“VAR Should NOT Have Intervened.” – Ex-PGMOL Chief Drops Neco Williams Bombshell After Nottingham Forest vs Tottenham Handball Chaos
A major refereeing controversy has erupted after Nottingham Forest were denied a potential winning goal against Tottenham Hotspur, with former PGMOL chief Keith Hackett delivering a clear and damning verdict on the decision. Hackett believes VAR should not have intervened in the incident involving Neco Williams, describing the call as one that failed the key test of being a clear and obvious error.
The match at the City Ground ended 0-0, leaving both sides still searching for their first win of the Premier League season. The defining moment arrived in the second half when Williams forced the ball over the line following a scramble in the Tottenham box. Referee Craig Pawson initially awarded the goal, only for VAR official Peter Bankes to recommend it be disallowed for handball.
Replays showed a chaotic sequence in which Morgan Gibbs-White’s effort caused confusion among the Spurs defenders. Williams threw himself at the ball as Sandro Tonali attempted to clear, and the Forest full-back appeared to bundle it home. After a lengthy check, the goal was ruled out on the basis that the ball had touched Williams’ arm immediately before crossing the line.
Keith Hackett did not agree with the intervention.
“VAR should not have intervened,” Hackett stated. “The threshold is supposed to be clear and obvious error. From the angles available, this is not clear and obvious. The on-field decision was goal, and there is enough doubt in the pictures to leave it alone. Once you start guessing or relying on the slightest movement of a shirt, you undermine the whole system.”
Hackett continued: “I’ve looked at it carefully. There is contact that can be argued, but it is not definitive enough to overturn a goal that has already been given. The protocol is there for a reason. If it is not clear and obvious, you stay with the referee. In this case, they went looking for a reason to disallow it.”
The comments have added significant weight to the frustration felt by Nottingham Forest. Manager Oliver Glasner was already vocal after the match, accusing VAR of “guessing” and insisting the goal should have stood. Williams himself was equally firm, stating he had headed the ball and that the decision did not meet the required standard for intervention.
“It’s a goal,” Williams said. “VAR is there for clear and obvious errors, and for me that is not clear and obvious. I’ve seen the images and at no point did I think I handballed it. I headed it in between my arms.”
Hackett’s intervention aligns closely with that view. The former PGMOL chief has repeatedly stressed that the system works best when it corrects only the most blatant mistakes. In his assessment, the Neco Williams incident fell short of that bar.
“The danger with these decisions is that they create the impression that every single contact will be hunted down,” Hackett explained. “That is not what VAR was designed for. It was designed to fix the howlers. When you overturn goals on marginal or unclear contact, you create more problems than you solve. Forest have every right to feel hard done by.”
The decision proved costly in the context of the match. A goal at that stage would have given Forest a platform to push for a first win of the season. Instead, the game remained goalless, and both teams left the City Ground with a point that felt insufficient for different reasons. Tottenham extended their wait for a first league goal and first victory, while Forest were left reflecting on a moment that could have changed their early-season narrative.
Supporters have reacted strongly to Hackett’s comments. Many feel the former referee has articulated what they saw in real time: a goal given on the pitch, followed by a lengthy review that produced a soft and inconclusive overturn. The sense of injustice has been heightened by the fact that the contact, even if present, appeared incidental in a crowded and chaotic goalmouth scramble.
Hackett was careful to acknowledge the difficulty of the situation for the officials. “These are not easy decisions in real time or even on replay,” he said. “But the standard has to remain high. Clear and obvious means exactly that. If you have to slow it down repeatedly and still cannot be certain, you do not intervene. That is the principle that is being lost.”
The controversy adds to a growing list of handball debates in the early weeks of the season. Each one chips away at confidence in the consistency of the process. For Forest, the immediate concern is more practical. They remain without a win and without a goal from open play in the league, and a moment that should have provided a breakthrough was taken away.
Keith Hackett’s verdict is unlikely to change the result, but it has given formal backing to the argument that the intervention was unnecessary. In his view, the goal should have stood. VAR, he insists, should not have become involved.
Whether that message is heard by those responsible for the system remains to be seen. For Nottingham Forest and their supporters, the frustration of a disallowed goal that many believe was legitimate will linger long after the final whistle.
