The evidence

[derbyrameater]

We don't know what the conversation was between the ref and linesman, it could be the linesman said "I think the corner taker was slightly offside there" and the ref then says "well put the flag up then if you think that" or something along the lines of asking the ref who got the last headed and the ref was like 'a Wolves player' then the linesmen may then go 'well then he was offside' etc. Plenty of reasons for the slight delay in the flag.

I believe all conversations are recorded so I imagine both PGMOL (and Wolves) have heard what was said and have no issues or it would have been reported.

You have no idea along with the rest of us what was discussed at Compton.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

I hope you are right, but experience tells me otherwise. Showing up at Compton costs nothing. The only real threats the authorities have to counter are, a legal challenge by the club, or a concerted campaign in the media. I can't see either as likely and at any event neither would be guaranteed success. As Wolves supporters what would we see as a positive outcome? I think the most we are likely to get is some acknowledgment of "error" and perhaps a minor scapegoat - the referee, or linesman. Is that getting to the root of the issue? If not what outcome do others see? I would like to be wrong on this.

I feel an apology and acknowledgement of their error would be a good start. Then it would require an explanation about who gave the offside and why. I imagine that will be the lino and they'll say it's from the Hwang header and we'll be left to trust that. Don't think we'll ever hear the audio, way too much of a precedent. Then they'll say the cameras were OK, but one was too zoomed in to see Nunes. Only by acknowledging their mistake will they have even the chance to improve.

 

[GoldenHorseshoe]

But I've never seen a ref instruct the linesman to flag before....

If the ref came out in snorkeling gear, wouldn't you expect an explanation?

Especially if he asked the lino to raise his flipper.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

We don't know what the conversation was between the ref and linesman, it could be the linesman said "I think the corner taker was slightly offside there" and the ref then says "well put the flag up then if you think that" or something along the lines of asking the ref who got the last headed and the ref was like 'a Wolves player' then the linesmen may then go 'well then he was offside' etc. Plenty of reasons for the slight delay in the flag.

I believe all conversations are recorded so I imagine both PGMOL (and Wolves) have heard what was said and have no issues or it would have been reported.

It's a good point on the conversation. The only thing I'd say is that the lino might have been unclear on who made the first header (Collins) when Nunes was (probably) in an offside position, but not actually offside. I'd imagine he could see (although there were a lot of bodies) Hwang head it, by which time Nunes is onside. So there was no real reason for him to ask the question if he saw the path of the ball.

 

[Monketron]

The positive thing to campaign for, as a result of this incident, would be for the conversations between officials and deliberations of the VAR check to be public, as they are in other sports. What reasonable argument would they have against this?

100% agree on that, had thought that long before this issue. The football commentators get a live listen to the VAR to Ref conversation too, it's just not fed to the TV feed for some reason.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

But I've never seen a ref instruct the linesman to flag before....

If the ref came out in snorkeling gear, wouldn't you expect an explanation?

No, I'd assume he was an attention seeker and not want to give him the satisfaction, (Or that he was a pervert, in which case he probably already had the satisfaction.)

 

[RichB]

I think you may have misread this incident very wrongly.

Webb showing up for hour and a half meeting at Compton in person suggests it's been taken very seriously indeed.

Yep…. This.

Certainly suggests it’s been taken seriously doesn’t it? I didn’t expect that Howard Webb would have gone to Compton especially relatively quickly. It’s positive I think

 

[tonto]

We don't know what the conversation was between the ref and linesman, it could be the linesman said "I think the corner taker was slightly offside there" and the ref then says "well put the flag up then if you think that" or something along the lines of asking the ref who got the last headed and the ref was like 'a Wolves player' then the linesmen may then go 'well then he was offside' etc. Plenty of reasons for the slight delay in the flag.

I believe all conversations are recorded so I imagine both PGMOL (and Wolves) have heard what was said and have no issues or it would have been reported.

It may well have gone.. **** me I have a bet on Liverpool win put your flag up you dozy *******

 

[tonto]

It's a good point on the conversation. The only thing I'd say is that the lino might have been unclear on who made the first header (Collins) when Nunes was (probably) in an offside position, but not actually offside. I'd imagine he could see (although there were a lot of bodies) Hwang head it, by which time Nunes is onside. So there was no real reason for him to ask the question if he saw the path of the ball.

If your are not sure you don’t flag leaving it to var not the other way round

 

[YouGottaRaulWithIt]

I'll save them the trouble

Hi Julen,
The Salah goal is allowed under the current rules as the initial cross doesn't reach him and then he is deemed active when Toti heads it and then he is onside because it is a deliberate act of the defender.

The Toti goal was given offside by the assistant referee. Subsequent footage showed that this was an error, but that angle was not available to Mr Dean of VAR, so he did not have the evidence to overrule the onfield decision.
Best wishes
PGMOL

either that or
Stop whining, did nobody tell you that Liverpool always have a +1 handicap at Anfield.

Dear FIFA,
Thank you for your response to our complaint. We have considered your explanation, and believe it to be a pile of crap. You will be hearing from our solicitor.
Regards

 

[wolvesjoe]

If your are not sure you don’t flag leaving it to var not the other way round

Exactly.

The ref and linesman were not to know that miraculously the camera perspective did not exist for this one piece of turf.

Putting up the flag had only one rationale: to allow for the disallowing of the goal, now that VAR was taken out of the equation.

This must also be the reason why Webb has taken the extraordinary step of visiting the club. The veil, however momentarily, has been torn.

 

[wolvesjoe]

Have to love Lopetegui, a man who said he didn't get too involved on the touchline, but has been booked twice already for pointing out scandalous decisions.

Somewhat of a contrast to moody Nuno, who bottled it all inside, or tetchy Bruno, all roiled up with nowhere to go.

JL has the gravitas to do it.

 

[YouGottaRaulWithIt]

Some interesting points here;

Now that referees are professional, could a football team that has been knocked out of a cup competition due to an incorrect decision sue for financial damages on account of professional negligence / incompetence? | Notes and Queries | guardian.co.u

www.theguardian.com

Thanks for sharing this. The interesting bit is:

"...BUT if the referee was cheating (eg had taken a payment to fix the result) then that - I think - is different. The club could sue in the tort of deceit, and claiming for pure economic loss is entirely appropriate."

The question is, why did the ref tell the lino. to put his flag up after the goal had been scored. Who told him to do it and why?

I would be looking for a proper explanation and an apology as a minimum. I really want more transparency. We need to hear conversations and see what they see. I also want Mike Dean's balls chopped off as he is obviously a cheating *******.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Exactly.

The ref and linesman were not to know that miraculously the camera perspective did not exist for this one piece of turf.

Putting up the flag had only one rationale: to allow for the disallowing of the goal, now that VAR was taken out of the equation.

This must also be the reason why Webb has taken the extraordinary step of visiting the club. The veil, however momentarily, has been torn.

Webb is scheduled to visit all Premier League clubs, but visited Wolves first in the light of events at Anfield.

 

[Beastier]

Webb is scheduled to visit all Premier League clubs, but visited Wolves first in the light of events at Anfield.

I bet he was hoping to turn up on the basis of us having calmed down a few days later.....he must have been so thankful for the non-awarding of the clear penalty the night before.....

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

I hope you are right, but experience tells me otherwise. Showing up at Compton costs nothing. The only real threats the authorities have to counter are, a legal challenge by the club, or a concerted campaign in the media. I can't see either as likely and at any event neither would be guaranteed success. As Wolves supporters what would we see as a positive outcome? I think the most we are likely to get is some acknowledgment of "error" and perhaps a minor scapegoat - the referee, or linesman. Is that getting to the root of the issue? If not what outcome do others see? I would like to be wrong on this.

Seems I wasn't wrong about the outcome of this. Even my more optimistic guess, that there might be some acknowledgement of an error, seems to have been off the mark. We are not even being given an outline of any excuses Webb may, or may not, have given at his visit and everybody has "moved on".

 

[SE10 Wolf]

The officiating at today's game could be interesting to observe.

 

[wolvesjoe]

Seems I wasn't wrong about the outcome of this. Even my more optimistic guess, that there might be some acknowledgement of an error, seems to have been off the mark. We are not even being given an outline of any excuses Webb may, or may not, have given at his visit and everybody has "moved on".

That could be the case.

However I dont really expect any public statements until after the Liverpool game, on the grounds of not wanting to influence the outcome, ironically enough

 

[WickedWolfie]

No, I'd assume he was an attention seeker and not want to give him the satisfaction, (Or that he was a pervert, in which case he probably already had the satisfaction.)

You mean that he's Mike Dean?

 

[Notsoslimshady]

Wasn't really sure wherd to put this, but just seen united,s goal, and yet another strange offside by-law seemingly in place.

Rashford within a yard of the ball but deemed not to be interfering with play. Walton defending it with the rule being that you have to touch the ball or impede an opponent to be 'interfering'. Another load of **** as far as i see. How can you be that close to the play and not interfering

 

[Lobo de Ouro]

Literally zero chance that goal stands if it's Wolves scoring it.

 

[Oh Robbie Robie]

The officiating at today's game could be interesting to observe.

I expect us to be given two penalties, at least... both of which we will miss, of course.

 

[SE10 Wolf]

I expect us to be given two penalties, at least... both of which we will miss, of course.

Quite! However, I certainly don't advocate us getting the benefit of 'dodgy' decisions, I just want fairness, clarity, consistency and transparency. I'm beginning to really dislike the game I have loved for decades.

 

[Jay Jay de Wolf]

Wolves finally told why Toti Gomes' goal was disallowed against Liverpool

Wolves have been in contact with the PGMOL about Toti Gomes' goal against Liverpool, and they have now responded.

www.molineux.news

 

[Rauls Headband]

Wolves finally told why Toti Gomes' goal was disallowed against Liverpool

Wolves have been in contact with the PGMOL about Toti Gomes' goal against Liverpool, and they have now responded.

www.molineux.news

Utter utter utter BS. Talk about washing your hands………

They‘ve had a whole week and that’s the best they can come up with. Also completely deflects from the question of the gesture made by the ref to the linesman and why the flag only went up after that gesture was made when the linesman appeared to be making his way to the halfway line.

 

[SE10 Wolf]

If not already specifically addressed in the original letter a follow up should absolutely ask why the unsighted referee instructed the retreating, flag down, linesman to raise his flag.

 

[YouGottaRaulWithIt]

Nothing to do with Wolves, but Mike Dean has been up to his incompetent best again today at Newcastle. VAR fail to notice a clear penalty for Fulham, and then 5 seconds later pull the ref up to call him over for a penalty that never was. The man is useless. Even with working cameras at his disposal and he still gets it wrong, twice!

 

[Big Saft Kid]

Wasn't really sure wherd to put this, but just seen united,s goal, and yet another strange offside by-law seemingly in place.

Rashford within a yard of the ball but deemed not to be interfering with play. Walton defending it with the rule being that you have to touch the ball or impede an opponent to be 'interfering'. Another load of **** as far as i see. How can you be that close to the play and not interfering

These officials literally do not understand the nature of the sport they are refereeing. The guys who drew the original rules up around 150 years ago did. And these were simple rules that even a child could grasp. But with the advent of VAR a whole fake science has grown up that falsely claims that a more 'technical' definition of these simple rules is now required. The reason for this is in fact control, and with that comes manipulable outcomes. And who wants those? Three guesses!

 

[BarryM]

Wasn't really sure wherd to put this, but just seen united,s goal, and yet another strange offside by-law seemingly in place.

Rashford within a yard of the ball but deemed not to be interfering with play. Walton defending it with the rule being that you have to touch the ball or impede an opponent to be 'interfering'. Another load of **** as far as i see. How can you be that close to the play and not interfering

Did the offside player affect the judgement or actions taken by a defending player?

That should be part of the criteria. (It is but in very lose terms)

Toti and the Man City defenders both made decisions based on the offside player.

Crazy to think had the Man City player slid in and fouled Rashford then the goal wouldn’t have stood!

 

[Scallywolf]

Have the PGMOL replied to us about Toti’s legitimate (disallowed) goal? Julen said the club have sent a letter asking for an explanation.

I know Howard Webb, their new boss, visited Compton Park last week, but he apparently visited all Premier League clubs.

Why no answer?

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Have the PGMOL replied to us about Toti’s legitimate (disallowed) goal? Julen said the club have sent a letter asking for an explanation.

I know Howard Webb, their new boss, visited Compton Park last week, but he apparently visited all Premier League clubs.

Why no answer?

It's here somewhere. It was the cameraman's fault for zooming in. Nothing to see, move on...

 

[Southdownswolf]

Have the PGMOL replied to us about Toti’s legitimate (disallowed) goal? Julen said the club have sent a letter asking for an explanation.

I know Howard Webb, their new boss, visited Compton Park last week, but he apparently visited all Premier League clubs.

Why no answer?

It was the cameraman's fault who has been given £5000 disciplined

 

[thetwistedsock]

It's because they don't have the same setup as for a premier league game. I've never seen a goal line camera or 18 yard camera view zoomed in for premier league var reviews. It's increasingly clear to me that the camera setup for var should be standardised in cup games to the same level as premier league games.

 

[WickedWolfie]

It's because they don't have the same setup as for a premier league game. I've never seen a goal line camera or 18 yard camera view zoomed in for premier league var reviews. It's increasingly clear to me that the camera setup for var should be standardised in cup games to the same level as premier league games.

Given that VAR isn't used for many FA Cup ties l wouldn't hold your breath.

 

[DasWolf]

It's because they don't have the same setup as for a premier league game. I've never seen a goal line camera or 18 yard camera view zoomed in for premier league var reviews. It's increasingly clear to me that the camera setup for var should be standardised in cup games to the same level as premier league games.

Why doesn't VAR have 20 cameras or something. We've seen instances with goal line tech being obscured. We've seen cases where VAR doesn't have an angle. The cameras basically cost nothing when you consider all the money on the line.

You could have cameras in line with the action all the way up the pitch.

 

[Flump]

Why doesn't VAR have 20 cameras or something. We've seen instances with goal line tech being obscured. We've seen cases where VAR doesn't have an angle. The cameras basically cost nothing when you consider all the money on the line.

You want there to be a reduction in the number of cameras from the normal 30 in the PL?

The answer is, basically, cost.

 

[thetwistedsock]

Why doesn't VAR have 20 cameras or something. We've seen instances with goal line tech being obscured. We've seen cases where VAR doesn't have an angle. The cameras basically cost nothing when you consider all the money on the line.

You could have cameras in line with the action all the way up the pitch.

I tried to explain this in post #353. The premier league has a more comprehensive setup as standard. I don't know why that standard hasn't been repeated for cup games but I would assume because the production company is different and the requirements aren't binding.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

I tried to explain this in post #353. The premier league has a more comprehensive setup as standard. I don't know why that standard hasn't been repeated for cup games but I would assume because the production company is different and the requirements aren't binding.

That might be, but even in a PL game, Liverpool suffered from the same failure against Arsenal at the Emirates back in October.

Error stopped VAR looking at possible Saka offside in Arsenal vs Liverpool

Arsenal's first goal against Liverpool was given, even though Saka appeared to be in a possible offside position in the build-up

www.football.london

 

[DasWolf]

You want there to be a reduction in the number of cameras from the normal 30 in the PL?

The answer is, basically, cost.

I tried to explain this in post #353. The premier league has a more comprehensive setup as standard. I don't know why that standard hasn't been repeated for cup games but I would assume because the production company is different and the requirements aren't binding.

VAR only has 5 cameras "built in". You can go and read all about this. The rest are managed by broadcasters.

The cost is essentially nothing, as a one off investment.

As for the cup, that's not an answer. Yes the specifications might be different, but that doesn't answer why. Especially when the cups use existing infrastructure already there are part of the PL specifications, which is why only PL grounds have it.

 

[Flump]

VAR only has 5 cameras "built in". You can go and read all about this. The rest are managed by broadcasters.

The cost is essentially nothing, as a one off investment.

As for the cup, that's not an answer. Yes the specifications might be different, but that doesn't answer why. Especially when the cups use existing infrastructure already there are part of the PL specifications, which is why only PL grounds have it.

Yes, and they also use the broadcast cameras for VAR decisions. If the cost was essentially nothing, there would have been 30 cameras there like normal for a PL game.

It's much more likely that the answer was cost, rather than some shadowy figure thinking in advance that a marginal onfield call would go in Liverpool's favour, and having fewer cameras present means it's less likely to be able to be overturned.