Howard Webb’s explanation on Match Officials: Mic’d Up that the disallowed Virgil van Dijk goal was “reasonable” has done little to placate Liverpool supporters. More telling than Webb’s characterization, however, was what the programme revealed about how the decision actually began.
Contrary to earlier accounts, the call to rule out the goal originated with assistant referee Stuart Burt rather than referee Chris Kavanagh, VAR Michael Oliver or assistant VAR Timothy Wood. The officials’ audio shows Burt initiating the sequence:
Assistant referee: “Robertson’s in line of vision, right in front of the keeper. He’s ducked under the ball. He’s very, very close to him. I think he’s [in] line of vision. I think he’s (Donnarumma) been impacted, mate.”
Referee: “Ok, so offside then.”
Assistant referee: “I think offside.”
That exchange makes clear the assistant was the instigator and, by Kavanagh’s brief affirmation, the effective on-field decision-maker. That matters, because it raises fresh questions about whether the ruling should have been handled differently.
Burt was poorly placed to judge whether Andy Robertson obstructed Mike Maignan/Donarumma’s line of vision; he was roughly at a right angle to the action. By contrast, Kavanagh and the VAR team had better vantage points to assess whether Robertson actually stood in the goalkeeper’s line of sight and affected his ability to play the ball. Yet the assistant’s immediate verdict — “in line of vision” — set the process in motion and left the VARs to determine only whether there had been a “clear and obvious” on-field error.
Webb’s point about the subjective nature of many offside incidents where the player does not play the ball is relevant. On non-factual, subjective matters such as interference, overturning an on-field decision requires a very high bar for a “clear and obvious” error. Once the assistant asserted Robertson was in the goalkeeper’s line of vision, there was limited scope for reversal.
Law 11 — Offside (summary):
– A player in an offside position is penalised for interfering with an opponent by preventing them from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing their line of vision;
– by challenging an opponent for the ball;
– by clearly attempting to play a ball that is close when that action impacts an opponent;
– or by making an obvious action that clearly affects an opponent’s ability to play the ball.
It looks odd that the VAR described Robertson as “mak[ing] an obvious movement directly” in front of the goalkeeper when the footage shows Robertson ducking away from the flight of the ball. How that assertion aligns with the rule’s wording — particularly the clause about “making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball” — is not straightforward. Still, any uncertainty over the VAR’s interpretation is largely academic because the on-field assistant’s call carried primacy in the decision chain.
This is not to say Webb was wrong to describe the decision as “not unreasonable.” Reasonable arguments exist for disallowing the goal. But it is reasonable — and important — to question whether the outcome should have hinged on an instant verdict about Robertson blocking the goalkeeper’s line of vision, especially when that judgement came from an official positioned at a poor angle to make it.
Full transcript of the officials’ exchange:
Assistant referee: “Robertson’s in line of vision, right in front of the keeper. He’s ducked under the ball. He’s very, very close to him. I think he’s line of vision. I think he’s (Donnarumma) been impacted, mate.”
Referee: “Ok so offside then.”
Assistant referee: “I think offside.”
Referee: “On-field decision is offside.”
VAR: “Checking the on-field decision of offside against Andy Robertson. Delay, delay. So you’ve got clear offside position.”
AVAR: “I agree with the on-field decision. I think it’s offside. It’s a clear, obvious action which clearly impacts on the goalkeeper.”
VAR: “Chris, it’s Michael. Confirming the on-field decision of offside against Andy Robertson. He is in an offside position, very close to the goalkeeper and makes an obvious movement directly in front of him. Check complete, offside.”