Liverpool 0-3 Nottingham Forest: Should Murillo’s goal at Anfield have stood?
Incident: Just 13 days after Virgil van Dijk’s goal was controversially disallowed at the Etihad, there was a touch of de ja vu for Liverpool concerning Nottingham Forest’s first goal. Murillo’s strike survived a VAR check, despite Dan Ndoye being stood in an offside position in front of Allisson. He was deemed NOT to be impacting him with an action.
Dermot says: “I go back to two weeks ago and the grey area for this kind of incident is too wide. We are at the behest of the officials on the day.
“It’s so subjective and it is too loose. There are no defining barriers like handball.
“If you tighten this up, people might not like it, but we’d accept it. At the moment, people are saying this has happened to our team this week and this has happened to our team this week.
“Liverpool feel aggrieved at both decisions.”
‘The referees have learnt from Liverpool’s disallowed goal’
Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher on the difference between Van Dijk’s disallowed goal and Murillo’s goal given at Anfield:
“The difference is Andy Robertson moves. He moves to the ball.
“You ask for consistency and to get the decision right, but you can’t have both. If you want consistency, every goal like this would be disallowed.
“Consistency is only good as long as everyone is happy with it.
“Last week it was said the Liverpool goal should have been a goal. This week, two have been given as goals. You could say everyone has looked and learnt.
“They haven’t been inconsistent. They have actually recognised and thought that in this situation the more acceptable situation is a goal. They have actually given people what they want.”
Arsenal 4-1 Spurs: Should Eze’s first goal have been ruled out?
Incident: There was another similar incident at the Emirates. Ebere Eze scores Arsenal’s second goal but Leandro Trossard and Martin Zubimendi are both moving across the goalkeeper’s eyeline in an offside position. Should the goal have been ruled out?
Dermot says: This is what I don’t understand. I think both of those players are in the goalkeeper’s eyeline. I’m told because they peel away from that, they’re not impacting.
‘This is the most obvious one!’
Jay Bothroyd on Sky Sports News:
“That’s probably the worst decision. They are directly in the keeper’s eyeline. When I saw that, straight away I said that would be offside.
“That is the most obvious one. He’s looking straight down the ball and there are two players in his eyeline. That’s why I don’t understand it.”
Newcastle 2-1 Man City: Was Donnarumma fouled before Barnes scored?
Incident: Harvey Barnes scores for Newcastle after pushing Man City goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma at a corner.
Dermot says: Is it a foul on Donnarumma? I think not.
Jay Bothroyd: Donnarumma needs to be stronger. Barnes is leaning into him but there are a lot of players in the six-yard box, there is going to be contact.
Did VAR images get offside call wrong?
Jay Bothroyd on Sky Sports News:
“I’m looking at the offside. To the naked eye, it looked offside. When they drew the lines, it looked like Dias was jumping but he was actually on the ground.
“Bruno Guimaraes’ foot is way ahead of Dias’ body. I don’t understand how they’ve come to that decision.”
Should Man City have been awarded a penalty for Schar’s challenge on Foden?
Incident: In the first half, Man City were furious with referee Sam Barrott for not awarding a penalty after Fabian Schar caught Phil Foden. VAR said it was a consequence of momentum, not reckless.
Dermot says: “They said no penalty because in the guidelines if the challenge is reckless it’s a yellow card. Once it’s a yellow card they have to give a penalty.
“They haven’t deemed Schar’s challenge reckless. It’s a consequence of his momentum.
“This will split a lot of people.”
Burnley 0-2 Chelsea: Should Burnley have been awarded a penalty for handball?
Incident: Should Burnley have been awarded a penalty in the first half for handball against Chelsea? Burnley players think Robert Sanchez took the goal kick and not Trevoh Chalobah, who put his hand on the ball. Referee Peter Bankes wasn’t having any of it.
Dermot says: “It’s interesting.
“It was the second time it had happened in the game. It happened earlier in the game too.
“Zian Flemming is aiming to enter the penalty area but he can’t. If he enters he has to then go out before he can challenge the player. So, he can never challenge Chalobah for the ball.
“The referee had exactly the same decision to make earlier in the game and whistled and told Flemming he had to come out of the box if he wanted to go in.
“It was the same the second time. It was an incorrect restart.”
