A series of pundits have all offered their verdict on Virgil van Dijk’s disallowed goal for Liverpool in their 3-0 defeat to Manchester City on Sunday – and despite the sympathy that has come his way, two experts have given their opinion on what has been deemed a “borderline call”.
The Reds were well beaten at the Etihad as Pep Guardiola marked his 1,000th match in management with a 716th victory, and in a win that allows Manchester City to close the gap on leaders Arsenal to four points. But while Liverpool were well off the pace and are now eight points adrift themselves, the reigning champions will have reason to wonder ‘what if’ after Van Dijk’s controversial moment.
Thinking he had scored an equaliser when his header found the bottom corner, Van Dijk‘s celebrations were quickly cut short when the strike was disallowed after Andy Robertson, who ducked under the flight of the header and did not touch the ball, was flagged for offside.
After a VAR review, the decision called was deemed the correct one, with Robertson adjudged to have obscured Gianluigi Donnarumma’s view of the header.
However, several pundits felt Liverpool and Van Dijk were hard done by, with Danny Murphy, on BBC Radio Five Live, leading the protests, saying that the goal “should stand” because Robertson was “not in Donnarumma’s line of vision”.
Colleague Dion Dublin agreed, saying: “Robertson is in an offside position” but crucially was “not in his [Donnarumma’s] eyeline”.
“I have seen it two or three times and if anyone could be in his eyeline it would be Jeremy Doku,” Dublin added.
Wayne Rooney agreed that it should have stood and said: “I don’t think Andy Robertson delayed Donnarumma diving. The City keeper can see the ball the whole way so I think that was the wrong decision.”
Gary Neville said during Sky Sports’ commentary he was “not sure” if it should have been chalked off because Robertson was “to the left of Donnarumma” and he was “not convinced” the City goalkeeper “is ever getting near that”.
ITV presenter Mark Pougatch was also shocked by the decision, posting on X: “Donnarumma sees that header all the way.
“The replays clearly show the keeper could see Van Dijk’s header all the way, notwithstanding Robertson.
“So what on earth is the reason to disallow that? I think VAR is having an absolute shocker today.”
However, the strongest protests came from YouTuber Mark Goldbridge, who, on a live stream on his That’s Football show, branded the decision an absolute joke, taking his fury out on Michael Oliver, who was on VAR duty.
“Justice. Michael Oliver, you’re an absolute joke. You are an absolute hypocrite. You are not good at your job,” the influencer raged.
“What is it about you and Man City? I don’t know. Two years ago, Liverpool had a stonewall penalty at Anfield, and he didn’t give it. Here we are two years later – he’s overruling the referee for something that wasn’t clear and obvious, pulling rank again and making it all about himself. Absolute joke.”
READ NEXT 🔴 Liverpool stitched up by ‘obvious and clear’ VAR error says Arne Slot; Man City admission made
The disallowed Van Dijk goal: what the experts are saying
The protests among the pundits continued, with former City defender Micah Richards rating the decision as “really harsh”, adding: “The goalkeeper can see it all the way. I can understand the rules and why it was taken away but I think it’s harsh.”
Tottenham and England great Glenn Hoddle disagreed with the decision, writing on X: “The Liverpool disallowed goal sums up the game [at the moment]! Such a poor decision. Refs understand the rules but don’t understand the game.
He added: “Robertson reads the situation he’s ducking down as Van Dijk is heading the ball!! And I want City to chase Arsenal!!!”
In the wake of the incident, the Premier League quickly released a statement, which simply backed the goal to be correct.
It read: “The referee’s call of offside and no goal to Liverpool was checked and confirmed by VAR – with Robertson in an offside position and deemed to be making an obvious action directly in front of the goalkeeper.”
Speaking to Rousing the Kop, former referee Mark Clattenburg feels the goal may have stood if Robertson had moved out of the way, rather than ducked.
“It will split opinions, but Andrew Robertson is in an offside position in front of the goalkeeper when Virgil Van Dijk heads the ball into the goal,” he said.
“I believe if Robertson had made a movement to the left or right and had not ducked under the ball which distracted the goalkeeper, he would not have been punished for being in the offside position.
“Robertson does not affect the line of vision as a defender was blocking this, and does not impact his ability to save the ball, but clearly distracts.
“He was offside, but the question is ‘does he distract, in line of vision or affects his ability to play the ball?’
“This is why it’s subjective and everyone will have an opinion.”
BBC Sport‘s VAR expert, Dale Johnson, acknowledged that the decision was controversial but explained that it wasn’t disallowed due to a blocked line of vision for Donnarumma.
‘Subjective offside decisions, those where the player does not touch the ball, are always controversial,’ Johnson wrote.
‘They require interpretation about impact from the officials, and that is often not straightforward.
‘And Chris Kavanagh, who was the referee for Sunday’s game, knows all about them.
‘As Virgil van Dijk’s header made its way towards the goal, Andrew Robertson ducked to allow the ball to go into the net. The Scotland international was stood offside, and the assistant raised his flag for offside.
‘This decision was not about line of vision, but “an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball”.
‘The offside law does not require a referee to think Manchester City goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma would definitely save it, only that his ability to do so has been affected. It is the ducking motion which is absolutely crucial because it could put doubt into the goalkeeper’s mind about a potential touch.
‘If Donnarumma had not been stood close to Robertson, or if the Scotland international was not in the six-yard area, the case for offside would have been weak.
‘But there must be an argument that Donnarumma had been impacted. For that reason, as the on-field team gave offside, it was not likely to be overturned through a VAR review.
‘It is a borderline call, but still supportable as an on-field decision.
‘However, officials are advised it’s usually best to leave complicated subjective offside decisions to the VAR, and if that had happened Liverpool would likely have had an equaliser.’
Liverpool latest: German media rate ‘inexcusable’ Wirtz; Inter Milan deal hope
Meanwhile, following Florian Wirtz’s latest disappointing outing for Liverpool in their defeat to Manchester City at the Etihad on Sunday, a range of media in Germany have had their say on the £116m man with Arne Slot sending a message and with the player himself reassuring fans.
On the transfer front, Liverpool are boosted by the news that Inter Milan are ready to offload a defender that the Reds are ready to spend big on in 2026.
Elsewhere, Sunday’s conquerors, Manchester City, are reported to have taken a shine to a Liverpool star, who is in talks with the defending Premier League champions over a new contract.
Get the inside story first by joining our TEAMtalk Facebook channel to receive the latest breaking and exclusive news straight into your Messenger inbox.