DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 97426--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Ancientref
Date: November 11, 2025, 4:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
For me the problem is that the AR thinks that Roberson was in
the line of sight…a very difficult decision to make from his
angle. The video clearly shows that this was not the case, the
keeper had a clear view and did not delay his dive to see if
Robertson played the ball. The referee has a better sight line
and should, in my opinion, have been sent for an OFR if he was
in doubt, the AR’ s opinion on sight lines is not far off
useless from his angle. I wish the conversation could be about
the high quality of Manchester City, but the imperfections, or
possible imperfections, in the VAR system take the headlines
away. The promise of perfection has not been realised and the
holding and pushing in the penalty area goes on despite the
early promises. The number of referees required for VAR and 4th
Official duties is impacting lower down the leagues where the
standards have clearly dropped imo.
Like others I think that Kavanagh is a good Ref, but sending him
to do this match has left him vulnerable to criticism based on
geography….I have just returned from a day in Liverpool and
believe me it is so.
Were there no other referees capable of refereeing this game ?
Or is PGMOL totally insensitive to the additional pressures
involved ?
#Post#: 97427--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: TA_Ref
Date: November 11, 2025, 5:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ancientref link ---
>
> Were there no other referees capable of refereeing this game ?
Or is PGMOL totally insensitive to the additional pressures
involved ?
>
--- End Quote ---
Attwell and Oliver were out of the running having done Liverpool
in the last three weeks.
Taylor done City last week.
Kavanagh was realistically the only option.
The only other option was probably Pawson otherwise you’d have
been putting a fairly inexperience official on the game (in
terms of big match experience).
#Post#: 97429--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: ajb95
Date: November 12, 2025, 1:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Interesting that Oliver on VAR alllwed the goal to be disallowed
but when he did a game city g Fulham where a city player was
interfering with the Fulham goalkeeper the goal was allowed to
stand
#Post#: 97430--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: OwdReds
Date: November 12, 2025, 2:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I saw the incident for the first time last night. Robertson
makes no attempt to get back onside and has to duck out of the
way of the ball. His only reason for being there is to cause
problems for the keeper. In 99.9 % of matches, that's offside no
questions asked. The only reason we're having this debate is Tv
running and ruining the game at the top levels, something my
father warned me about 50 years ago.
#Post#: 97441--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: flipmode
Date: November 12, 2025, 4:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: OwdReds link ---
>
> I saw the incident for the first time last night. Robertson
makes no attempt to get back onside and has to duck out of the
way of the ball. His only reason for being there is to cause
problems for the keeper. In 99.9 % of matches, that's offside no
questions asked. The only reason we're having this debate is Tv
running and ruining the game at the top levels, something my
father warned me about 50 years ago.
>
--- End Quote ---
I said the same thing to a mate last night. If this hadn't have
happened to one of the red cartel, this wouldn't have even been
discussed.
The way Michael Owen pushed the issue following what I thought
was an excellent explanation and understanding from Howard Webb,
was nauseating - and clearly derived from his script from up
above.
#Post#: 97443--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Failed Ref
Date: November 12, 2025, 7:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Dale Johnson revisited this incident in his BBC column and
basically said that for subjective decisions, there will always
be disagreement. Some quotes from his article:
"This is one of the most complex and highly subjective parts of
the law. When a goal is disallowed the affected party - team,
players and fans - rarely take it well. There is also usually a
groundswell of opinion against the decision among
ex-professionals and pundits - and that's regardless of the
merits in law."
"It is telling that Webb described the Robertson decision as
"not unreasonable". He didn't directly say it was correct,
because to do so would suggest the alternative view of onside
would be incorrect - and that just isn't the case."
"It falls within a subjective corridor where both outcomes can
be deemed correct. There is no "right" decision, only
alternative viewpoints based upon an interpretation of events."
"It highlights one of the biggest issues with VAR, that a
decision can have two valid outcomes and there will always be an
aggrieved party. One side can think it's reasonable, and the
other unreasonable."
Johnson also looks at the offside law:
"The wording of the law has such nuance, too, that it was not
widely known that ducking out of the way of the ball could
possibly be an "obvious action." But this is exactly the kind of
movement that it is supposed to cover: something which is not an
attempt to play the ball but which could distract an opponent.
It could be a dummy, allowing the ball through your legs or, in
this case, ducking out of the way."
An interesting read, well articulated and reminds us that Man
City could be equally aggrieved as Liverpool are now had the
goal been allowed! It makes Liverpool's demand for an
explanation look like what it is, a partisan sop to their
supporters to cover over their own failings. It should have been
done privately but was never going to be. Owen should have
accepted the subjectivity of the decision.
#Post#: 97467--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Scally Bob
Date: November 14, 2025, 9:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The whole situation is farcical.
HTML https://x.com/timessport/status/1989317668038381784?s=46
#Post#: 97468--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Affy_Moose
Date: November 14, 2025, 9:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Scally Bob link ---
>
> The whole situation is farcical.
>
>
HTML https://x.com/timessport/status/1989317668038381784?s=46
>
--- End Quote ---
I take every judgement that the KMI makes with an enormous pinch
of salt.
#Post#: 97473--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Leggy
Date: November 14, 2025, 12:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Affy_Moose link ---
>
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=7396.msg97467#msg97467
date=1763133295]
> The whole situation is farcical.
>
>
HTML https://x.com/timessport/status/1989317668038381784?s=46
>
--- End Quote ---
I take every judgement that the KMI makes with an enormous pinch
of salt.
[/quote]
Indeed. And adding that the VAR was also right not to intervene
just muddies the waters even further. I get that the KMI Panel
believes that the goal should have stood (although disagreeing
with them) AND that it was not a significant error requiring a
VAR intervention, but that is a subtle nuance that will pass
over the heads of the average football fan - specially one
supporting either side. They would, quite reasonably, ask: Was
it an error or not??
#Post#: 97491--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Failed Ref
Date: November 15, 2025, 3:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The Times doesn't say what the split of opinion was. The panel
has previous for disagreeing with PGMOL. It is also easy to
express the ideal outcome when you have umpteen camera angles to
look at as many times as you wish.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page