adminEverton striker Thierno Barry saw a goal ruled out against Ipswich Town after Brennan Johnson was deemed to have been in an offside position.
The Toffees claimed a 1-0 win over Ipswich, with Barry getting the final touch on a long-range effort from James Tarkowski to put the ball into the net.
Everton took the lead after only 11 minutes and successfully protected their advantage until the final whistle, despite a strong late push from Gary O’Neil’s team.
Everton believed they had extended their lead in the second half when Barry headed into the far corner from a Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall set-piece. However, following a VAR check, Johnson was ruled to have been offside while interfering with the Ipswich goalkeeper.
There is little doubt that Johnson was in an offside position, but there is certainly room for discussion over whether he actually influenced the outcome of the goal.
Speaking exclusively to GIVEMESPORT, former Premier League referee Graham Barber offered his assessment of the incident.
Barber explained that he understands why the goal was not allowed to stand, while suggesting that Johnson had placed himself in a position where he could leave the officials with a decision to make.
“I can see why it wasn’t given. We all know that these days, particularly from set pieces, particularly corners, I think managers and coaches are going to have to rethink putting players to stand in front of the goalkeeper. Because that’s where it all stems from to start with. A player’s putting himself in a position where he could be fouling or obstructing the goalkeeper. So that’s the first thing.
Barber then highlighted the subjective nature of the next stage of the decision, admitting that, in his personal view, he did not think the goalkeeper would have been capable of making the save.
“The second thing is subjective, right? Personally, from a subjective point of view, I didn’t think he would save it. But then you have to say as well that Brennan clearly moved towards the goalkeeper, and he actually put himself in front of the goalkeeper. And when you do that, you know you stand a chance of somebody turning out and saying you’re in an offside position; you affected the outcome of the play. Whether you affected it or not, again, is subjective. It was perhaps a little bit harsh.”
David Moyes referred to consistency following the match, but Barber believes decisions of this nature are unlikely to be applied identically from one game to another.
Barber also noted that while some may argue Johnson did not interfere with the goalkeeper, there is an argument that his positioning did constitute an obstruction.
“David Moyes, I think he said after the game when he was talking about consistency, decisions like that will never be consistent over the season, and they won’t because some will have a different opinion of that the next week. Somebody will say, ‘The goalkeepers didn’t have a chance of getting that ball, so how’s he impeded the goalkeeper?’ The fact is, he has impeded the goalkeeper.
“Whether the goalkeeper would have got that or not is subjective. So it’s a difficult one. And again, would I turn around and say that the referee and the VAR were wrong on the day? They weren’t wrong. It wasn’t an obvious mistake. That situation did happen. That needs to be interpreted, and it was interpreted in favour of disallowing the goal.”
Ultimately, it remains a challenging situation for match officials to judge, particularly when the decision depends on interpretation. With subjective calls involved, disagreements over whether a goal should stand are always likely to arise.
admin
