The evidence

[JOSWolf]

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

Totally laughable excuse.

 

[Snarlingwolf]

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

That’s exactly what the FA want us to believe and to forget it. But, IMO, we definitely shouldn’t let it end there,

The FA still haven’t explained the very irregular behaviour of the referee as the ball hits the net and Wolves players and fans are all celebrating. WE WANT THEM TO EXPLAIN HIS ACTIONS!!!

In almost every match where a goal is scored, the referee actions are that, first, he looks over to the linesman to see if he has his raised his flag or not. Immediately after our goal, the linesman did NOT raise his flag and was retreating to the centre line!!!!!

When the ball hit the net, instead of pointing towards the centre spot and awarding the goal - since he sees the linesman has his flag down AND retreating to the centre line, you can clearly see the referee striding towards the linesman and gesturing to him to put his flag up! THIS IS HIGHLY IRREGULAR BEHAVIOUR FOR A REFEREE when a goal is scored.

The fact that the FA have totally ignored this very pertinent question raised by our letter speaks volumes for me. They are covering up for Madley, the refere, as they could not explain his actions other than to say it was his decision to disallow the goal. IMV, Mike Dean’s claim that there was no definitive camera angle to prove/ disprove whether Nunes was offside or not is a load of b***£#)t. The referee went out of his way to disallow the goal immediately, without any evidence at all.

The whole matter stinks something rotten.

We need to keep raising this question with the FA until we get an answer, fo the sake of football and fair play.

Then to top it all, to really make matters worse, the FA appoint Andre Marriner (a Villa fan) as ref and Stuart Attwell (whom awarded Man Utd that ridiculous offside goal at the weekend) as VAR official for our replay tomorrow evening!!!

 

[QB Wolf]

All of the talk of camera's doesn't explain why the ref told the lino to put his flag up.

 

[SE10 Wolf]

All of the talk of camera's doesn't explain why the ref told the lino to put his flag up.

The smoking gun in my opinion.

 

[Flump]

That’s exactly what the FA want us to believe and to forget it. But, IMO, we definitely shouldn’t let it end there,

The FA still haven’t explained the very irregular behaviour of the referee as the ball hits the net and Wolves players and fans are all celebrating. WE WANT THEM TO EXPLAIN HIS ACTIONS!!!

In almost every match where a goal is scored, the referee actions are that, first, he looks over to the linesman to see if he has his raised his flag or not. Immediately after our goal, the linesman did NOT raise his flag and was retreating to the centre line!!!!!

Pretty common for there to be some discussion between the two. I.e.

lino - "I think Nunes was offside, did the ball go to him off a Wolves head, or a defender?"
ref - "yep, off Hwang - put your flag up!"

 

[Notsoslimshady]

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

Kinda as much as was expected eh. And no mention of why the ref told the linesman to put his flag up.

 

[theweave]

You can't leave it in the hands of the tv companies, they are the ones who benefit most from the likes of Liverpool remaining in the competition

 

[Notsoslimshady]

Pretty common for there to be some discussion between the two. I.e.

lino - "I think Nunes was offside, did the ball go to him off a Wolves head, or a defender?"
ref - "yep, off Hwang - put your flag up!"

Also covered by.....

Ref "if it's offside VAR will pick it up".

One of the points of var is that it doesn't need the flag up when the ball has gone in the goal. All it has done in this instance is made it the onfield decision, which then can't be overturned. No flag = goal

 

[Flump]

Also covered by.....

Ref "if it's offside VAR will pick it up".

One of the points of var is that it doesn't need the flag up when the ball has gone in the goal. All it has done in this instance is made it the onfield decision, which then can't be overturned. No flag = goal

But if the lino was (wrongly) certain Nunes was in an offside position, and almost certain it came off Hwang, then the correct thing to do is check with the ref the part he's not sure on, and then flag it.

Given VAR is generally reliable (albeit to the point of irritation with marginal calls) for offsides, to me that seems a lot more likely than the ref apparently thinking that there wouldn't be camera coverage, and so wanting to give the onfield call in Liverpool's favour just in case VAR can't overturn it.

 

[Jonzy54]

Ref Watch should be back on today and no doubt Peter Walton ‘s brother Dermot Gallagher will say the Rashford incident was correct

 

[Snarlingwolf]

Pretty common for there to be some discussion between the two. I.e.

lino - "I think Nunes was offside, did the ball go to him off a Wolves head, or a defender?"
ref - "yep, off Hwang - put your flag up!"

Even that would would be very irregular and ridiculously amateurish behaviour, IMO.

If the linesman isn’t sure or the ref isn’t sure, the flag should NOT be raised and a goal should’ve be awarded/ indicated. That’s what VAR is for!! To check clear & obvious errors!! If VAR hadn’t got a camera angle or Dean was asleep, then the goal should’ve been awarded.

Can you imagine what would have happened if Liverpool had “scored” a goal like this down at the Kop end???!! (Goal would have been indicated straight away by the ref and no conversation at all like the linesman suggesting “I think it might be offside…..”.)

As you can tell, I’m still spitting feathers about the whole stinking affair over our disallowed winner.

 

[Notsoslimshady]

But if the lino was (wrongly) certain Nunes was in an offside position, and almost certain it came off Hwang, then the correct thing to do is check with the ref the part he's not sure on, and then flag it.

Given VAR is generally reliable (albeit to the point of irritation with marginal calls) for offsides, to me that seems a lot more likely than the ref apparently thinking that there wouldn't be camera coverage, and so wanting to give the onfield call in Liverpool's favour just in case VAR can't overturn it.

Ithe post i replied to suggested the lino might think thst nunes might be offside. I'd say if he was certain he would have flagged straight away (as he apparently did according to the likes of gallagher) and not retreated off to halfway. Why, other than the point of this discussion; should it be called in "liverpool's favour just in case var can't overturn it". Surely benefit of doubt goes to attacking team. 'Clear and obvious' and 'onfield decision' has not really been a part of var offside. They put their silly lines out and decide whether it is on or off, and go with that, flag up or not. It should be a case of 'proving it isn't a goal', not proving it is. I stand by the thought that the ref had no business or need to tell him to put the flag up.

Regarding the camera, it's a cop out. If ITV are to blame then they need addressing, but surely there should be some guidelines and mitigation to ensure all areas of pitvh required are covered

 

[Flump]

Even that would would be very irregular and ridiculously amateurish behaviour, IMO.

If the linesman isn’t sure or the ref isn’t sure, the flag should NOT be raised and a goal should’ve be awarded/ indicated. That’s what VAR is for!! To check clear & obvious errors!! If VAR hadn’t got a camera angle or Dean was asleep, then the goal should’ve been awarded.

Can you imagine what would have happened if Liverpool had “scored” a goal like this down at the Kop end???!! (Goal would have been indicated straight away by the ref and no conversation at all like the linesman suggesting “I think it might be offside…..”.)

As you can tell, I’m still spitting feathers about the whole stinking affair over our disallowed winner.

Yes, you do sound quite emotionally driven about this.

Normally refs & linesman are encouraged to discuss things - such as goals, and whether or not they're offside.

 

[Zico]

I have little sympathy with the officials, but I do think that huge incompetence is more likely than conspiracy. As above, it could have gone:

Ref - All okay?
Linesman - Unless it came off a Wolves man, in which case offside.
Ref - It did - flag up.

VAR does require the onfield officials to make a decision. They can't just do nothing and leave it to VAR. As Saturday - Raul was flagged off then VAR checked it, that's what's supposed to happen if the linesman believed it was off.

Linesman clearly was watching a different game at Anfield. He may also have completely missed that there was a second touch and that Nunes was clearly onside from that one.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still seething too. But I think all this cloak and dagger stuff with Madeley and Dean quickly cooking up a tissue of lies is just paranoia.

 

[Wednesbury Wolf]

I have little sympathy with the officials, but I do think that huge incompetence is more likely than conspiracy. As above, it could have gone:

Don't get me wrong, I'm still seething too. But I think all this cloak and dagger stuff with Madeley and Dean quickly cooking up a tissue of lies is just paranoia.

Yes most people would have agreed with you in the past - not now it's just too obvious. Because they see that their actions have been largely dismissed as simple errors by the usual suspects they are now acting in plain sight. Remember the BBC and Sky are a massive part of the problem as they will never challenge the establishment.

 

[Eastyorksyeltz]

Yes most people would have agreed with you in the past - not now it's just too obvious. Because they see that their actions have been largely dismissed as simple errors by the usual suspects they are now acting in plain sight. Remember the BBC and Sky are a massive part of the problem as they will never challenge the establishment.

I don't think you are right that it is a conscious conspiracy, but I think you are on to something about "challenging the establishment".
There is, I think, a lack of understanding from within this establishment, both media and football authorities, that there is anything wrong with giving the benefit of doubt, or favouring, the "Top" sides.
It seems they have the view that this is really what their audience expects and wants. I really do think it is a deep set, but subconscious, bias. They come to believe their own narrative, "People want these sides to win and dominate the sport". It's what the customer wants and the customer is always right, or perhaps more importantly it's what they themselves, as important figures within the game, want - and they know best. It really is no different from attitudes in many other areas of life, society, culture, sport, politics, where there is an inherent, self perpetuating establishment.

 

[WickedWolfie]

That’s exactly what the FA want us to believe and to forget it. But, IMO, we definitely shouldn’t let it end there,

The FA still haven’t explained the very irregular behaviour of the referee as the ball hits the net and Wolves players and fans are all celebrating. WE WANT THEM TO EXPLAIN HIS ACTIONS!!!

In almost every match where a goal is scored, the referee actions are that, first, he looks over to the linesman to see if he has his raised his flag or not. Immediately after our goal, the linesman did NOT raise his flag and was retreating to the centre line!!!!!

When the ball hit the net, instead of pointing towards the centre spot and awarding the goal - since he sees the linesman has his flag down AND retreating to the centre line, you can clearly see the referee striding towards the linesman and gesturing to him to put his flag up! THIS IS HIGHLY IRREGULAR BEHAVIOUR FOR A REFEREE when a goal is scored.

The fact that the FA have totally ignored this very pertinent question raised by our letter speaks volumes for me. They are covering up for Madley, the refere, as they could not explain his actions other than to say it was his decision to disallow the goal. IMV, Mike Dean’s claim that there was no definitive camera angle to prove/ disprove whether Nunes was offside or not is a load of b***£#)t. The referee went out of his way to disallow the goal immediately, without any evidence at all.

The whole matter stinks something rotten.

We need to keep raising this question with the FA until we get an answer, fo the sake of football and fair play.

Then to top it all, to really make matters worse, the FA appoint Andre Marriner (a Villa fan) as ref and Stuart Attwell (whom awarded Man Utd that ridiculous offside goal at the weekend) as VAR official for our replay tomorrow evening!!!

Re your last para the problem is that you could make very similar comments about any combo PGMOL offered. The basic issue is that they are ALL absolutely crap. That's why English officials haven't been involved much past the group stages in any major international tournament since Pontius was a pilot.....

 

[wolvesjoe]

But if the lino was (wrongly) certain Nunes was in an offside position, and almost certain it came off Hwang, then the correct thing to do is check with the ref the part he's not sure on, and then flag it.

Given VAR is generally reliable (albeit to the point of irritation with marginal calls) for offsides, to me that seems a lot more likely than the ref apparently thinking that there wouldn't be camera coverage, and so wanting to give the onfield call in Liverpool's favour just in case VAR can't overturn it.

The only way for the goal to be ruled out is if the linesmen wrongly flags it.

This is what is done in a delayed fashion after the ref has had chance to speak to VAR official and signal to the lineman what he must do.

This is NOT to establish if there is an offside as that would be done automatically in any case, (as we have seen on multiple occasions).

In other words, an irregular procedure is followed to rule out a goal where the key player is not even close to being offside.

 

[Flump]

The only way for the goal to be ruled out is if the linesmen wrongly flags it.

This is what is done in a delayed fashion after the ref has had chance to speak to VAR official and signal to the lineman what he must do.

This is NOT to establish if there is an offside as that would be done automatically in any case, (as we have seen on multiple occasions).

In other words, an irregular procedure is followed to rule out a goal where the key player is not even close to being offside.

Refs and linesmen talk all the time before giving a decision. There wasn't time to speak to VAR before signalling to the lino to put their flag up.

 

[GoldenHorseshoe]

I have little sympathy with the officials, but I do think that huge incompetence is more likely than conspiracy. As above, it could have gone:

Ref - All okay?
Linesman - Unless it came off a Wolves man, in which case offside.
Ref - It did - flag up.

VAR does require the onfield officials to make a decision. They can't just do nothing and leave it to VAR. As Saturday - Raul was flagged off then VAR checked it, that's what's supposed to happen if the linesman believed it was off.

Linesman clearly was watching a different game at Anfield. He may also have completely missed that there was a second touch and that Nunes was clearly onside from that one.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still seething too. But I think all this cloak and dagger stuff with Madeley and Dean quickly cooking up a tissue of lies is just paranoia.

I'm not so sure about that (incompetence), the more different excuses come out, but nothing yet about the refs instruction, the more it looks like bias, the most charitable I can think of is unconscious bias.

 

[WolfInSheep'sClothing]

Anyone with nothing better to do want to create a massive banner saying "We've won this 3-2 already?" We're on the beeb after all.

 

[WolfInSheep'sClothing]

Is there an explanation of why the linesman flagged in the first place? The *cough* no evidence *cough* from the Var is one thing, but the lino running up the field before the ref telling him to put the flag up is another.

 

[Lobo de Ouro]

Is there an explanation of why the linesman flagged in the first place? The *cough* no evidence *cough* from the Var is one thing, but the lino running up the field before the ref telling him to put the flag up is another.

Is the "linesman running up the field" not becoming our version of "the linesman flagged immediately"? I'm not sure either are true, but we seem to be adopting that rhetoric to help our argument (which doesn't need helping).

He definitely didn't flag... but from memory, he kinda hesitates and walks a step or two towards the half way line... certainly doesn't act in any way to indicate he thinks it is offside, or that it is definitely a goal.

On the topic of the official excuse... if the camera was too zoomed in, can't they just zoom it back out? What can be zoomed in can surely be zoomed out.... right?

 

[Zico]

I'm not so sure about that (incompetence), the more different excuses come out, but nothing yet about the refs instruction, the more it looks like bias, the most charitable I can think of is unconscious bias.

Yes I agree I do believe there is at least unconscious bias at work as well. They will always be more prepared to disallow a non-Sky Six goal.

 

[Shergar]

I'm not so sure about that (incompetence), the more different excuses come out, but nothing yet about the refs instruction, the more it looks like bias, the most charitable I can think of is unconscious bias.

OK Prince Harry.

 

[geowolf]

Just release the transcript of the conversation. The AR was perfectly positioned and if he genuinely thought Nunes was off-side from the second header then personally I’ll accept it. The VAR failure was a fiasco but one of those things. To restore my faith I just want to be sure that the officials gave the decision they believed to be right.

 

[WolfInSheep'sClothing]

He definitely didn't flag... but from memory, he kinda hesitates and walks a step or two towards the half way line... certainly doesn't act in any way to indicate he thinks it is offside, or that it is definitely a goal.

He doesn't hesitate at all he starts jogging.
If they have nothing to hide release the conversation.

 

[GoldenHorseshoe]

OK Prince Harry.

What an insult.

 

[Norwegian Wolf]

The replay of Raul’s goal on Saturday shows it was disallowed by VAR as he was assumed to be offside when Ait-Nouri headed it on. Didn’t the defender then get a touch and head it on as well, therefore playing him onside like Salah last week?

 

[Lobo de Ouro]

The replay of Raul’s goal on Saturday shows it was disallowed by VAR as he was assumed to be offside when Ait-Nouri headed it on. Didn’t the defender then get a touch and head it on as well, therefore playing him onside like Salah last week?

Was (correctly according to the rules) deemed an unintended deflection off the defender, rather than an intentional action to play the ball, meaning the offside is at the point the ball is played by the attacker, but Salah becomes onside as an intention action was made. Utter joke of a rule, which basically everyone agrees.

 

[reanswolf]

Anyone with nothing better to do want to create a massive banner saying "We've won this 3-2 already?" We're on the beeb after all.

Should be 3-1

 

[Norwegian Wolf]

Was (correctly according to the rules) deemed an unintended deflection off the defender, rather than an intentional action to play the ball, meaning the offside is at the point the ball is played by the attacker, but Salah becomes onside as an intention action was made. Utter joke of a rule, which basically everyone agrees.

Very true. I get the ‘official’ reason that the VAR officials will hide behind, but in simple terms it looks like one defender accidentally heading the ball on gives Salah a goal and yet another defender accidentally heading the ball on still denies Raul a goal.

I guess that’s where interpretation of the laws comes into play for our learned officials.

 

[SE10 Wolf]

Anyone with nothing better to do want to create a massive banner saying "We've won this 3-2 already?" We're on the beeb after all.

Or a massive “Why Are We Here? PGMOL!” banner.

 

[SE10 Wolf]

Why wouldn’t the BBC and Sky challenge the system if the reffing is either, corrupt or incompetent? Newspapers and tv would make more money from a big story.

Perhaps it would only be a big story if the bias/corruption/incompetence were to negatively impact the status quo instead of further strengthening it?

 

[QB Wolf]

I think the ref, **** himself in the heat of the moment and thought we better get VAR to check it.

 

[reanswolf]

Although it is undoubtedly huge incompetence, i think it is also undoubtedly not a conspiracy but a case of unconscious bias. I have seen many instances where the ref is happy with the lino decision and never urged him to raise his flag.

I cannot imagine that happening if the circumstance had been reversed but I cannot prove that.

 

[Very Proud (AKA Still Proud)]

There's a simple remedy to this:

1. VAR set-up must be consistent across all games in a competition or it is not used for any (we get proper football back).

2. Where VAR is used for a competition then a recording of all communication is made available to both teams after the game. I would go as far as all communication when VAR is involved is broadcast in the stadium but I fear the officials would start a riot right now.

3. Football Supporters Groups/Trusts (acting on behalf of the fans they represent) should have the right to properly challenge the use of VAR and the inconsistent application of the laws of the game - it is our game without us it is nothing, they need to stop treating us like an underclass and provide us with a sport we deserve.