibly frustrated, while pundits and fans alike debated whether Ballard had overstepped the line or was simply competing fairly for the ball.
The controversial incident occurred just seven minutes into the match. As the ball was played into the air, Ballard rose to challenge Merino and appeared to catch the Spaniard with his arm during the contest. Merino required lengthy treatment before being able to continue, and the clash immediately became one of the game’s biggest talking points. After the final whistle, the debate carried over into the Match of the Day studio, where host Kelly Cates asked former Arsenal forward Theo Walcott for his take on the incident.
Walcott admitted that he saw the event differently from many others, particularly his fellow pundit Alan Shearer. “Well, my view, I look at it a little bit differently, to be honest,” Walcott began. He explained that while the challenge may not have been “clear and obvious” enough for VAR to overturn the on-field decision, he still felt that Ballard’s actions crossed the line. Walcott pointed out that it was very early in the game — just seven minutes — and suggested that Ballard might have been trying to impose himself physically on the match, describing it as the defender’s attempt to “put his mark on the game.”
Walcott referenced Arteta’s comments about Sunderland being “disruptive” and agreed that the challenge exemplified that approach. “There’s a slight movement from the elbow to Merino’s cheekbone,” he noted, adding that while he and Shearer might not see eye to eye on the matter, he believed the elbow was raised too high and was “very disruptive” in its execution.
Alan Shearer, however, completely disagreed. The former England captain and Newcastle legend defended Ballard, arguing that the Sunderland defender had done nothing wrong. From Shearer’s perspective, Ballard was simply doing what any centre-back should do in that situation — protecting his space and ensuring that the opposing forward or midfielder could not get across him to win the ball.
“I think as a defender, if he allows that forward to get across him, Merino, his manager goes absolutely berserk at him,” Shearer explained. “That’s his space, and he cannot allow any forward to get across him.” He went on to add that Ballard had every right to challenge for the ball in that manner, noting that such physical duels are part of the game. “He then settles himself and goes for the header. He can’t jump without doing that for a header,” Shearer said, defending the natural movement of a defender competing in the air.
The exchange between Shearer and Walcott highlighted the broader debate about where to draw the line between fair physical play and dangerous conduct. While Walcott leaned toward seeing Ballard’s challenge as overly aggressive, Shearer insisted it was simply strong defending. The disagreement reflected two classic footballing perspectives — the defender’s instinct to protect their ground and the attacker’s concern for player safety — both of which continue to fuel debates about the use of VAR and the interpretation of physical challenges in modern football.
