Liverpool supporters were left furious on Saturday after their side fell into the gray area of the offside rule for the second consecutive game. It gave weight to the argument that authorities need clarity in decision-making in such situations.
Nottingham Forest scored a controversial goal at Anfield just 13 days after Virgil van Dijk’s header against Man City was ruled out in similar circumstances for Arne Slott’s side.
The question of how officials interpret whether a player is influencing an opponent when he stands in front of or near a goalkeeper was back on the table on Sunday. When Eberechi Eze scored Arsenal’s second goal alongside Guglielmo Vicario against Tottenham, both Leandro Trossard and Martin Zvimendi didn’t seem to see it.
Liverpool lost both games 3-0, while Tottenham lost to Arsenal 4-1. However, the incidents, which occurred at key moments in each game, could lead Reds manager Arn Slott and Spurs head coach Thomas Frank to point out that inconsistency is hurting the team.
Liverpool’s Virgil van Dijk’s header against Man City was ruled out after Andy Robertson was ruled offside.
Murillo’s shot went past Dan Ndoye and into the Liverpool goal.
Eberechi Eze fires through a crowd of players to score Arsenal’s second goal for Spurs
Your opinion: A revelatory idea to solve the offside problem.
John L.: “If you’re in an offside position inside the penalty area, you’re offside, even if you’re not interfering with play. If you’re outside the box and you’re not interfering with play, keep playing. That way we don’t make these different decisions.”
Tarquin: “Anyone in an offside position is offside! No matter where they are. As Brian Clough once said, if you’re not disrupting play, what are you doing on the pitch?”
Jim: “VAR shouldn’t be involved at all. Only on-field decisions. Since it was introduced, it has degraded refereeing skills. Without VAR, we wouldn’t have this much controversy.”
Chris: “If you’re offside in the six-yard box, you’re offside. When you’re this close to goal, you’re disrupting the play just by being there. And generally, you just use your players’ feet on the offside line. If they’re leaning, they’re leaning.”
AF: “A player within the frame of the goal should be considered active, whether he is touching the ball or not. He is therefore obliged to remain in an onside position. Then the ‘gray zone’ will be resolved.
Rob Labs: “There is a clear triangle from post to post to the ball. Any opponent in an offside position within that triangle should be offside regardless of their line of sight.”
Jake: “Did we ever think for a second that the rules didn’t matter? Subjectivity is fine as long as the results are consistent, but they conceded two clearly offside goals and disallowed a clearly onside goal.”
Official line on this situation
PGMOL manager Howard Webb said of Van Dijk’s goal against Man City when Andy Robertson was deemed to have influenced goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma from an offside position.
“The referee has to make a judgment. Did that specific action affect the goalkeeper and his ability to save the ball? That’s where the subjectivity comes in.”
Use Chrome Browser for a more accessible video player
Listen to the audio of Virgil van Dijk’s goal against Manchester City being canceled. PGMOL boss Howard Webb explained on match official show Mic’d Up why VAR did not intervene to overturn the decision.
He continued: “It is not unreasonable to understand why (the officials) would draw such a conclusion when the player is so close to the goalkeeper, the ball is coming towards the goalkeeper, and he has to duck to get in the way.”
On Saturday, Dan Ndoye adjusted his body position to avoid Murillo’s shot from an offside position, but a statement from the Premier League Match Center said Ndoye was “not within the line of sight of (Liverpool goalkeeper) Alisson and did not take any action that would have affected his opponent.”
Regarding Eze’s goal against Tottenham, when Trossard and Zvimendi were on the other side of the Tottenham defense in front of his team-mates, the Premier League Match Center announced that “no Arsenal player was deemed to have been within the goalkeeper’s field of vision and he made no movements that could influence the opponent while in an offside position.”
Discussing Arsenal’s goal on Ref Watch, pundit Jay Bothroyd said: “That was probably the worst decision. They were in the keeper’s line of sight. When I saw it, I immediately said it was offside.”
Did the officials adapt their approach after Van Dijk’s goal was disallowed?
Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher suggested in Refwatch that referees may have adapted their approach to such situations following scrutiny for Van Dijk’s canceled goal at Man City.
“I was told last week that Liverpool’s goal should have been a goal,” he said. “We were given two goals this week and I think everyone saw and learned.
“They’re not being consistent. They’re actually recognizing and thinking that in this situation a more acceptable situation is the goal.”
“They’ve actually given people what they want.”
After watching Eze’s opening goal, there’s no way Arsenal players could say they weren’t blocking Vicario’s line of sight.
Les Ferdinand on Sky Sports
There has been no public statement from PGMOL or Webb that referees have been instructed to approach these situations differently.
But Mr Gallagher said clarification of the rules was now needed.
“The gray area in these types of incidents is too wide. We are following the instructions of the authorities on the day.
Use Chrome Browser for a more accessible video player
Following Virgil van Dijk’s canceled goal against Manchester City, Arne Slott compared it to John Stones’ goal against Wolves last season – both games were refereed by Chris Kavanagh.
“It’s very subjective, it’s too loose. There’s no clear barrier like in handball.
“If we tighten this up, people might not like it, but we’ll accept it. At this point, people are saying this happened to our team this week, and this happened to our team this week.”
‘Liverpool are outraged by both decisions.’
