Sometimes the video assistant referee (VAR) cannot win, caught between what feels right in the spirit of the game and what is correct in the laws of football. Manchester City thought they had scored a decisive third goal at Liverpool, capping one of the most dramatic finishes this Premier League season has seen. But VAR stripped the goal away after reviewing a foul committed just before the ball crossed the line. Fans may hate it, pundits may criticise it, and football itself may shrug. Yet VAR official John Brooks had no choice but to intervene. A foul occurred that allowed a goal which might otherwise have been prevented. In the simplest terms, that is the rule. The incident came at the end of a tense match that City won 2-1 at Anfield.
Why the goal could not stand
Liverpool goalkeeper Alisson had moved upfield for a set-piece as his team sought a late equaliser. Rayan Cherki kicked the ball toward an empty net from just inside his own half. Erling Haaland chased the ball and was certain to outrun Dominik Szoboszlai. The City striker overtook Szoboszlai around 25 yards from goal, looking set to score, but he was pulled back. Referee Craig Pawson spotted the foul but allowed play to continue, playing advantage. As the ball rolled toward the goal, the two players jostled to reach it. Szoboszlai appeared ready to slide in and clear it off the line. Before he could, Haaland pulled him back, preventing the home player from stopping the goal.
The first pull on Haaland complicates matters because it seemed the striker was going to score anyway. But the situations are distinct. The first foul by Szoboszlai and the subsequent action by Haaland must be treated separately. Without Haaland’s pull, Szoboszlai likely would have prevented the goal. That alone makes it impossible for the goal to stand. Pawson had played advantage, so if Szoboszlai had successfully cleared the ball, the play would have been stopped, and he would have received a red card for denying a clear goal-scoring opportunity. The result would have matched the outcome of the VAR decision: no goal and a red card. If we ignore the initial pull on Haaland, few could dispute that disallowing the goal was correct.
VAR has disallowed goals correctly many times, but fans and pundits often struggle to accept it. Yes, the goal could influence Manchester City’s season, but the goal conceded might prove crucial for Liverpool too.
Mixed reactions to the VAR decision
The VAR intervention proved correct, and Pawson announced the decision to both teams and the crowd, splitting opinions in the stadium. Former Manchester United defender Gary Neville, covering the game for Sky Sports, called it “so unjust” and criticised the interruption to football’s excitement. He added that rules exist, but the spirit of the game matters too. “Just let the goal be,” Neville said. “You have killed one of the great moments of the season. Fans watch matches for entertainment and moments like that. VAR has killed the joy.”
In contrast, ex-Manchester United captain Roy Keane said the moment “added to the drama” and described it as “great”. Haaland expressed sympathy for his former RB Salzburg teammate Szoboszlai. “The referee has to follow the rules,” Haaland told Sky Sports. “I feel bad for him. Just give the goal and not the red card. But rules are rules.” Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola reacted with humour and frustration, urging the referee to “give the goal and go home.”
