Wolves boss Gary O’Neil wasn’t pleased at seeing VAR overturn John Stones’ winner and hand Manchester City victory at Molineux on Sunday – particularly given his side’s previous in strikingly similar circumstances.
“If I had to upset someone in the street and there’s a big guy and a little guy, I’m upsetting the little guy.”
And for Gary O’Neil, the situation when it comes to Premier League referees and the biggest, most important decisions, is starting to look very, very similar.
It was a brilliant throwaway line at the end of O’Neil’s press conference on Sunday afternoon. Certainly, it lightened the mood and got a good laugh from the reporters in attendance after a controversial ending to his side’s meeting with Manchester City.
The Wolves boss had just seen his side on the end of a VAR intervention that had handed the Premier League champions a 95th minute winner at Molineux – courtesy of England international John Stones – and consigned his Wolves side to a seventh defeat in eight games leaving the Black Country side sitting bottom of the table, with just one point to their name.
When Stones powered his header into the roof of the net, Bernardo Silva was offside. The on-field assistant referee put his flag up and amid celebrations from the City players and their jubilant supporters, the goal was disallowed by referee Chris Kavanagh.
On the touchline, Pep Guardiola and his staff fumed at the fourth official. O’Neil, in his technical area, could be seen waving his hands and declaring “it’s offside, it’s offside”.
It was a situation which the Wolves boss and his side had seen before, just six months ago in fact, when Wolves had a late goal disallowed against West Ham in similar circumstances. Wolves unhappy then, believed Hammers ‘keeper Lukasz Fabianski had been able to see Max Kilman’s effort, but referee Tony Harrington was advised to check the pitch side monitors because young forward Tawanda Chirewa was standing in an offside position. The goal was duly ruled out.
Then, O’Neil labelled it “possibly the worst decision I have ever seen”. That led Wolves to issue a statement, demanding a change in the usage of VAR. A vote on scrapping VAR was eventually knocked down, 19-1, in the summer.
O’Neil and his staff went so far as to send images to the PGMOL to show that Fabianski could “clearly see the ball”. But that wasn’t enough, with the Wolves boss revealing refs’ chiefs were told that it was disallowed because “he [Chirewa] was still in close proximity to the goalkeeper.”
Thus, added O’Neil: “So even though his line of vision wasn’t impacted, he was in close proximity, and it had an effect on him. Bernardo Silva is less than a yard away from Jose’s feet. So I think that same reasoning should be applied to this one.”
Only Stockley Park and VAR Stuart Attwell had other ideas. The matter was referred back to the on-field official for another check, and after Kavanagh had a couple more looks at it, the decision was reversed and the goal was given.
Two near-identical situations. Two different outcomes.
“I’m sure they’ll tell us it was the right call and everybody got it right,” said O’Neil. “You get these reviews back. And it says 5-0 it’s the right decision, when it’s not that clear.”
The PGMOL statement was duly put out. They said: “Stones’ goal was disallowed on-field due to Bernardo Silva being in an offside position and in the goalkeeper’s line of vision. The VAR deemed Bernardo Silva wasn’t in the line of vision and had no impact on the goalkeeper and recommended an on-field review. The referee overturned his original decision and a goal was awarded.”
And of course, those of a City persuasion – notably Guardiola and Stones – insisted that the right decision was made. But it was never going to end the controversy, particularly given how much of a grey area it clearly is.
“I didn’t have too much faith that we would get the rub of the green. The refereeing will be the refereeing and there’s nothing I can do about it.”
Not on this day. But what about other days? What about in the coming weeks?
Because then O’Neil took his shot and said the kind of thing that football supporters comment on regularly, whether in the ground, in the pub, or on social media, but which managers rarely come out and matter-of-factly say.
Do officials, subconsciously favour the big teams? The Wolves boss insisted “there’s no chance that people are purposely against Wolves”. But Is it easier to give the decision to the supposed ‘elite’?
“Is there something in the subconscious around decision-making,” he pondered. “Without even knowing it, are you more likely to give it to Manchester City than Wolves?
“My focus and my senses are heightened when we’re facing Man City and Pep (Guardiola) and (Erling) Haaland. Are the officials the same, when it’s Haaland and when it’s Manchester City? Is there something in there that influences decision-making? And I’ve spoken to them about this as well, and they obviously guarantee me there isn’t. They are human.
“Referees are human, and Manchester City scoring a last-minute winner is a big thing, so maybe there’s something sub-consciously that you’re less likely to get those decisions.
“But Manchester City scoring a last-minute winner is a big thing. It’s a bigger thing than Wolves scoring a last-minute goal against West Ham. So maybe there’s something subconsciously that means that you are less likely to get them.
“I might be miles off, but if I had to upset someone in a street and there was a little guy and a big guy, I’m upsetting the little guy.
“But there is something in there and they definitely don’t do it on purpose. I know they’re 100 per cent honest, and they’re doing the best job they can, and I respect them fully. I just know that from a human point of view, I feel different playing Manchester City than I do when we play someone in the first round of the Carabao Cup. I’m sure the officials feel the same. They feel it. They’re human.
“But maybe there’s something that just edges it in that direction when it’s really tight.”
The Wolves boss revealed he would be speaking to PGMOL chief Howard Webb this week, albeit “only from an understanding point of view.”
But his very public comments will certainly have set the cat amongst the pigeons when it comes to referees and perceptions of big-club bias.
