Liverpool protested against "illegal" penalty: Van Dijk s goal was disallowed, causing public outrage

Although Liverpool coach Slott admitted that the result of the team's 0-3 loss to Manchester City was "reasonable", the club expressed strong dissatisfaction with the decision that Van Dijk's key goal in the game was canceled by VAR and has officially lodged a protest.

Controversial scene: Van Dijk scored with a header, but it was ruled invalid

In the first half, Liverpool got a corner kick opportunity. Captain Van Dijk overpowered the defenders and leaped high, heading the ball past Manchester City goalkeeper Donnarumma into the net. If this ball is valid, the score will become 1 to 1, and the trend of the game may be completely rewritten.

However, after VAR intervened, the referee determined that the goal was invalid after a review. The reason was: Liverpool left-back Andrew Robertson, who was standing on the goal line, was in an offside position and "bent to dodge" during the flight of the ball, which was considered to have "affected the goalkeeper's ability to react."

This decision became a turning point in the game - since then, Liverpool's morale has been frustrated, and Manchester City has lost three consecutive games.

Liverpool questioned: The penalty violated Article 11 of the Rules

After the game, Liverpool immediately filed a formal complaint with the Premier League referee management body PGMOL (led by former whistleblower Howard Webb). The club emphasized that the penalty clearly violated the offside provisions of Article 11 of the Football Association's "Rules of Competition".

According to the rules, a player in an offside position only commits an offside foul when he "actively participates in the game" or "interferes with an opponent's player". In this situation:

Robertson did not touch the ball;

did not block the goalkeeper's sight;

did not have physical contact or contention with Donnarumma;

Multi-angle replays showed that the goalkeeper clearly saw the trajectory of the ball throughout the entire process and was fully qualified to save it.

Liverpool pointed out that Robertson just instinctively lowered his head to avoid the flying ball. This action had neither subjective interference intention nor had a substantial impact on the game. The club requires PGMOL to publicly explain: Which specific standard is used to determine that this behavior constitutes "interference"?

"This is not a matter of subjective judgment, but a misunderstanding of the rules." A club insider said.

Slott implicitly criticized: Same situation, but different penalties.

Although coach Slott maintained restraint, he could not hide his disappointment: "Robertson did not interfere with the goalkeeper at all. After the game, I specifically looked back at an almost identical scene from last season - the same referee enforced the law, but Manchester City's similar goal at that time was It was deemed valid."

He reiterated: "We are convinced that we lost, but the way the goal was handled was indeed wrong."

VAR consistency has been questioned again

PGMOL has not yet responded to the matter, but this penalty has once again ignited criticism of the inconsistent VAR standards. In recent years, Liverpool has suffered many losses due to similar offside interference penalties. Fans and the media generally believe that the referee's definition of "interference" is too broad and lacks a unified standard.

For many fans, this is not only the gain or loss of a goal, but also reflects a deep-seated problem: football can accept human errors, but it cannot tolerate arbitrary interpretation of rules.