DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 97388--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Affy_Moose
Date: November 10, 2025, 1:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You can’t solely rely on the LotG for decisions like this. The
LotG intentionally do not get into specific detail (such as
we’re all aware that Law 12 for instance doesn’t mention studs
showing, or point of contact etc).
UEFA’s training considers the proximity of the player to the
goal line and to the goalkeeper and whether they make any
movement. They particularly care if the ball goes through a
player (I.e. between their legs) or if they have to duck or move
out of the way.
I understand why people are annoyed (I hate McTominay’s goal v
Spain being disallowed) but the training and coaching expects
this to be disallowed.
The goalkeeper may well have been impacted and his decision
making cannot be committed until he knows if Robertson is likely
to play the ball or not.
It’s not as obviously offside as some other examples we’ve seen
in the past (such as the Dutch offside in the last Euros) but
it’s not obviously wrong at all. I expected offside to be given.
As an aside, attacking teams need to wise up. These situations
occur because it’s very much en vogue to place an attacker close
to the goalkeeper, and defending teams don’t put players on the
posts. Decisions like these are becoming quite common for ARs
and they’re hugely difficult to judge - especially without VAR.
The attacker needs to get out of the way as soon as the ball is
close to being touched by an attacker from the corner -
otherwise they are very much at risk of either directly making
contact with a goalkeeper and offside not even being in question
or - like this situation - giving the onfield officials a
decision to make.
#Post#: 97394--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Scally Bob
Date: November 10, 2025, 3:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As a Liverpool supporter I’m naturally disappointed with the
decision but don’t use it as an excuse for a deserved defeat.
I’m sure I’ll be accused of wearing red-tinted glasses but here
goes…..
I think from Kavanagh’s position his view would see Robertson
directly in front of the goalkeeper. From the angle shown on
television (which does not match the referee’s position) it’s
clear that Robertson is not in the goalkeeper’s line of sight.
There’s a video from behind the goal (which admittedly wouldn’t
be available to VAR) that shows Donarumma having a completely
uninterrupted view of the ball as it comes towards him. He also
took a step to his right immediately before the ball was headed
goalwards which although not relevant to a refereeing decision
may explain why he didn’t get close to saving it.
The delay in raising the flag seemed longer than I’d expect and
I did wonder if there was some doubt in the officials’ decision
making.
Given the angle from which VAR would view the incident-and even
this, like most refereeing decisions, is a subjective call-I
thought VAR should have asked the referee to have a look at the
monitor.
Of course the real answer is scrap VAR but unfortunately that
genie is well and truly out of the bottle and ruining the game
every week. In happier times a decision like this would have
been grumbled about over a pint or two after the match and by
the time we got home it would be a fading memory.
#Post#: 97396--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: rustyref
Date: November 10, 2025, 4:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> As a Liverpool supporter I’m naturally disappointed with the
decision but don’t use it as an excuse for a deserved defeat.
I’m sure I’ll be accused of wearing red-tinted glasses but here
goes…..
>
> I think from Kavanagh’s position his view would see Robertson
directly in front of the goalkeeper. From the angle shown on
television (which does not match the referee’s position) it’s
clear that Robertson is not in the goalkeeper’s line of sight.
There’s a video from behind the goal (which admittedly wouldn’t
be available to VAR) that shows Donarumma having a completely
uninterrupted view of the ball as it comes towards him. He also
took a step to his right immediately before the ball was headed
goalwards which although not relevant to a refereeing decision
may explain why he didn’t get close to saving it.
>
> The delay in raising the flag seemed longer than I’d expect
and I did wonder if there was some doubt in the officials’
decision making.
>
> Given the angle from which VAR would view the incident-and
even this, like most refereeing decisions, is a subjective
call-I thought VAR should have asked the referee to have a look
at the monitor.
>
> Of course the real answer is scrap VAR but unfortunately that
genie is well and truly out of the bottle and ruining the game
every week. In happier times a decision like this would have
been grumbled about over a pint or two after the match and by
the time we got home it would be a fading memory.
>
--- End Quote ---
A very considered view, but you have used the words subjective
call. If it was a subjective call there's no possible way VAR
can say it was a clear and obvious error therefore they have to
stick with the on-pitch decision. Had Stuart Burt not flagged
it would be the same discussion with with a different outcome,
the goal would have stood.
#Post#: 97398--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Arbitre anglais
Date: November 11, 2025, 12:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Affy_Moose link ---
>
>
> The attacker needs to get out of the way as soon as the ball
is close to being touched by an attacker from the corner -
otherwise they are very much at risk of either directly making
contact with a goalkeeper and offside not even being in question
or - like this situation - giving the onfield officials a
decision to make.
>
--- End Quote ---
I think so much of offside law now already favours the attacker,
so I’m comfortable with this being offside. If you choose, as a
tactic, to put a player there to hassle the GK at a corner
(that’s the only real reason for being there), then you take
your chances with the offside. If ball is heading towards an
attacker who has to duck and is in immediate space where GK
could dive, then it’s reasonable to say you impact. If it’s
given on field, I also think it’s fair for VAR to stay out of
it, as it’s not a clear error (at best, a subjective call). Also
in any game without VAR, this likely gets given live, as there’s
no option for 100 replays looking at line of sight to the exact
degree!
#Post#: 97399--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Scally Bob
Date: November 11, 2025, 2:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: rustyref link ---
>
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=7396.msg97394#msg97394
date=1762810229]
> As a Liverpool supporter I’m naturally disappointed with the
decision but don’t use it as an excuse for a deserved defeat.
I’m sure I’ll be accused of wearing red-tinted glasses but here
goes…..
>
> I think from Kavanagh’s position his view would see Robertson
directly in front of the goalkeeper. From the angle shown on
television (which does not match the referee’s position) it’s
clear that Robertson is not in the goalkeeper’s line of sight.
There’s a video from behind the goal (which admittedly wouldn’t
be available to VAR) that shows Donarumma having a completely
uninterrupted view of the ball as it comes towards him. He also
took a step to his right immediately before the ball was headed
goalwards which although not relevant to a refereeing decision
may explain why he didn’t get close to saving it.
>
> The delay in raising the flag seemed longer than I’d expect
and I did wonder if there was some doubt in the officials’
decision making.
>
> Given the angle from which VAR would view the incident-and
even this, like most refereeing decisions, is a subjective
call-I thought VAR should have asked the referee to have a look
at the monitor.
>
> Of course the real answer is scrap VAR but unfortunately that
genie is well and truly out of the bottle and ruining the game
every week. In happier times a decision like this would have
been grumbled about over a pint or two after the match and by
the time we got home it would be a fading memory.
>
--- End Quote ---
A very considered view, but you have used the words subjective
call. If it was a subjective call there's no possible way VAR
can say it was a clear and obvious error therefore they have to
stick with the on-pitch decision. Had Stuart Burt not flagged
it would be the same discussion with with a different outcome,
the goal would have stood.
[/quote]
I meant that the decision by VAR whether to get involved or not
is subjective. Another VAR in this instance may have thought
that given the referee’s position he had made an error that
should be reviewed on the monitor.
#Post#: 97400--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Marvin Grapevine
Date: November 11, 2025, 3:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> As a Liverpool supporter I’m naturally disappointed with the
decision but don’t use it as an excuse for a deserved defeat.
I’m sure I’ll be accused of wearing red-tinted glasses but here
goes…..
>
> I think from Kavanagh’s position his view would see Robertson
directly in front of the goalkeeper. From the angle shown on
television (which does not match the referee’s position) it’s
clear that Robertson is not in the goalkeeper’s line of sight.
There’s a video from behind the goal (which admittedly wouldn’t
be available to VAR) that shows Donarumma having a completely
uninterrupted view of the ball as it comes towards him. He also
took a step to his right immediately before the ball was headed
goalwards which although not relevant to a refereeing decision
may explain why he didn’t get close to saving it.
>
> The delay in raising the flag seemed longer than I’d expect
and I did wonder if there was some doubt in the officials’
decision making.
>
> Given the angle from which VAR would view the incident-and
even this, like most refereeing decisions, is a subjective
call-I thought VAR should have asked the referee to have a look
at the monitor.
>
> Of course the real answer is scrap VAR but unfortunately that
genie is well and truly out of the bottle and ruining the game
every week. In happier times a decision like this would have
been grumbled about over a pint or two after the match and by
the time we got home it would be a fading memory.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is the fundamental problem with VAR. It was wrongly sold to
fans as though it would make things fairer when it actually
makes me as a fan feel so much more frustrated.
Previously I'd moan about a bad decision but it was easier to
accept because it was made in the moment. When you get this
horrific inconsistency despite the delays, and justifications
like 'it was error but not enough of an error for VAR to
intervene" then I'm sorry but something is just wrong. To anyone
who thought about it logically in advance, VAR for subjective
decisions could never work because the decision about whether
something is a foul is entirely subjective.
Ironically, VAR for factual matter - such as offside - should be
great but when those offsides become subjective we end up with
the same issues. I believe the goal should have counted as
Robertson did not impact the keeper at all. I compare that with
Brentford's equaliser against Chelsea earlier this season where
an offside player tried to play the ball in front of a defender,
and shockingly the VAR didn't even consider the offside offence
or the player's actions, and quickly allowed the goal to stand.
That's a massive failing of the VAR process.
I hate VAR. It's ruining the game, and it's only going to get
worse.
#Post#: 97403--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Affy_Moose
Date: November 11, 2025, 4:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Marvin Grapevine link ---
>
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=7396.msg97394#msg97394
date=1762810229]
> As a Liverpool supporter I’m naturally disappointed with the
decision but don’t use it as an excuse for a deserved defeat.
I’m sure I’ll be accused of wearing red-tinted glasses but here
goes…..
>
> I think from Kavanagh’s position his view would see Robertson
directly in front of the goalkeeper. From the angle shown on
television (which does not match the referee’s position) it’s
clear that Robertson is not in the goalkeeper’s line of sight.
There’s a video from behind the goal (which admittedly wouldn’t
be available to VAR) that shows Donarumma having a completely
uninterrupted view of the ball as it comes towards him. He also
took a step to his right immediately before the ball was headed
goalwards which although not relevant to a refereeing decision
may explain why he didn’t get close to saving it.
>
> The delay in raising the flag seemed longer than I’d expect
and I did wonder if there was some doubt in the officials’
decision making.
>
> Given the angle from which VAR would view the incident-and
even this, like most refereeing decisions, is a subjective
call-I thought VAR should have asked the referee to have a look
at the monitor.
>
> Of course the real answer is scrap VAR but unfortunately that
genie is well and truly out of the bottle and ruining the game
every week. In happier times a decision like this would have
been grumbled about over a pint or two after the match and by
the time we got home it would be a fading memory.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is the fundamental problem with VAR. It was wrongly sold to
fans as though it would make things fairer when it actually
makes me as a fan feel so much more frustrated.
Previously I'd moan about a bad decision but it was easier to
accept because it was made in the moment. When you get this
horrific inconsistency despite the delays, and justifications
like 'it was error but not enough of an error for VAR to
intervene" then I'm sorry but something is just wrong. To anyone
who thought about it logically in advance, VAR for subjective
decisions could never work because the decision about whether
something is a foul is entirely subjective.
Ironically, VAR for factual matter - such as offside - should be
great but when those offsides become subjective we end up with
the same issues. I believe the goal should have counted as
Robertson did not impact the keeper at all. I compare that with
Brentford's equaliser against Chelsea earlier this season where
an offside player tried to play the ball in front of a defender,
and shockingly the VAR didn't even consider the offside offence
or the player's actions, and quickly allowed the goal to stand.
That's a massive failing of the VAR process.
I hate VAR. It's ruining the game, and it's only going to get
worse.
[/quote]
That's partly true. The game certainly accepted marginally
incorrect offside calls (one way or the other) and they were
just part of the game. Stakeholders in football now don't like
those now being almost all correct. However, it's certainly not
true that football readily accepted wrong decisions previously.
Just look at the Championship, or Women's football.
--- Quote ---
> To anyone who thought about it logically in advance, VAR for
subjective decisions could never work because the decision about
whether something is a foul is entirely subjective.
--- End Quote ---
If everything in football was objective we wouldn't need
referees. Subjective decisions can still be observably wrong.
--- Quote ---
> When you get this horrific inconsistency despite the delays,
and justifications like 'it was error but not enough of an error
for VAR to intervene" then I'm sorry but something is just
wrong.
--- End Quote ---
This is completely unavoidable as soon as you have more than one
party making decisions. The alternative is no second check (so
gross miscarriages of justices are allowed and accepted to
happen), or we review and re-referee every single decision.
You can put 100 FIFA referees in a room; or 100 QCs in a room;
or 100 scientists in a room and they will largely agree (close
to unanimously) on the vast majority of decisions. However, so
long as subjectivity exists then logic demands that you'll
arrive at a decision that splits decisions.
Now you have to decide what you do - do you park the decision
and put it to the vote of a jury? Or do you allow a principle
decision maker to make the best decision they can on the basis
of the information they have available?
Unfortunately, you cannot have top level football in 2025 with
30+ cameras and millions of viewers, and not have VAR. As
frustrating as it can be, football won't accept the alternative.
#Post#: 97407--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: November 11, 2025, 5:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Affy_Moose link ---
>
> [quote author=Marvin Grapevine
link=topic=7396.msg97400#msg97400 date=1762852752]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=7396.msg97394#msg97394
date=1762810229]
> As a Liverpool supporter I’m naturally disappointed with
the decision but don’t use it as an excuse for a deserved
defeat. I’m sure I’ll be accused of wearing
red-tinted glasses but here goes…..
>
> I think from Kavanagh’s position his view would see
Robertson directly in front of the goalkeeper. From the angle
shown on television (which does not match the referee’s
position) it’s clear that Robertson is not in the
goalkeeper’s line of sight. There’s a video from
behind the goal (which admittedly wouldn’t be available to
VAR) that shows Donarumma having a completely uninterrupted view
of the ball as it comes towards him. He also took a step to his
right immediately before the ball was headed goalwards which
although not relevant to a refereeing decision may explain why
he didn’t get close to saving it.
>
> The delay in raising the flag seemed longer than I’d
expect and I did wonder if there was some doubt in the
officials’ decision making.
>
> Given the angle from which VAR would view the incident-and
even this, like most refereeing decisions, is a subjective
call-I thought VAR should have asked the referee to have a look
at the monitor.
>
> Of course the real answer is scrap VAR but unfortunately that
genie is well and truly out of the bottle and ruining the game
every week. In happier times a decision like this would have
been grumbled about over a pint or two after the match and by
the time we got home it would be a fading memory.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is the fundamental problem with VAR. It was wrongly sold to
fans as though it would make things fairer when it actually
makes me as a fan feel so much more frustrated.
Previously I'd moan about a bad decision but it was easier to
accept because it was made in the moment. When you get this
horrific inconsistency despite the delays, and justifications
like 'it was error but not enough of an error for VAR to
intervene" then I'm sorry but something is just wrong. To anyone
who thought about it logically in advance, VAR for subjective
decisions could never work because the decision about whether
something is a foul is entirely subjective.
Ironically, VAR for factual matter - such as offside - should be
great but when those offsides become subjective we end up with
the same issues. I believe the goal should have counted as
Robertson did not impact the keeper at all. I compare that with
Brentford's equaliser against Chelsea earlier this season where
an offside player tried to play the ball in front of a defender,
and shockingly the VAR didn't even consider the offside offence
or the player's actions, and quickly allowed the goal to stand.
That's a massive failing of the VAR process.
I hate VAR. It's ruining the game, and it's only going to get
worse.
[/quote]
That's partly true. The game certainly accepted marginally
incorrect offside calls (one way or the other) and they were
just part of the game. Stakeholders in football now don't like
those now being almost all correct. However, it's certainly not
true that football readily accepted wrong decisions previously.
Just look at the Championship, or Women's football.
--- Quote ---
> To anyone who thought about it logically in advance, VAR for
subjective decisions could never work because the decision about
whether something is a foul is entirely subjective.
--- End Quote ---
If everything in football was objective we wouldn't need
referees. Subjective decisions can still be observably wrong.
--- Quote ---
> When you get this horrific inconsistency despite the delays,
and justifications like 'it was error but not enough of an error
for VAR to intervene" then I'm sorry but something is just
wrong.
--- End Quote ---
This is completely unavoidable as soon as you have more than one
party making decisions. The alternative is no second check (so
gross miscarriages of justices are allowed and accepted to
happen), or we review and re-referee every single decision.
You can put 100 FIFA referees in a room; or 100 QCs in a room;
or 100 scientists in a room and they will largely agree (close
to unanimously) on the vast majority of decisions. However, so
long as subjectivity exists then logic demands that you'll
arrive at a decision that splits decisions.
Now you have to decide what you do - do you park the decision
and put it to the vote of a jury? Or do you allow a principle
decision maker to make the best decision they can on the basis
of the information they have available?
Unfortunately, you cannot have top level football in 2025 with
30+ cameras and millions of viewers, and not have VAR. As
frustrating as it can be, football won't accept the alternative.
[/quote]
Football is played throughout the world at all levels and
according to The Laws of the Game and those who play at levels
below the elite level, in the main, accept whatever decisions
the officials make, therefore your statement that football won't
accept the alternative is totally untrue.
Don't you mean that football at the elite level is totally media
driven, with interpretation of Laws changed, VAR and its effect
on these interpretations, so many changes made to scheduled
fixtures which play havoc with those fans who actually attend
matches etc. etc.?
Football does accept the alternative because it has to do so
outside of the elite level. It is the media, and in particular,
the television braodcasting companies who won't acccept that the
game can't be played without all the rubbish that they have
introduced.
Never mind, the circus will continue as they try to undermine
every decision our officials make. They will probably introduce
a well known Stephen Sondheim song just to rub it in.
#Post#: 97424--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Claretman
Date: November 11, 2025, 2:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I would say the delay in the flag going up is because of the
referee and the AR having a conversation over the comms system,
something which i prefer to the old system of flag referee go
over to consult with every Tom, Richard and Harry trying to get
in their faces whilst they discuss.
AR would have probably said to referee Liverpool no ** is in an
offside position but i cant see whether he is interfering or not
you probably have a better view, to which the referee says to AR
interfering and thus AR raises flag at that stage.
#Post#: 97425--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Adam
Date: November 11, 2025, 3:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Pre-warning for this post: for anyone who doesn't know by now,
I'm a Liverpool fan.
I've been thinking about this slowly over the last couple of
days. As a fan, I'm really gone beyond the point of caring,
frankly because we were woeful and Virgil's goal being allowed
will only have delayed an inevitable thrashing by City. If I had
it my way Stinky Slot would be not far off of joining Moany
Marco in the jobseekers office!
However as a referee, this decision intrigues me. To begin,
absolutely no problem with Stuart Burt's call. He's head and
shoulders the best Assistant Referee in the country now that
Cann is retired and I'd trust his judgement over most lino's in
the game.
For me though, in the VAR process, this goal should have been
allowed to stand.
My belief is that if we analyse the situation in great depth,
there is enough of a case to justify an OFR. It could definitely
be argued it didn't get the attention that other, fine-margin
decisions have gotten in the last 12 months.
If we look at Robertson's movement, he most certainly does not
play the ball, my interpretation of playing the ball is going to
attempt to touch it, he does the exact opposite, as per Owen on
MOMU, if he'd flicked a head or a toe at it, case is closed, get
on with the game.
Also, a key detail.that I feel many have missed, Donnarumma
dives before Robertson moves (watch the clip carefully). He's
already committed to diving at full stretch towards the ball. He
doesn't hesitate in his dive, he purely can't reach the ball
based off of his original dove from which he doesn't attempt to
change his movement. Therefore, I don't think Robertson has
influenced his ability to save the ball, meaning Robertson would
be ineffective in the play, meaning a goal could stand. I think
if this got as much scrutiny from VAR as other moments have
gotten in the past, we might have arrived at this call.
Anyway, sorry for the ramble, but that's an opinion from little
old me. To finish, I'm done with VAR, I'd rather a wrong but
brave decision from Stuart Burt than having to debate a decision
which wouldn't have done much for the game for days on end after
because VAR could've intervened.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page