Former referee Dermot Gallagher has weighed in on the controversial VAR decision during the Wolves versus West Ham match, supporting the ruling that disallowed Max Kilman’s injury-time equaliser.
Gallagher explained that Tawanda Chirewa’s positioning directly impacted Hammers goalkeeper Lukasz Fabianski, as he was obstructing him from an offside position. He emphasized that according to the law, being in such proximity to the goalkeeper in an offside position necessitates a decision against the attacking team.
In response to Wolves manager Gary O’Neil’s vehement criticism of the decision, Gallagher stated that it couldn’t be deemed the “worst decision” ever, as it adhered to the rules.
He subtly suggested that O’Neil’s perspective might be influenced by the intensity of the moment, hinting at the need for a clear understanding of the laws of the game. Despite O’Neil’s outcry and potential disciplinary repercussions, Gallagher defended the match officials’ adherence to the established regulations.
O’Neil acknowledged the possibility of facing consequences for his comments, acknowledging his tendency to speak candidly in the heat of the moment.
He expressed willingness to apologize if he crossed a line but remained steadfast in his belief that his reaction was justified given the circumstances. However, with his team’s protests resulting in a series of yellow cards, including some for his coaching staff, O’Neil acknowledged the risk of further disciplinary action.
Gallagher reiterated that the referee’s decision was in line with the laws of the game, emphasizing the importance of understanding and potentially revising those laws if necessary.
He explained: “If you look at the forward (Chirewa) he’s in contact with the goalkeeper. He’s directly in line with him. He’s got to impact him, he’s in an offside position.
“You could go, ‘Well would the goalkeeper have stopped the ball?’ but I don’t think the goalkeeper has any chance to stop the ball because he can’t move. He can’t move out of the way, so I think offside.”
And in a possible jibe at O’Neil, the former Premier League official added: “It’s not the worst decision I’ve ever seen…”
He noted that most referees agree that proximity to the goalkeeper in an offside position warrants being deemed offside due to the significant impact it can have on the goalkeeper’s ability to play the ball. Gallagher’s comments underscored the complexity of officiating decisions and the importance of clarity and consistency in applying the rules.
He added: “I think that sums it up, he (O’Neil) has come to the conclusion that the referee is hamstrung. The referee has to go by the law, and if the law needs changing that is a different issue. The referee is right in law, there is no doubt about that.
“I’ve spoken to a few referees about it and most referees feel that if you are that close to the goalkeeper in the six-yard area, and you are offside you have to be given offside because of the impact you have. He alludes to the law, but that is what the law says as well.”
In the aftermath of the contentious decision, both sides were left to reflect on the outcome. While Wolves felt aggrieved by the ruling, Gallagher’s analysis provided a nuanced perspective, highlighting the balance between upholding the laws of the game and the potential need for refinement or adaptation. As debates surrounding VAR and officiating continue to evolve, Gallagher’s insights serve as a reminder of the complexities inherent in adjudicating professional football matches.