Rooney backs VAR after West Ham equaliser is ruled out at Arsenal

West Ham thought they had salvaged a point when Callum Wilson bundled in a stoppage-time equaliser against Arsenal at the London Stadium, only for a lengthy VAR review to erase the goal and keep Mikel Arteta’s side on course at the top of the Premier League. The ruling, which came in the 95th minute of Arsenal’s 1-0 win on 10 May 2026, hinged on a foul on goalkeeper David Raya in the build-up.

Wayne Rooney came down firmly on the side of the officials. Speaking on BBC Sport’s The Wayne Rooney Show, the former England and Manchester United striker said VAR did “a really good job” and described the call as a clear foul. In Rooney’s view, the debate was inevitable because of the timing and the stakes, but the decision itself was correct.

That is the central tension in this incident, and in so many replay controversies now: not whether the laws can be applied, but how consistently and transparently they are being applied when a match hangs on a single contact in the penalty area. The Premier League Match Centre said the referee overturned the original decision of goal after VAR review because Raya had been fouled by West Ham striker Pablo Felipe before Wilson found the net. Arsenal immediately protested, insisting there had been a foul on Raya in the build-up.

Gary Neville raised the temperature further by calling it the “biggest moment in VAR history” in the Premier League. His reaction underlined how much was packed into one decision. Arsenal had already gone ahead through Leandro Trossard, so the overturned equaliser preserved a narrow win that moved the Gunners five points clear of Manchester City. For West Ham, who stayed 18th after the defeat, the same call deepened a relegation fight that now looks far more urgent than any argument over fine margins.

The episode will linger because it sat at the intersection of title pressure and survival pressure, with David Raya’s role at the centre of both. Rooney’s endorsement may calm some of the anger, but it also sharpens the wider question of what officials are actually judging when they intervene: the obviousness of the foul, the effect on the goalkeeper, or simply the consequence of letting a stoppage-time goal stand.