The Forgotten Liverpool Vs Manchester City ‘Unfair’ Referee Call

All eyes in the Etihad Stadium were on Chris Kavanagh, who must have known it was a controversial call.

The referee had just blown his whistle to disallow a goal in one of the Premier League’s biggest games, Liverpool vs Manchester City, and he must have known it would cause a stink.

It was a matter of debate whether the defender who’d made the infraction really had any effect on the goal being scored. Replays showed that it was a call that gave the goalkeeper a lot of credit.

The year was 2023 and the goal disallowed by Kavanagh was for Manchester City. Manuel Akanji was judged, in the eyes of the referee, to have fouled goalkeeper Allison, although contact between the two players looked minimal at best.

It was a crucial decision given the game ultimately finished 1-1 and so as he did his postgame interviews, manager Pep Guardiola was pressed about whether the injustice irked him.

The Catalan coach questioned whether the call was consistent with another decision to allow a goal for Newcastle United against Arsenal a few weeks earlier, but refused to get bogged down in it.

“I don’t know. I didn’t watch it [again]. I had five flash interviews and all of them asked me the same question, so maybe you watched it better than me,” he told reporters.

Almost exactly two years later, Kavanagh found himself once again at the center of a controversial disallowed goal at the same end of the Etihad Stadium.

This time, however, it was Liverpool on the receiving end of the injustice.

Virgil Van Dijk’s header sailed into the corner of the net past a ducking Andy Robertson.

The Liverpool player was in an offside position, but didn’t appear to be blocking goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma’s eyeline.

Just as was the case in 2023, the media questions for the wronged manager postgame were about the disallowed goal.

However, in contrast to Guardiola, who claimed not to have watched a replay, Arne Slot walked into the press conference having delved into the archives of Chris Kavanagh decisions and was ready to highlight a similar call made in Manchester City’s favor last year.

“I think it’s obvious and clear that the wrong decision has been made, at least in my opinion, because [Robertson] didn’t interfere at all with what the goalkeeper could do,” he told reporters.

“Immediately after the game, someone showed me the goal that the same referee allowed City against Wolves last season. It took the linesman 13 seconds to raise his flag to say it’s offside, so there was clearly communication.

“That could have influenced the game in a positive way for us because in the first half, we were so poor.

“We would have been lucky going 1-0 down at half-time, let alone if it was 1-1 or 2-1 down. It has been an influential decision, which is not to say that we then would have had a result over here because you cannot predict how the second half would have gone.”

It was, of course, easier for Guardiola to be more magnanimous after drawing the game. Slot suffered a 3-0 defeat and is on a poor run of form.

However, it is clear that someone in the media zone was busy showing clips to Liverpool players, as their captain, Virgil Van Dijk, also raised the previous decision.

“I think [the explanation] was just hindering the goalkeeper or something like that? But someone showed me a clip that Man City scored last year against Wolves and the referee was [Chris Kavanagh] back then as well,” he said.

“I don’t know, I’ve already said too much because the thing is, the decision has been made, we lost 3-0 and we don’t make excuses in that sense. We lost 3-0; we have to take it on the chin and move on. How tough it is is obviously a hit, but we have to keep going.”

The inference that the referee has given consistently favorable decisions to Manchester City is clearly dishonest.

As the decision from two years ago shows, you can cherry-pick any set of decisions from a referee to build a narrative.

But what do players and coaches gain from this? Nothing consequential.

Of course, it is perfectly acceptable for them to voice their displeasure at the decision; there is just no reason to raise the stakes.

Fuelling ideas of conspiracy by casting aspersions fuels toxicity.

Had Liverpool’s displeasure been contained to the aftermath of the game, that would be one thing, but they didn’t leave it there.

On Monday, it was widely reported that they had made contact with Professional Game Match Officials Limited to “raise their concerns”

It’s unclear what the source of these stories is, as not even the BBC explained where the information came from.

A clue could be derived from the national outlet stating as fact that “the Anfield club does not accept, according to the wording of the rules, that the relevant criteria for an offence was met.”

How did they know this? Presumably, somebody briefed them. Other articles on the PGMOL, such as the one in The Athletic, which cited “senior figures” at the Anfield club, wove in the Wolves decision, essentially elevating the critique.

As I have highlighted in the past, this aggressive approach adopted by Liverpool regarding complaints about officials benefits no one and poisons the discourse around the big games.

There are numerous occasions when teams facing the Reds have suffered unjust calls that have gone in Liverpool’s favor.

It’s worth remembering that before trying to trash a referee’s reputation or turn the whole postgame narrative into a debate about a marginal subjective call. As Van Dijk and Slot both acknowledged afterwards, they still lost 0-3.