Liverpool have formally raised a complaint to the Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) following the decision to disallow Virgil van Dijk’s goal during their 3-0 defeat to Manchester City at the Etihad Stadium. The club believes the officials misapplied Law 11 regarding offside interference after Andy Robertson was judged to have obstructed goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma.
The incident occurred in the 38th minute when Van Dijk’s powerful header found the back of the net. However, referee Chris Kavanagh ruled the goal out for offside, with confirmation from VAR Michael Oliver. Officials determined that Robertson, positioned in front of Donnarumma, made an “obvious action” that impacted the goalkeeper’s ability to play the ball despite not touching it.
Liverpool strongly disagree with that interpretation and argue that Robertson did not interfere with Donnarumma’s line of vision or movement. The club has contacted PGMO chief Howard Webb to seek clarification on how the decision aligned with the laws of the game. They maintain that the wording of Law 11 does not support the referee’s conclusion in this instance.
According to the offside rule, a player can only be penalised for interfering with play if they clearly obstruct an opponent’s line of sight, challenge for the ball, or make a visible action that prevents the opponent from playing it. Liverpool believe Robertson’s movement—ducking to avoid Van Dijk’s header—does not meet any of these criteria and that the goal should have stood.
Despite the controversy, head coach Arne Slot refused to use the decision as an excuse for his team’s poor result. He acknowledged that Liverpool were below their usual standards but insisted that the officials made a “clear and obvious error” in disallowing the goal. Slot also pointed out a similar situation last season when Manchester City had a goal allowed under nearly identical circumstances, suggesting inconsistency in officiating.
The decision has reignited the debate over the role of VAR in the Premier League and how subjective interpretations of offside interference are applied. Liverpool’s complaint to PGMO is expected to prompt a review, as questions continue to mount over the consistency and transparency of refereeing decisions in crucial matches.
