PGMOL boss Howard Webb has admitted Everton should have been awarded a penalty for handball against Mateus Fernandes in their defeat at West Ham United
The ball touches the hand of Mateus Fernandes behind Thierno Barry during the match between West Ham United and Everton at London Stadium on April 25, 2026
The ball touches the hand of Mateus Fernandes behind Thierno Barry during the match between West Ham United and Everton at London Stadium on April 25, 2026(Image: Jed Leicester/Everton FC/SmartFrame)
View Image
Howard Webb has admitted that Everton should have been awarded a penalty for handball in their damaging 2-1 Premier League defeat at West Ham United last month.
The Blues were trailing 1-0 when the ball struck West Ham midfielder Mateus Fernandes' hand inside the box as he grappled with [Thierno Barry](http://Thierno Barry).
The Premier League attempted to explain the decision with a post on their Match Centre page on X that read: "The referee’s call of no penalty was checked and confirmed by VAR - with it deemed that Fernandes accidentally handled the ball while grappling with an opponent."
But that cut little ice with a furious Everton manager David Moyes, who said: "I'm a bit surprised. I've been to see them (the officials) and VAR are saying it was grappling – well, the boy marking him was grappling. He punched the ball. I'm amazed they haven't given it."
Blues chief executive Angus Kinnear contacted the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) to express concerns about the consistency of officiating in the Premier League. But when asked if the club had received a response, Moyes then said: "Yes, but it's always rubbish what you get back. You never get anything good back.
"Jonathan (Williams), the secretary, spoke about it and spoke with them. I didn’t do so, but it is never what you want to hear."
Now PGMOL chief refereeing officer Webb has spoken publicly for the first time about the controversial incident.
Speaking on Match Officials Mic'd Up, he said: "Interesting situation, this one. I'm with you. From the outside, I want to say we think a penalty should've been awarded here against Fernandes. However, I don't think he really meant to deliberately handle the ball.
"But most penalties that are given where there's no intent to handle the ball are when players make themselves unnaturally bigger. They take a risk by putting their arm out to maybe block a shot or a cross, and they know that if the ball does hit their arm or their hand in that position, then they're going to pay the price for that.
"He doesn't make himself unnaturally bigger here. He moves his arm forward. I think he's probably trying to prevent the attacker from turning him. But in doing that, he kind of bats the ball away.
"He can't even see the ball, but Fernandes knows more or less where the ball is, and it's a deliberate action with his arm, probably not to handle the ball, but to do something. And therefore, I think we've given Fernandes way too much benefit of the doubt here.
"Looking really quite technically at it, I think the game just expects a penalty in this situation. We have to fall in line with what the game expects, the understanding of what the game expects, and I think in this situation, a penalty would've been the right outcome and let Fernandes explain what he was trying to do rather than us trying to explain why we decided not to intervene!"
A run of controversial calls against Everton continued in their next match, the 3-3 draw at home to Manchester City, in which an angry Moyes felt midfielder [Merlin Rohl](http://Merlin Rohl) was pulled down in the area by opposition captain Bernardo Silva as a corner was swung in.
That incident wasn't brought up on the latest Match Officials Mic'd Up show, but the decision to overturn the linesman's initial call to rule out Barry's equaliser for offside, after he latched on to Marc Guehi's back pass, was discussed.
Webb said: "Clearly, this is a correctly awarded goal in the end. The officials initially penalise Barry for offside, but then they have a consultation on the field and they award the goal, which is the right thing to do.
"It’s the right thing to do because Guehi plays the ball back towards his goalkeeper in a very controlled way, a deliberate way. He’s not under immediate pressure by Barry at that moment. Barry is some distance away.
"He’s not challenging Guehi. He’s not impacting his ability to play the ball. Guehi chooses to play it back to the goalkeeper, makes a bad job of it, and that resets the offside position for Barry, and Barry can then nip in and score the goal. So definitely the right outcome, even though it was initially read incorrectly on the field at the start.
"(Barry becomes onside again) He does. Well, he does as soon as Guehi plays that ball in a controlled and deliberate way. That’s a reset of the play. If Barry had come into challenge Guehi, and Guehi had sort of instinctively stuck a foot out to stop the ball, that would still be offside because then he’s interfering with the opponent.
"But certainly, that action by Guehi is so controlled, it’s such a deliberate action, that it resets the play and allows Barry to get back involved.
"What we would do by disallowing this goal is rewarding bad defending. Guehi’s knocking it back to the goalkeeper. If he does that normally like you’d expect him to do, then Barry would be an irrelevance. But he doesn’t. He plays it back towards the goalkeeper in a bad way, and that allows Barry to get back involved.
"So that controlled action is the important thing, and yeah, it’s certainly a good goal."