Liverpool have formally questioned the refereeing body after a controversial disallowed goal by skipper Virgil van Dijk in their 3-0 defeat to Manchester City, arguing the decision breached the laws of the game. The incident — a Van Dijk header that would have made the score 1-1 — was overturned after a VAR review which concluded Andy Robertson, who was standing on the goal line, was in an offside position and had impeded City goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma by “ducking” out of the way. PGMOL, the refereeing organisation led by former official Howard Webb, has been asked by Liverpool to explain precisely which parts of Law 11 were deemed to have been satisfied in reaching that conclusion.
Law 11, which governs offside, specifies that a player in an offside position is only penalised if they become “involved in active play” — either by playing the ball or by interfering with an opponent, such as obstructing the goalkeeper’s line of vision or clearly attempting to play a ball whose action impacts an opponent. Liverpool’s position is that Robertson did not affect Donnarumma’s ability to play the ball and that, on multiple-angle review, the Scotland international was not in the goalkeeper’s line of vision. The club says the rule is criteria-based rather than subjective and therefore wants clarity on which criteria were judged to be met in this case.
Manager Arne Slot, speaking after the match, described the decision as a “clear and obvious error” and said it might have altered the course of the game if the goal had stood, though he was careful not to blame the defeat entirely on the call. Slot observed that, while the disallowed header could have changed momentum, Manchester City were the better side overall and Liverpool were a fair reflection down 2-0 at half-time. He also pointed to a perceived inconsistency: the same match official had allowed a similar situation in a City game last season (a John Stones header in which Bernardo Silva was on the line) — a fact Slot suggested undermined the current ruling’s consistency.
The disallowed goal has sparked debate among fans and pundits, reflecting a broader frustration with how tightly interpreted and seemingly subjective some offside/impediment calls have become. Commenters in the article’s thread highlighted the grey area in the laws and the difficulty of reaching uniform decisions on interference and goalkeeper obstruction. Some defended the officials, saying Robertson’s proximity to Donnarumma was sufficient to warrant the decision; others argued the reversal was plainly wrong.
Liverpool’s formal contact with PGMOL seeks not just a protest but a detailed explanation of the application of the laws in this particular instance. The club’s request asks the refereeing body to specify which elements of Law 11 were considered to have been met — essentially demanding transparency on how the interpretation was applied. The outcome of Liverpool’s complaint may feed into ongoing conversations about VAR protocols, referee guidance, and the consistency of offside rulings, issues that continue to polarise the game as technology and interpretation evolve. Meanwhile, on the field the result stood: City’s victory was decisive on the day, and Liverpool must now address broader performance issues beyond the single controversial call.
