Disallowed Liverpool Goal vs Man City 2025: Howard Webb Explains Controversial Offside Ruling
Manchester City’s 3-0 win over Liverpool on November 9, 2025, hinged on a 38th-minute flashpoint: Virgil van Dijk’s header ruled out for offside. Referee Chris Kavanagh flagged Andrew Robertson’s interference; VAR Michael Oliver upheld it. PGMOL chief Howard Webb defended the call on Match Officials Mic’d Up, calling it “not unreasonable”—yet Liverpool’s formal complaint and fan outrage keep the debate boiling.
Key Points
- Incident: 38′ – Van Dijk header disallowed
- Offender: Robertson (offside, ducked under ball)
- Impact: Allegedly affected GK Donnarumma
- VAR: No clear error; on-field decision stands
- Webb: “Subjective but understandable”
- Liverpool: Contacted PGMOL over criteria
- Contrast: Man City vs Wolves 2024 (goal awarded)
The Moment: How the Disallowed Goal Unfolded
Corner swings in. Van Dijk rises, powers header toward goal. Donnarumma dives—but the whistle blows.
Assistant Stuart Burt flags: Robertson, offside in the six-yard box, ducks as the ball skims overhead.
Kavanagh: Offside interference.
Oliver’s VAR check: 72 seconds. Audio reveals focus on “ducking” and “proximity,” not just vision.
Webb: “The ball passes inches over Robertson’s head. He’s three yards from goal, central. Donnarumma must react—does the duck force hesitation?”
Result: No goal. City lead 1-0, cruise to victory.
Webb’s Breakdown: Why Officials Ruled Interference
On Mic’d Up (November 11), Webb dissected the call frame-by-frame.
Law 11 Nuance: Offside interference isn’t just touching the ball. It’s:
- Interfering with play
- Interfering with an opponent
- Gaining advantage
Robertson: Doesn’t touch ball. But ducks actively.
Webb: “Clear action to avoid it. Ball travels through his airspace. Goalkeeper sees it—but proximity (1.5m) and movement create doubt.”
Donnarumma’s dive starts late—Webb suggests subconscious pull-back.
VAR Threshold: Only overturn “clear and obvious” errors.
Webb: “Only Donnarumma knows 100%. Factual evidence—position, duck, flight path—supports on-field opinion. Not clearly wrong.”
Liverpool’s Complaint: Criteria Not Met?
Liverpool’s official PGMOL letter (November 10) argues:
- Robertson didn’t block vision (Donnarumma tracked ball)
- Duck was evasion, not interference
- No “clear impact” on save attempt
Arne Slot post-match: “If ducking is interference, every set-piece has 5 offside calls.”
Club demands clarity on “subjective” thresholds.
Man City vs Wolves Precedent: Key Differences
Slot cited last season: Bernardo Silva offside vs Wolves (May 2024). Stones header—Silva nearby, moves left. Goal awarded after VAR.
Webb’s distinction:
| Factor | Liverpool vs City (2025) | City vs Wolves (2024) |
|---|---|---|
| Ball Path | Over Robertson’s head (duck) | Over GK Sa’s head |
| Offside Player Action | Ducks under flight | Moves sideways away |
| Distance to GK | 1.5m central | 3m peripheral |
| GK Reaction | Hesitation evident | Full dive, no impact |
| Outcome | Disallowed | Awarded |
Webb: “Sa unaffected. Ball never threatened Silva’s space. Different dynamics.”
Subjectivity in Offside: Beyond “Line of Vision”
Assistant Burt’s audio: “Line of vision… ducking… close to keeper.”
Webb clarifies: Vision intact, but interference broader.
IFAB Examples:
- Challenging opponent for ball
- Clearly attempting to play
- Making obvious action impacting opponent
Webb: “Ducking can distract. Goalkeepers train split-second reactions—any anomaly risks pull-out.”
Data: 2025/26 season—14 set-piece offsides for “interference without touch” (up 40% since 2023 law clarification).
Impact on the Match and Title Race
Scoreline without goal? Potentially 1-1 at half-time.
City’s goals:
- 18′: Haaland header
- 44′: González deflection
- 67′: Foden
Liverpool: 0 shots on target post-disallowance.
Premier League table post-Matchday 11:
| Pos | Team | Pts | GD |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Arsenal | 33 | +19 |
| 2 | Man City | 29 | +17 |
| 8 | Liverpool | 25 | +12 |
Eight-point gap. Liverpool’s title hopes dented.
The Bigger Picture: VAR, Subjectivity, and Fan Frustration
Webb admits: “Most subjective calls in football.”
PGMOL 2025/26 accuracy: 96% key decisions correct (down 1% on set-pieces).
Fan sentiment (YouGov poll, November 10):
- 68% believe goal should stand
- 82% want “impact evidence” mandate
Semi-automated offside (trial 2026) won’t fix interference calls—still human judgement.
Verdict: Right Call, Wrong Time?
Webb: “Understandable disagreement. But evidence supports officials.”
Liverpool: Pushing for law review at next IFAB meeting (March 2026).
One moment, one duck, one dive—not taken. Football’s fine margins, explained—but not settled.
