Follow us on

'.

Even a former West Ham player says Tottenham deserved a penalty for James Maddison foul

Add as preferred source on Google

A former West Ham United star has reacted to the latest evidence that has come to light regarding the foul on James Maddison in stoppage time of Tottenham’s 1-1 draw against Leeds.

In a week dominated by debates over the use of VAR and the quality of officiating, Tottenham have good reason to feel aggrieved with a big decision going against them yet again.

Maddison appeared to have been brought down in the box by Felix Nmecha, but Jarred Gillett was not convinced, and VAR did not see a reason to ask the official to re-watch the incident.

Maddison has said publicly that it was he, not Nmecha, who got the final touch on the ball, and the Spurs star has accused the officials of being too petrified to make decisions in the era of VAR.

James Maddison screams for Tottenham penalty
Photo by Shaun Brooks – CameraSport via Getty Images

Don Hutchison claims Tottenham should have been awarded a penalty against Leeds

Some experts have suggested that Jillett was right not to award Spurs a penalty as the Leeds forward got a small touch on the ball.

However, footage from a new angle shows that it was Maddison who got the final touch with the outside of the boot, with Nmecha appearing to make no contact with the ball.

Former West Ham midfielder Don Hutchison shared the clip on his handle and suggested that it was a stonewall penalty.

Hutchison wrote on X: “This is why I show no bias whatsoever. Maddison is the one who touches the ball to the side, not the defender. Pen all day long IMO.”

Big question marks again about the implementation of VAR

There has been a lot of consternation about the way VAR has been implemented and the inconsistencies in the decision-making this season.

This is another example of a huge inconsistency, as it is unclear why VAR only appeared to spend around 20 seconds reviewing the decision, unlike West Ham’s equaliser on Sunday, which was combed over for around five minutes before the final decision.

The PMGOL perhaps needs to explain either whether this new angle was not available to VAR or whether the video officials chose not to view it, as they were convinced there was a touch after watching other angles.

Have something to tell us about this article?