The Wales international believes his disallowed goal against Tottenham should have stood after VAR intervened at the City Ground
Neco Williams has publicly questioned the decision to rule out his goal in Nottingham Forest’s goalless draw with Tottenham, insisting he did not handle the ball.
The Wales international thought he had given Forest the lead at the City Ground when he battled between Micky van de Ven and Sandro Tonali to force the ball over the line from close range.
Referee Craig Pawson initially awarded the goal, only for VAR Peter Bankes to intervene and rule that Williams had handled the ball immediately before scoring.
Williams was adamant afterwards that the officials had made the wrong call, arguing the evidence did not meet the threshold required for VAR intervention.
“It’s a goal,” Williams told Sky Sports.
“VAR is there for when there’s a clear and obvious error, and for me, that’s not clear and obvious.
“I’ve seen the images back and not one moment I thought I hand-balled it.
“I headed it in between my arms. If you pause it, it’s going to look like it hit my arm, but it didn’t hit my arm.”
The decision proved costly for Forest, who were held to a 0-0 draw despite believing they had scored what could have been a winning goal.
Forest manager Oliver Glasner was also highly critical of the VAR intervention, saying the available replays did not clearly demonstrate that the ball had struck Williams’ arm.
“The referee allowed the goal and I have watched it back – because in the game I could not see anything, nobody could – and I have seen five or six different angles,” Glasner said.
“To be fair, from one angle, you can guess that the ball touched the arm, because the shirt moves a little bit.
“But it is not clear. Is it the ball? Tonali was on the line… VAR cannot intervene when he is guessing.”
Glasner said the decision went against guidance given to Premier League clubs before the season, when the threshold for VAR intervention was emphasised.
“It was not clear and obvious,” he said. “We had a briefing before the season that the threshold for VAR intervention should be very high.
“That is why this was a wrong intervention, for me.”
The Forest boss stressed that he understood the difficulty of officiating Premier League matches but felt the intervention ultimately undermined the referee’s original decision.
“What we are told – and this is exactly the right way – to support the referee; to keep the threshold for VAR intervention very high and to strengthen the referees’ decisions,” Glasner said.
“That is what they did not do today.”
Williams was also frustrated by what he felt was a wider pattern of decisions going against Forest during the game.
“I think a lot of decisions didn’t go our way today,” he said. “But this is football.”
Glasner claimed Forest should also have been awarded a penalty after Mohammed Kudus bundled Williams over while the Welshman challenged for a header.
The manager subsequently spoke to Pawson, although he acknowledged that the referee had little choice once VAR had advised him that the goal should be disallowed.
“I told him after the game that, I feel the goal should have stood,” Glasner said.
“But if he gets told it is handball, he has to trust that. He has to trust the VAR.”
You must be logged in to post a comment Login