Sky Sports Ref Watch Split Over West Ham Penalty Decision Against Newcastle United
Sky Sports’ Ref Watch panel has weighed in on the controversial moment during West Ham United’s clash with Newcastle United at the London Stadium, where a Hammers penalty was overturned after a VAR review.
Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher believes that VAR made the correct decision to overturn the spot-kick, while ex-Cardiff City striker Jay Bothroyd took the opposite stance — arguing that the penalty should have stood despite the minimal contact with the ball.
The incident occurred early in the first half after Jacob Murphy had fired Newcastle ahead with a fourth-minute goal. Moments later, referee Rob Jones pointed to the spot, believing Malick Thiaw had fouled Jarrod Bowen as the West Ham attacker shaped to shoot.
However, replays soon revealed that Thiaw had managed to get a slight touch on the ball before colliding with Bowen. Following a lengthy VAR review and a pitchside monitor check, Jones reversed his initial decision and awarded a drop ball to the Newcastle goalkeeper. Explaining his verdict to the London Stadium crowd, the referee announced:
“After review, Newcastle 12 [Thiaw] clearly touches the ball before subsequent contact with West Ham 20 [Bowen]. My final decision therefore is no penalty and a drop ball to the goalkeeper.”
The announcement was met with boos from the home supporters — though those frustrations turned to relief at full-time as West Ham ultimately secured the victory.
On Monday morning’s Ref Watch on Sky Sports, Gallagher defended the officials’ actions, saying:
“There’s no doubt about it — he’s gone in to play the ball, not the man. I genuinely thought it was a penalty at first, but after seeing one replay, you can clearly see he gets the ball.”
But Jay Bothroyd saw things differently. The former striker argued that Thiaw’s touch on the ball wasn’t significant enough to prevent Bowen from getting his shot away and therefore shouldn’t have negated the foul:
“He hasn’t touched the ball enough to take it away from Bowen. The ball barely changes direction or speed. Bowen still has a chance to shoot, but Thiaw blocks him — so that should still be a penalty. Just because you touch the ball doesn’t mean it’s okay if you also stop the attacker from scoring.”
The debate has divided fans online, with many agreeing with Bothroyd that Thiaw’s minimal contact wasn’t sufficient to overturn the decision, while others backed Gallagher’s interpretation that the defender’s touch was decisive.
Regardless, the moment proved a key talking point in what was a dramatic encounter — and another example of how VAR continues to spark heated discussion in the Premier League.
Leave a Reply