VAR controversy continues as Van Dijk goal disallowed

Five games in, Liverpool seemed unstoppable with fifteen points out of fifteen, a hard-fought victory against title challengers Arsenal, and four points clear. 6 games later, they find themselves languishing in 8th, having only picked up three extra points in that period.

A game at the Etihad would always be a difficult proposition for the Reds, but games of that magnitude have an uncanny ability to change the course of the season. Win it, and they deal a major blow to a fellow title rival. Manchester City vs Liverpool in the past decade has been synonymous with great football, the fast counter-attacking play of Jurgen Klopp vs the controlled, systematic build-up adopted by Pep Guardiola. There have been moments that have decided titles, John Stones’ acrobatic clearance off the line being one.

This game, however, will not be remembered for its football but as another game embroiled in VAR controversy. At 2-0 down, a bullet header from Van Dijk shot past the despairing arms of Donnarumma, game on. Or so Liverpool thought, Van Dijk’s celebrations came to an abrupt end as he spotted the linesman’s flag. Andy Robertson was judged to have impacted Donnarumma’s line of sight from an offside position. It was a view that was not immediately obvious on first glance. From where Van Dijk headed the ball, it looked as though he had an unobstructed view of the ball.

The camera angle behind the goal should make it unambiguous whether Robertson was committing an offence

This type of offside is arguably the hardest decision for the linesmen to make. This is where VAR and its mantra of ‘minimum interference and maximum benefit’ should thrive. The camera angle behind the goal should make it unambiguous whether Robertson was committing an offence. VAR decided not to intervene, and the goal was ruled out. What could have been the moment Liverpool used to springboard not only a comeback but a turnaround in their dire recent form never happened. Manchester City scored one more goal to see the game out in such a degree of comfort that they would have never been afforded if the goal were given.

The rule that VAR exists only to aid the referee when they have made a clear and obvious error has been one of the central issues

After the game, a panel voted 3-2 that VAR was right not to overturn the decision, but also voted in the same manner that the original decision most likely should have been a goal. Here was yet another decision that operated in the dreaded grey area of ‘clear and obvious’.

The rule that VAR exists only to aid the referee when they have made a clear and obvious error has been one of the central issues within the system. The idea was to ensure that the new technology did not interfere too much with the on-field referee, and whilst it may have been well-intended, it has thrown up a litany of issues. The clear and obvious line leaves open the scope for not overturning a wrong decision. It is ambiguous in its wording, and that leaves room for inconsistency. It is the inconsistency that is killing VAR.