Liverpool saw a first-half equalizer against Manchester City chalked off earlier this month, and a Premier League review group has now confirmed that the video officials were right not to overturn the call.
Liverpool saw a first-half equalizer against Manchester City chalked off earlier this month, and a Premier League review group has now confirmed that the video officials were right not to overturn the call.
The Key Match Incidents (KMI) panel, which examines major refereeing choices after every round of fixtures, agreed that the on-field ruling should ideally have gone the other way. Even so, the majority felt the threshold for video intervention had not been met.
Out of five members, three believed the assistant referee was wrong to flag for offside in the build-up to Virgil van Dijk’s finish. But the same three also concluded that the VAR crew acted correctly by staying with the original verdict.
Liverpool had hoped the goal would stand when Andy Robertson moved under the dropping ball before it crossed the line. Referee Chris Kavanagh and assistant Stuart Burt instead penalized him, judging that his movement affected goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma.
The VAR team of Michael Oliver and Tim Wood supported the match referee’s decision. Their stance was that Robertson’s action in front of the goalkeeper could reasonably be interpreted as interfering with play.
Liverpool contacted Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) after the game, raising concerns that the criteria for an offside infraction had not been fulfilled. The club believed the defender’s actions should not have been considered influential.
When the KMI panel later assessed the incident, most members argued Robertson was not blocking Donnarumma’s view and did not clearly hinder the goalkeeper’s chance of reacting to the header. For that reason, they felt the goal ought to have counted.
However, some members did not view the original offside decision as a “clear and obvious” mistake. That distinction meant video officials were not deemed wrong for avoiding an intervention.
The KMI panel applies two judgments to each key scenario: the accuracy of the referee’s initial decision and whether the VAR should have overturned it. Because the second question demands a higher standard of proof, the group can reach mixed conclusions.
One member felt that Robertson’s movement created enough doubt for VAR to leave the call untouched, despite personally believing the goal should not have been disallowed.
The remaining two members fully agreed with the on-field decision. They argued that Robertson’s action directly affected Donnarumma’s attempt to make a save, supporting the offside ruling.
Referee chief Howard Webb later described the overall outcome as “not unreasonable,” highlighting the subjectivity involved in this type of decision.
In another weekend incident, the KMI panel flagged a misjudgment in Brentford’s meeting with Newcastle. Dango Ouattara was cautioned for simulation after going down under a challenge from Dan Burn.
The group unanimously viewed Burns’s action as a careless trip and said a penalty should have been awarded.
A majority of the panel deemed the non-penalty decision to be a clear and obvious error after reviewing the video evidence. Two members disagreed on the VAR element, arguing the contact was slight enough for the referee’s call to stand.
All other major decisions from the round of matches were upheld, including a unanimous verdict backing Craig Pawson’s choice not to give Arsenal a penalty when Dan Ballard’s arm caught Mikel Merino. The panel ruled that Ballard’s action was part of a normal challenge.
