Ex-PGMOL chief Keith Hackett has weighed in on the controversy surrounding Benjamin Sesko's effort vs Liverpool. The Manchester United striker scored the second goal in what turned out to be a 3-2 win for the Red Devils.
The two Premier League rivals met at Old Trafford, with each team desperate to secure Champions League qualification, but Matheus Cunha gave the home side an ideal start, as he found the back of the net after just six minutes.
Riding a wave of momentum, Sesko then doubled that lead with 14 minutes on the clock. Liverpool would go in two goals down at the break, but mistakes from Amad Diallo and Senne Lammens allowed them to level the game at 2-2, through Dominik Szoboszlai and Cody Gakpo.
Man Utd weren't to be defeated, though, as they found a winner through Kobbie Mainoo. The midfielder controlled his finish in fine fashion, as the Red Devils won the match 3-2.
Sesko's Goal vs Liverpool Shrouded in Controversy
The most controversial incident in the match came when Sesko found the back of the net in the first half. Having lost by just a single goal, Liverpool fans will no doubt feel aggrieved over the incident.
After Bruno Fernandes put the ball into the six-yard box, Freddie Woodman got a finger tip on the ball. This only carried it into Sesko, who then bundled it across the line. However, replays seemed to show the ball touching the striker's hand before it went in.
VAR checked the incident, but the goal was allowed to stand. Offering a clear verdict on the matter, Hackett has claimed that the goal should have been ruled out. Taking to social media, he simply stated:
"The law states that you cannot score a goal with your hand even if considered accidental."
Sir Alex Ferguson Related
Sir Alex Ferguson Rushed to Ambulance in Health Scare Before Man Utd vs Liverpool
Worrying news from Old Trafford.
Rules Expert Explains Why VAR Didn't Rule Out Man Utd Goal
MixCollage-03-May-2026-04-31-PM-106
Despite Hackett's claim, the Premier League released a statement explaining that the officials could not intervene as there was 'no conclusive evidence.' In full, the reason given was:
"The referee’s call of goal was checked and confirmed by VAR – with it deemed there was no conclusive evidence that Sesko handled the ball before scoring."
Having seen the TV replays, Hackett clearly felt that there was actually conclusive evidence of a handball, which explains his stance. However, rules expert Dale Johnson has now claimed that such forensic footage is not available to the VAR team. He said:
"The VAR cannot use the ultra-zoom which Sky showed in the replay several minutes after the goal."
While this may well be a valid excuse for why the goal stood, it does beg the question: why do the media have better technology to review Premier League footage than the PGMOL? Perhaps something needs to change on that front.