Foul or fair? Should Spurs have got FIRST PL penalty of season vs Leeds?

The biggest VAR call in 24 hours! Should Spurs have been awarded a 90+13 penalty?

Spurs boss Roberto De Zerbi said that referee Gillett - who had earlier awarded Leeds a penalty for a wild overhead kick by Mathys Tel - was "not calm" during the match.

The controversy surrounding match officiating comes just over 24 hours after West Ham had their 95th-minute equaliser disallowed against Arsenal for a foul on David Raya by striker Pablo inside the area - an incident that took over four minutes to determine.

Also See:

• Who are Tottenham's last two games against?
• Stream Spurs' last two games on Sky with NOW

"For sure we suffered the pressure today. We didn't play with passion with the ball, too frenetic but also the referee was not calm today," De Zerbi said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Tottenham Hotspur boss Roberto De Zerbi questioned Jarred Gillett's performance in the 1-1 draw with Leeds in the Premier League, suggesting that the referee wasn't calm enough

"I can't understand the polemic about yesterday's VAR because it was 200 per cent a foul, not 100 per cent, 200 per cent."

O'Hara: It's an obvious penalty

Reacting to the incident on Sky Sports Fan Club, former Spurs midfielder Jamie O'Hara added: "It's a penalty. I'm sorry, I don't care what anyone says.

"You can show me a million angles of this, where does the ball move? I don't believe there is enough movement from the ball and the player. That ball does not move. That is a penalty.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Jamie O'Hara can't understand how the referee didn't award a penalty to Tottenham Hotspur after James Maddison went down in the box under a challenge from Lukas Nmecha against Leeds United

"He bottled it, that ref. We saw a crazy decision the other day at West Ham - which was a foul. But they took an age over that decision. They looked at that for five minutes. They looked at the [Nmecha] challenge for 30 seconds and played on."

There were 49 seconds between the challenge being made on Maddison and referee Gillett receiving the news that his on-field decision of 'no penalty' was correct.

Does it even matter if Nmecha touches the ball?

Image: Jarred Gillett waves away Spurs' penalty appeals against Leeds

The first sign that Gillett was convinced that Nmecha played the ball was his decision to award a corner once the Maddison challenge was made. There was also the linesman on the touchline who would have helped make that decision.

However, there have been incidents in the past where penalties have been awarded, even though the defender has got a touch on the ball.

In January 2025, Arsenal's William Saliba was penalised for conceding a penalty on Brighton's Joao Pedro - despite the centre-back heading the ball before coming into contact with the attacker via a follow through.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PGMOL chief Howard Webb admits that the penalty incident during the Brighton v Arsenal match, involving William Saliba and Joao Pedro was unusual, but agrees that the Frenchman did commit a foul

Justifying the decision of a penalty, PGMO chief Howard Webb argued that getting a touch on the ball does not negate a penalty, especially when a follow through is concerned.

"That touch on the ball doesn't negate the possible award of a penalty," said Webb about the Saliba incident.

"We've seen other examples where the ball may touch a player but there's still heavy contact on the follow through and it's a penalty."