Cann says United goal against Forest should have been disallowed
Darren Cann said United’s second goal should have been ruled out after a VAR review, reigniting anger over how accidental handball is judged in attacking moves.
Darren Cann said Manchester United’s second goal against Nottingham Forest should have been disallowed, after a VAR review of Bryan Mbeumo’s arm contact in the build-up left the original decision standing at Old Trafford.
Matheus Cunha scored the goal in United’s 3-2 win over Forest on Sunday, May 17, 2026, a strike that restored Manchester United’s lead shortly after the match had been level. Referee Michael Salisbury went to the pitchside monitor to examine the incident, then upheld the on-field call. The Premier League Match Centre later explained the outcome: “After review, the decision of goal stands because the handball offence is accidental, therefore the final decision is goal.”
Cann, the former assistant referee and BBC Sport laws analyst, said that reading of the law was wrong. His view was that football’s expectation is that Mbeumo controlled the ball, particularly when the touch leads directly to a goal. He also noted that it was only the fourth time in the Premier League this season that a referee had stuck with the original decision after a VAR review, underlining how rare Salisbury’s call was in practice.
Forest were furious that the goal stood, and the decision quickly became one of the defining flashpoints of the afternoon. Vitor Pereira, the Nottingham Forest manager, called for a Premier League-wide meeting to clarify the handball law after what he described as a “very clear” handball. Gary Neville, working on the broadcast, also reacted strongly and was left baffled by the ruling.
The wider argument is not really about one touch of the ball by Mbeumo. It is about whether an accidental arm contact in an attacking move should wipe out a goal when the move leads straight to a score. The Premier League’s explanation treated the incident as accidental, but the reaction from Cann, Pereira and Neville showed how little confidence remains in the consistency of these rulings. With VAR still producing different outcomes in similar situations, the handball law remains one of the clearest tests of trust in the system.
Know something we missed? Have a correction or additional information?
Submit a Tip
