Wolves fans will not be happy with what Howard Webb has said

Wolves managed to get their first win of the season against Southampton last weekend, but there is still some frustration for some about the recent game with Manchester City.

Wolves were beaten 2-1 by City at Molineux on October 20, and there was a big controversy at the end of the game.

 

Wolves and City were all tied up at 1-1 and the visitors had a corner in the 95th minute.

Phil Foden delivered it, and it was headed in by John Stones. After a few seconds, the goal was disallowed by the linesman. The Premier League said Bernardo Silva was deemed not to be interfering with play in an offside position.

Silva was stood in front of Jose Sa as Foden stood over the corner. As the ball came in the Portuguese moved away, with Stones them heading in.

Wolves’ argument was that Silva was still interfering with play as Stones made contact with the ball.

PGMOL chief Howard Webb has now explained why the goal was awarded.

 

Howard Webb explains John Stones’ goal v Wolves

John Stones of Manchester City scores his team's second goal during the Premier League match between Wolverhampton Wanderers FC and Manchester City...
Photo by Shaun Botterill/Getty Images

Webb appeared on the monthly Match Officials Mic’d Up show to discuss some of the controversial incidents that have taken place in the Premier League recently.

As expected, the winning goal by Stones was mentioned.

Webb has insisted that the right decision was reached for the goal to be awarded. He said: “The on-field officials determined that Bernardo Silva had committed an offside offence when the ball was headed forward by John Stones. He can’t commit an offence before that because the ball comes from a corner and the law states you cannot be penalised for offside from a corner.

“But as soon as John Stones heads it forward, then his [Silva] position becomes relevant. Then we have to judge whether he has committed an offside offence. Now to do that, he has to be in an offside position – which he is – he also has to be doing other things.

“He either has to touch the ball – he doesn’t – he either has to be in the line of sight of the goalkeeper – he’s not – or he has to in some way challenge the goalkeeper, impact his movement, make physical contact with him. He doesn’t do any of those things as we can see.”

Webb then made a comment that is likely to be questioned by Wolves fans.

Last season at the London Stadium, Max Kilman saw a late goal ruled out against West Ham United, after Tawanda Chirewa was deemed to be interfering as he was stood in front of Lukasz Fabianski in an offside position.

Webb added: “So when the VAR looked at that, he could see that the goal was good, the offside offence hadn’t been committed by Bernardo Silva and quite rightly intervened to have the goal awarded.

“If he stays in front of Jose Sa, then he [Silva] would be penalised, because he is right in front blocking the line of sight, impacting his ability to react. We saw that with a game at Wolves against West Ham last year when [Lukasz] Fabianski was impacted and that was correctly intervened upon.”

There is a lack of consistency

As frustrating as it was for Wolves fans to see Stones’ goal given, it was arguably just about the right call, with Silva having just left Sa’s vicinity by the time Stones contacted the ball.

But fans will likely not accept the reference to Kilman’s goal that got ruled out last season, where Chirewa was flagged offside.

Even though Chirewa was standing in Fabianski’s eye line, he surely could not have been interfering because Fabianski made no attempt to save the header – because there was zero chance for him to even start his motion.

The ball was into the net in a flash, and the West Ham ‘keeper was never impeded because he never even moved.

After that defeat by City, quite a lot of Wolves fans were able to admit that Silva had been clever. But many at the time actually pointed to the disallowed goal for Kilman against West Ham, and the inconsistency is what a lot of people have a problem with.

 

 

For More Stories Like This, Check Our Home Page

 

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*