Liverpool respond after dismissing PGMOL’s explanation over the decision to rule out Virgil van Dijk’s goal

Liverpool have reportedly reached out to the PGMOL to express their dissatisfaction with the explanation given for the decision to disallow Virgil van Dijk’s goal against Manchester City on Sunday.

The Liverpool captain thought he had drawn his side level in the 38th minute, but the goal was ruled out as Andy Robertson was adjudged to be offside and “making an obvious action directly in front of the goalkeeper.”

However, replays showed that the left-back did not touch the ball and was positioned to the left of Gianluigi Donnarumma, rather than obstructing the Italian’s line of sight. As Sky Sports pundit Jay Bothroyd pointed out, it was actually Jeremy Doku who appeared closer to blocking the goalkeeper’s view.

According to James Pearce of The Athletic, Liverpool have now contacted PGMOL chief Howard Webb to raise “serious concerns” over the call, insisting that none of the conditions for disallowing the goal were met. After reviewing all available footage from several angles, senior figures at the club maintain that Robertson did not impede Donnarumma’s vision and that the goal should have stood to make it 1-1.

VAR official Michael Oliver did not advise on-field referee Chris Kavanagh to conduct a pitchside review, and Liverpool believe the standard VAR checks were not properly followed — a process which, if carried out correctly, might have led to a different decision.

Liverpool’s decision to contact the PGMOL is seen as a reasonable step. Rather than issuing an emotional statement, the club opted for a measured approach based on a thorough review of the incident.

However, their formal complaint is unlikely to result in any meaningful change, with a standard response from Webb expected at best. Still, the controversy raises key questions: why did the assistant referee delay raising his flag for nearly 10 seconds after the goal, and why didn’t Oliver intervene through VAR?

VAR was introduced to correct “clear and obvious errors” in such situations, and had Kavanagh been sent to the monitor, the outcome might have been different. While Liverpool’s frustration is understandable, their protest is unlikely to alter the result — though their decision to challenge the ruling in a composed and professional manner is entirely justified.