PGMOL concedes there was’significant human error’ in the decision to deny Luis Diaz’s goal in Tottenham’s 2-1 win against Liverpool

The Professional Game Match Officials’ League (PGMOL) has conceded that the referees’ decision to reject Luis Diaz’s goal during Liverpool’s 2-1 loss to Tottenham Hotspur was “a significant human error.” Liverpool played with nine men at the time of the match.

After an unusually swift video assistant referee (VAR) assessment by Darren England, the goal scored by Liverpool winger Diaz was overturned. The Reds were already down a player at the time, and the goal was disallowed because the standard offside line graphic was not displayed during the VAR review.

In the statement, it was said that “PGMOL acknowledges that a significant human error occurred.” “A comprehensive review will be carried out by PGMOL.”

It went on to say that “The goal that was scored by Luiz Diaz was disallowed for offside by the on-field team of match officials.” This was a clear and evident factual error, and as a result, the goal should have been awarded through the intervention of the VAR; nevertheless, the VAR failed to interfere.

BBC Sport is aware that the correct procedure was followed in order to reach the disputed conclusion; however, human error was the cause of the mistake.

In accordance with the standard operating procedure, the lines were drawn, and each and every other aspect was inspected.

However, what sources are describing as a slip of attention led to a loss of focus around the original on-field decision, which resulted in a confirmation of a ‘check complete’ rather than an intervention, which would have resulted in the goal being awarded.

It has been reported that the referee in charge, Howard Webb, has been in contact with Liverpool this evening.

The Reds also had Curtis Jones and Diogo Jota sent off, and despite keeping Spurs out for the majority of the game, they were ultimately defeated by an own goal scored by Joel Matip in the dying seconds.

Jurgen Klopp, speaking to the media after the game, stated that the circumstances surrounding his team’s loss were “the most unfair” and that “crazy decisions” were made.

When asked by Sky Sports, he stated, “That is not offside when you see it.”

They drew the line incorrectly and failed to evaluate the moment correctly when Mo Salah delivered the ball, hence the ball is currently stuck between Mo Salah’s knees.

“Decisions will be fraught with so much uncertainty as a result of this.”
During an appearance on BBC Match of the Day, the former England striker Alan Shearer referred to the blunder made by the VAR as “incomprehensible.”

He stated that “offside” was the one aspect of the VAR that they had embraced and learned that they could not fight over.

“This will cast a great deal of uncertainty on the decisions that are made. We were able to see that as an enormous mistake very immediately.

“We are led to believe that Darren England, the video assistant referee, and Daniel Cook, the video assistant referee, have done everything they should have done in terms of drawing lines, but instead of saying ‘goal,’ for some reason they had a huge lapse and said ‘check complete.'”

“What exactly is the purpose of having an assistance referee on the field? There was a gap of thirty-five to forty seconds between that and the time when play could resume. The video assistant referee had a short mistake in judgment, but the assistant VAR should be able to say, “We need to stop this.”A terrible day for the referees and the video assistant referee. There have been other examples of howler monkeys, but this one takes the cake. Moving forward, trust is going to be an extremely important factor.

On the ‘horrendous’ decision made by the VAR, “everyone will agree,”

Klopp stated that the PGMOL statement “doesn’t help” and made a connection to the apologies that Wolves received earlier in the season for the decision not to award a penalty while they were playing at Manchester United.

“I don’t think we should talk too much about that because it doesn’t help at all,” Klopp added. “I think we should just move on.”

“A similar speech or apology was given to the wolves. They did not receive a point from United, and it appears that we will not receive a point today either, thus it is of little use.

“I am very convinced that no one is making mistakes on purpose, yet it still occurred, and at this very moment I do not know why. Would having scored that incredible goal have been enough to win the match for us? I really have no idea. However, it’s likely because having goals helps.

“If you want things to change, you’ll have to do so without our input; if we speak up, we’ll have to pay a penalty.” They did not do it on purpose, but if we are going to discuss it, let’s do so in an appropriate manner.

After the referees made the mistaken judgment to disallow Diaz’s goal without any assistance from Stockley Park, the VAR centre in West London, Liverpool’s captain Virgil van Dijk remarked that he is “losing faith” in the video assistant referee system (VAR).

“It’s difficult to admit, but I’m losing faith,” he added. “I’m losing faith.”

“Everything that the VAR decides on should be completely transparent and unmistakable,” you should say. I have seen the still from the back; yet, on the live television broadcast, there were no lines seen. It’s all a little bit mysterious to me, and I have no idea who was in the VAR room when they made that judgment. Not only is it not a nice thing, but it also does not look very good. It is what it is, and we were defeated.

Gary Neville, a former defender for Manchester United, told Sky Sports that the judgment was “horrendous” and that it was “clear for everyone” to see that Diaz was onside. Neville also stated that it was “clear for everyone” to see that Diaz was onside.

“I can’t believe you said that!” It has a lot of importance. In recent weeks, there have been a few calls that have been made that, in my opinion, have been incorrect, despite the fact that I have defended the use of VAR and offsides as a matter of fact.

“Everything happened way too fast. That is an absolutely horrible one. It is crystal evident that everyone is on the same page with this. Over the past few weeks, there has been an issue with something. They are drawing the lines on the wrong cameras. They need to change that. It is very strange.

Jamie Redknapp, who played as a midfielder for Liverpool in the past, said, “Everyone will agree, this is onside, and it makes you wonder how many other decisions they got wrong.” It would appear that they have made that mistake by a yard. It is not a very attractive appearance. In my opinion, they made a major mistake there. We are making things far more difficult than they need to be.

Additionally contentious is the early red card shown to Jones.

It should be noted that the judgment made by Diaz was not the first contentious one of the game; that honor goes to the dismissal of Jones after just over a quarter of the game had been played.

Referee Simon Hooper initially sent the midfielder a yellow card for his challenge on Spurs’ Yves Bissouma, but after examining the on-field monitor, it was altered to a red card; this was another decision that Klopp did not agree with.

When Hooper first looked at the monitor, the VAR displayed a still image of the conclusion of the challenge for a few seconds. After that, the video tape was played back in slow motion.

“Curtis trips and falls after stepping on the ball. It wasn’t a poor tackle at all. When viewed in slow motion, the effect is different. He puts his foot down hard on the ball and goes out of his way to cover it. “That is a stroke of bad luck,” Klopp stated.

Neville continued by saying, “I know it looks bad, but his foot just slips off the top of the ball. That is not a red card in my book.” He has approached it in an honest manner. As someone who used to play the game, my first thought is that person isn’t trying to get one over on the other player. You could assume it’s a red card if you watch the last bit of the video in slow motion, but you need to look at the full thing.

Stephen Warnock, a former defender for Liverpool and England, expressed his agreement with this statement to BBC Radio 5 Live, saying, “I think it is very harsh.” The most important thing is that the VAR are taking their time to investigate the event rather than the original challenge.

“He gets the top of the ball, and then his foot goes over the ball, crashing into Bissouma’s ankle,” Despite this, it is possible to see the argument from both points of view. I can get the frustration that the Spurs fans are feeling about the tackle, but when everything is slowed down, it looks even worse.

In a previous match this season between Liverpool and Bournemouth, fellow Liverpool player Alexis Mac Allister was shown a red card, but it was later overturned on appeal. However, the judgement that the referee made on the field was upheld by VAR.

PGMOL acknowledges that they made another error.
This is not the first time that the VAR has reached the incorrect conclusion or failed to take action when it was required.

After failing to draw VAR’s offside lines and correctly disallowing a goal scored by Brentford against Arsenal in February, the referee Lee Mason resigned from his position at the PGMOL.

During the match between Brighton and Crystal Palace that took place in the same month, an offside line was drawn erroneously, which led to the goal scored by Pervis Estupinan being incorrectly disallowed. The line should have been drawn in a parallel fashion to teammate Marc Guehi, who was standing behind Palace defender James Tomkins, but it was drawn incorrectly parallel to Tomkins.

PGMOL also admitted that Brighton should have been awarded a penalty in their loss away at Tottenham in April. However, after referee Stuart Attwell rejected the initial appeals, he was not asked to alter the judgment or go to the TV monitor for a second look despite the fact that VAR saw the film. PGMOL also admitted that Brighton should have been awarded a penalty.

Michael Salisbury, a video assistant referee official, was relieved of his duties for the next Premier League matches.

An impartial committee reached the conclusion in December of the previous year that video assistant referees had made six improper interventions by that point in the 2022-23 season, and that they had missed another six opportunities where they ought to have stepped in.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *