James Maddison has claimed officials are “petrified” to make decisions after being denied a stoppage-time penalty against Leeds.
With Spurs drawing 1-1 in the 103rd minute, Maddison was challenged by Leeds striker Lukas Nmecha in the penalty box - only for referee Jarred Gillett and VAR to wave away the appeals.
According to the Premier League Match Centre, the officials felt Nmecha got enough contact on the ball to justify the penalty not being given.
Maddison wrote on his Instagram account on Tuesday evening: "For clarity… The small, tiny touch on the ball to change direction came from the outside of my right foot, not Nmecha, and I told the ref that.
"But the check was over in about 20 seconds. Officials are petrified to make decisions on pitch now because of VAR.
"We keep fighting. COYS."
Had it been awarded, Spurs would have had the chance from 12 yards to extend their lead over 18th-placed West Ham to four points with two games remaining - taking a major stride towards survival in the process.
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.
Reacting to the incident on Your Site 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.
"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.
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.
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."
