Carlo Ancelotti insists that he did not disrespect referee Chris Kavanagh after today's controversial 1-1 draw with Manchester United when he was sent off by the official for dissent.
The Italian confronted Kavanagh and the assistant who was involved in the decision to first allow and then disallow a stoppage-time goal that would have won the match for Everton in dramatic fashion, although the final determination came from Jon Moss in the VAR office in Stockley Park.
According to the Premier League, the goal was ruled out because Gylfi Sigurdsson was deemed to have been in an offside position when Dominic Calvert-Lewin struck the shot that then deflected off Harry Maguire and past David de Gea and that the Icelandic midfielder had “made an obvious action that impacted de Gea's ability to make a save”.
Ancelotti was asked to leave the field but was heard to say to Kavanagh: “I am not leaving. I want an explanation.” The official eventually brandished a red card to the Blues' manager and said, ”Off you go.”
“I was sent off because I asked [for an] explanation [from] the referee and so he sent me off,” Ancelotti said in the tunnel afterwards. “I had a conversation with him in the dressing room but I want to keep the conversation private.
“I think it was a really (harsh) decision. From our side, we can say that Gylfi didn't affect the vision of the goalkeeper. From their side, they're saying that he affected the vision of the goalkeeper but, unfortunately, it is they who have to make the decision.
“I didn't disrespect [the referee]. I was, of course, a little bit disappointed because we could [have won] the game with this goal but I know how difficult their job is. So no regrets and no complaints also.
“We will see if I'm banned. If I am banned for Chelsea, it'll be disappointing but the seats at Stamford Bridge are very close to the pitch anyway, so I'll be there.
"We will see this week what decision they make but whatever happens, I can train and this is important!"
Ancelotti was satisfied overall with his team's performance, however, saying:
“So it was a draw but it was a good draw. It gives us confidence. We played against a strong team, we were competitive all the game.
“Maybe we deserved to win and this is important for our confidence as we prepare for the next games.”
Reader Comments (90)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 01/03/2020 at 19:05:34
3 Posted 01/03/2020 at 19:37:03
4 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:00:45
5 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:01:29
But in this case, in order to overturn the decision to give the goal, It should have taken a good few minutes to discuss whether Sigurdsson was actually interfering or whether – as was actually the case – De Gea was already beaten by the deflection and Sigurdsson had nothing to do with it.
6 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:07:27
7 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:13:32
8 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:13:40
9 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:19:39
10 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:24:09
Someone should demand answers to why we were ripped off with that penalty at Brighton when one of our players accidentally stood on a Brighton forwards bootlace.
The Spurs home game was a despicable disgrace with at least two blatant and clear as day penalties not given to us, (the Alli handball, the Aurora wrestling to the ground of Richarlison)
There have been so many others thats its basically laughable how apparently biased these fruits are that work the system in this country.
Today is another example of refereeing twattery,
Does anyone think that goal would have been ruled out down the other end?
Would it have been ruled out at Anfield if St Mane or Sir Salah had been on their arse when gorgeous Bobby Firmino deflected one in of a unstylish Burnley or Southampton grock?
Like hell it would.
But because its Everton v Manchester United and it deflected in off the odious moaning snidey “slabhead” Maguire, its ruled out.
Maguire, ironically a player that should not even have been playing today after VAR let him off after “debollocking” the Chelsea player last week.
Football in this country is completely corrupt and all that VAR has done is highlight it even more glaringly.
11 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:32:27
If this is the way it's gonna go, them I fear many people will stop going the game, and even watching it on the box.
Brighton, and the penalty that wasn't, Spurs – Dele Alli's blatant handball, Leicester, and the goal that was offside, today. These descisions could be the difference in May.
Europa League qualification is going to be very tough now, but if we win at Chelsea, we are back in with a good chance.
Shocking and sadly now the egos of referees and the toxic use of VAR, is ruining football.
Surely the refs, if they are not using the pitch side monitor are bringing the game into disrepute?
Good on Carlo, and I hope this arsehole referee gets his demotion to the Championship very soon.
Hopefully this installs proper true grit and a resilience to turn up and fight for every ball, in our remaining games.
12 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:33:00
However, the line of sight argument seems to be irrelevant because of the following from Lyndon's report:
"According to the Premier League, the goal was ruled out because Gylfi Sigurdsson was deemed to have been in an offside position when Dominic Calvert-Lewin struck the shot that then deflected off Harry Maguire and past David de Gea and that the Icelandic midfielder had “made an obvious action that impacted de Gea's ability to make a save”."
So the assertion is that Siggy "made an obvious action..". I'm not sure I see any obvious action other than to pull his legs in so the ball doesn't hit them. It hasn't impacted on the keeper's ability to make the save. A bad call in my view, not because of the line of sight argument.
13 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:53:02
14 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:56:09
This proves it the Premier League don't want us there, and there is nothing we can do about it. We may as well just pack it all in. VAR as fucked us again, sick off it, the cheating rats.
15 Posted 01/03/2020 at 20:56:33
Loving this guy more every week.
16 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:04:03
17 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:04:38
He's only been with us for a few weeks but he's already lifted decades of anxiety and doubt off my shoulders. I was almost ready to give up on Everton before he arrived. The end of a lifelong love affair. But Carlo is slowly but surely rekindling my passion for the team and faith in the game.
18 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:14:42
19 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:22:39
They say it's about making "an obvious action that impacted de Gea's ability to make a save". None of that applies as I see it.
20 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:34:41
21 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:46:40
22 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:47:19
23 Posted 01/03/2020 at 21:47:27
They review the possibility of a penalty and decide it's not a clear and obvious error.
Yet they decide the referee made a clear and obvious error in deciding that Gylfi wasn't interfering with play?
I'm kind of okay with VAR calling offsides. I'd prefer a very small margin of error but at least it's a fairly objective decision.
But this wasn't about an objective decision. 'Interfering with play' is a subjective decision, made by the referee.
The VAR chose which decision he wanted to overrule. And I believe they did it because they have been given a mandate to call offsides, and misunderstood how far that mandate stretches.
This wasn't a question of offside. He was clearly in an offside position. The issue was whether he was interfering – it's not their job to get involved in that unless it's a clear and obvious error.
24 Posted 01/03/2020 at 22:23:15
25 Posted 02/03/2020 at 00:09:23
26 Posted 02/03/2020 at 00:15:04
27 Posted 02/03/2020 at 00:24:03
The fact that you can never beat the referee still holds and dwelling on it will never change the result.
Sigurdsson was offside, and should not have been. Naturally Ancelotti was upset at the time, but he will be turning round to Sigurdsson during the week and asking him ;
How long where you going to sit on your arse? I know we had the ball and it was in play, but the opposition could have had the ba!l in play as well , and your job is not to sit on your arse when the ball is in play, on the wages you are on.
28 Posted 02/03/2020 at 00:31:39
Now, the decision goes to a guy miles away from the ground!! He does not have to face the wrath of a crowd so it's even easier to make the call in favour of a sky 4-5 club.
What's the point in even going to the match anymore? It's a fucking fix.
29 Posted 02/03/2020 at 00:34:43
"A player is not committing an offence simply by being in an offside position"...tick.
Active involvment plus offside position is the offence... He was sat on his arse = not active (on a personal note, it's Sigurdsson ffs, he's never active.)
"Being actively involved in the area of play is not the same as being in the area of active play"...tick – he was sat on his arse.
"While in an offside position, there are three things a
player cannot do:
interfere with play
interfere with an opponent
gain an advantage by being in the offside position"
Tick, tick and tick – he was sat on his arse.
30 Posted 02/03/2020 at 00:45:11
31 Posted 02/03/2020 at 00:47:08
"Sigurdsson... made an obvious action that impacted de Gea's ability to make a save."
No he didn't.
By all means, argue all day about what it should have been. But facts are facts. VAR got involved and called this a clear and obvious error by the referee. Then made something up to justify it.
The referee gave a goal. Rightly or wrongly. And the standard to disallow was much higher than VAR used in this instance.
32 Posted 02/03/2020 at 01:05:10
33 Posted 02/03/2020 at 01:09:37
34 Posted 02/03/2020 at 01:13:52
35 Posted 02/03/2020 at 02:00:45
36 Posted 02/03/2020 at 02:09:45
Of course the Sky puppets Red shite Souness and fuck face Roy Keane say it was offside, yet that other Twatenburg ref says it was a goal.
I'm with the fans who think the game is corrupt. Carlo has a massive job on his hands to try to bring Everton Football Club back as a force to be reckoned with.
He is the man to do it and every fan must get behind him and his team. I feel confident that we are heading in the right direction; however, it's going to be tough fighting the powers that be who are keeping us where we are now.
37 Posted 02/03/2020 at 03:42:56
Sigurdsson "is never active" — cracker!
38 Posted 02/03/2020 at 05:18:47
However, to allow Moss to make such a decision when Everton is playing is a total abdication of responsibility by the Premier League. That was a disgraceful decision on that goal. He should be shot at dawn.
VAR is not the problem. It is the fact that they have one (dysfunctional) referee making that decision and it should be more than one and probably 3. Otherwise, just use the match referee.
What a fucking disgrace by the Premier League. IMO, Moss should be banned for life as he is far too biased!
39 Posted 02/03/2020 at 07:20:04
De Gea saw enough of Calvert-Lewin's shot to move to his right to cover its direction. It hits Maguire and goes in. No way would De Gea have had time to react to save that deflection.
So the question is: does Sigurdsson's position interfere with De Gea's sight? Impossible!!!
Whether it's the officials themselves, the time taken to make decisions on "clear and obvious errors", or the VAR technology, VAR is ruining the spontaneity of the game.
It should not be tweaked or laws changed to suit. VAR should be scrapped in its entirety.
40 Posted 02/03/2020 at 07:51:19
Moss was probably characteristically 40 yards from the VAR screen and out of breath whilst making this decision, such is the mans incompetence
41 Posted 02/03/2020 at 08:10:37
Would the goal have stood at the other end?
42 Posted 02/03/2020 at 08:19:41
43 Posted 02/03/2020 at 08:47:56
That decision has cost us a good league position as we press for top six and if the VAR decision is incorrect, it should be overturned and we should be awarded the points.
44 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:07:05
Sigurdsson was clearly in an offside position, which the ref and linesman must have seen, but the question of whether or not he is interfering in play should be up to the ref not VAR unless there was a deflection off Sigurdsson that the ref didn't see. No clear and obvious error there then.
I would suggest that the only decision VAR was in a position to make was whether the ball hit Sigurdsson.
45 Posted 02/03/2020 at 09:31:02
But why is he sat on his arse looking around in the first place? Because he is wondering why he hasn't heard the whistle for a penalty! Could argue he was no longer in control of the ball but, given how close he was to the goal, he would be denied the ability to get in on De Gea and get on the rebound from his save. Why wasn't that part reviewed?
It's unpleasant, but I can understand the VAR ruling, even if the messaging is confusing. He is offside. He clearly is in front of the keeper and, whether or not he is unsighted ,it's clearly a distraction to have a 6 foot bloke lying in front of you, but in an offside position. If it was at the other end and it stood, we would be baying for blood even more ferociously than now.
Positive to note though, goal or not, the lads are keeping it going to the end of the game, still working hard and creating chances right up to the whistle. That's a positive trait.
Also, what a difference Gomes makes. I wasn't watching but listening on the radio, his name and their new signing were the most used by far, everything seemed to be going through him.
Good on Carlo. Get stuck in. Passion. And quality after, laughing it off. Top stuff
46 Posted 02/03/2020 at 10:13:52
47 Posted 02/03/2020 at 10:33:09
Maguire in particular never stopped moaning and challenging his decisions - even staying on the field to argue with him face to face and throwing the ball down as he stalked away towards the tunnel. He continued his whinging into the after match interview on MOTD.
Circle the wagons folks - we need to channel this into a siege mentality now and Carlo is just the boy to lead it - a proper leader at last.
48 Posted 02/03/2020 at 12:46:33
49 Posted 02/03/2020 at 12:46:42
Im going back many years now a referee Mr. Evans ( cant remember his first name) a top class referee never took charge of any Everton or Liverpool games, dont know if this was by choice or that he wasnt allowed to.
He later became a scout for Sheffield Wed.
50 Posted 02/03/2020 at 12:49:17
51 Posted 02/03/2020 at 12:59:10
I dont believe for a second that the Brighton penalty against Keane would have been given if their striker had just “picked himself up and immediately got on with the game”. Instead he screamed, rolled and pleaded whilst on the floor and won his team a penalty.
Its a sad reflection of the game at the moment, I know.
And its typical of Everton that - whilst this tactic is working for other teams - its just cost us a winner.
52 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:26:24
53 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:33:54
54 Posted 02/03/2020 at 13:46:04
Damn good job it didn't lose us the point.
If the ref. and linesman deemed Siggy wasn't at fault then why did the moron at VAR say he was.
Maybe if it hadn't been so late in the game they may have allowed it, who knows. Either way it sucks.
55 Posted 02/03/2020 at 14:22:03
Ive read opinions of ex-refs, ex-pros, but Ive heard nothing coming from the horses mouth... I love Everton, but I think Im coming to the end with the circus, I honestly dont see the point.
56 Posted 02/03/2020 at 14:31:04
57 Posted 02/03/2020 at 14:52:03
58 Posted 02/03/2020 at 15:01:01
No John Im not a fan of VAR, the it is being used by the refs in the studio, I dont know many fans who do like it, even plenty of Red fans dont like it and they seem to benefit from it more than most.
59 Posted 02/03/2020 at 15:09:35
Other sports request Information through a referral either via an official or player who ask a much tighter question. Rather than an open has there been a foul in the build to the incident etc.
Its a far more reasonable less intrusive model which players can use or not as they prefer. A system which encourages intervention on marginal calls is a disaster.
Players are the ones who know when something big has been missed.
60 Posted 02/03/2020 at 15:13:24
Gylfi is in an offside position when DCL strikes the ball. Because the ball is deflected, Gylfi has to raise his legs in order for the ball to continue on its path. If he doesnt raise his legs, the ball stops because it hits him. Because the continuance of the ball in motion is dependent upon a player moving while in an offside position, hes deemed to be involved in the play. Ergo, offside.
Someone like Mike Gaynes or Sir John Pierce needs to weigh in on this. But Id bet thats their interpretation.
I dont agree with it and think its the wrong call completely. If you dont affect the path of the ball and dont block the line of sight, you can move all you want and NOT be involved in the play. The goal should have stood.
Jon Moss is a seriously “wanker” and Id about guarantee they were looking / thinking of explanations to disallow the goal, and not the other way around.
61 Posted 02/03/2020 at 15:44:45
When the ball was struck Sigurdsson is judged to be passive, otherwise the flag should go up immediately. If the shot goes in or is saved back out into play, the goal is given or we play on. Therefore the deflection makes no difference to the outcome.
With De Geas field of vision unimpeded in any way, Sigurdsson's movements comes after he is committed. His steps to the right is (tacit) information he can see the ball clearly and and hes done so without hesitation. It rules out interfering with the goalkeepers line of sight.
If he (the Lino) flagged immediately then Id have no issue, hes offside by definition. It would still feel harsh but I personally could live with it. They didnt so clearly theyve a-judged him to be passive, therefore if whatever the outcome should stand.
Passive offside is a subjective call, the goal was given on the field so it would take a clear error to over rule it. Based on the bar set so far this season the VAR has over reached his remit. Id have to re-read the final paragraph in law to be sure, but thats how Id understand it.
JaC, maybe surprisingly, Id give it!
62 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:00:33
There's zero argument about the line of sight, according to the League itself I believe? It's the offside bit and interfering in play.
You can't interfere with play if you've not touched the ball, didn't block sight, and are (as others eloquently pointed out) "sat on your arse"!
It's really a terrible, terrible call that was made far too quickly and is not what VAR is there for - it overreached in its remit as the call on the field was made, and there is a better and more compelling argument to let the goal stand.
I know fans of every club cry foul, but in a year where Everton have, time and again, been the victim to terrible calls.
No one is talking about this -
If Man U win the Europa League, and Man City are banned from Champions League next year, the CL spots go down to 6th place!
I'm pretty sure that's accurate???
Every single point in precious, and they are stealing them from right under our noses.
This Club must stop being so damn nice and fight back, dammit!
63 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:01:05
64 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:08:46
65 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:59:09
But the key is the flag, if it goes up immediately then I can tell the Lino things ah hes interfering there, he did not, so to over turn that interpretation you need clear evidence Im still waiting. 😑
66 Posted 02/03/2020 at 16:59:47
68 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:08:43
69 Posted 02/03/2020 at 17:18:11
Sigurdsson got the shot off and should have scored. No ref on earth will give a penalty in that situation. If he goes over before getting the shot away, yes. Otherwise, no.
70 Posted 02/03/2020 at 18:21:28
Anyone who has not watched rugby league, to put in simple terms, the ref will signal a square motion to indicate the big screen, then another hand signal saying try or no try.
The video ref will only get involved when the ref requests it.
Not only that, they show the incident on the big screen for fans to see.
That is the problem with var, refs decisions are getting over ruled, and no replays shown on the screens to supporters.
71 Posted 02/03/2020 at 18:45:02
So the game was over and he asked the ref for an explanation. However it is ok for Klopp to run onto the pitch, before the game has finished and hey ho, no problem at all. Same explanation as Carlo, it was a heat of the moment thing.
72 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:05:21
Nowadays, a VAR official has slow motion replays which they can watch over and over again from almost every angle imaginable. There is no excuse for getting something so, so wrong.
I would love to see Everton, or another club for that matter, really refuse to let a matter drop. Dont just accept the PGMOLs explanation or send a strongly worded letter. Actually publicly criticise the system and officials involved. Walk off the pitch or refuse to play under certain referees. Really make life difficult for the PGMOL and FA.
VAR was supposed to stop obviously bad decisions being made. Instead its only highlighting that theyll be made regardless.
73 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:14:56
74 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:30:12
75 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:35:45
76 Posted 02/03/2020 at 19:44:59
I believed it was an "overview" system, that allowed a qualified referee ( or referees) to watch aspects of the game live that the referee on the ground might miss due to the speed of the modern game.
If said VAR referee or referees saw something that they thought was a "clear and obvious error" by the man on the ground, they would bring it too his attention and he would then take a quick look at the reply on the pitch side monitor and decide whether his original decision was upheld or should be overturned.
I never thought that the VAR watching referee(s) would have the right to overrule the man on the ground at all, but merely bring his attention to glaring and obvious errors.
If VAR continues in this way then the purpose of the "man in the middle" becomes superfluous and the game can be refereed robotically from anywhere, by a panel of referees watching video screens of the action all over the pitch.
I honestly believe that VAR is being deliberately made to look controversial and useless by the powers that be because they want it scrapped and this is the quickest way to that end.
Used, as I believe it was going to be used, it would be a useful management tool for the referee in charge of the game.
Used as it is, it emasculates the referee who no longer has to worry about getting decisions right or wrong, because big brother can override him.
77 Posted 02/03/2020 at 20:10:25
Mike have to agree with John Mc
Seen hundreds of similar situations where a foul has been given after the ball has been released
Regardless of Sigi getting a shot away the ball was still in play, then he was fouled
How many times have we seen a penalty awarded for a foul on a player nowhere near the ball
78 Posted 02/03/2020 at 21:39:04
Be confused no more.
VAR (Very Awful Refereeing), is used when AR (Awful Referee), match official, is brought into question by VAF (Very Angry Fans).
VAR and AR then toss a coin and give a decision.
Hope this has helped!
79 Posted 03/03/2020 at 06:58:55
The above two mentioned answer to the FA, who as their initials suggest, no very little about anything !
80 Posted 03/03/2020 at 13:26:31
81 Posted 03/03/2020 at 14:51:30
82 Posted 03/03/2020 at 14:54:57
I bet Moss or Mason is 4th official.
83 Posted 03/03/2020 at 19:21:14
84 Posted 04/03/2020 at 12:33:35
85 Posted 04/03/2020 at 14:45:17
Hi Michael , I have opposed the use of VAR long before its introduction and, like yourself, I believe that it's causing more controversy than human error. I would be quite happy to revert to the system that was in place in my younger days. As a non-practising Roman Catholic, I always believed that the only men who were infallible were the Pope and referees, and if the ref didn't see it, it didn't happen.
86 Posted 04/03/2020 at 15:22:52
Although there were still plenty of replays of such incidents on TV, these were not fed back to the on field officials. Now though, some knobheads sitting in a box miles away from the stadium have numerous looks at controversial incidents and still get them wrong.
87 Posted 04/03/2020 at 15:51:14
The ref was Atkinson, and you watch Everton live more than me Rob, but can you ever remember Martin ever giving us a proper decision in all the years you've seen him officiate Everton?
Some refs have an agenda against certain teams, and although I think it's been done to death after the latest injustice, I also think it's an irrefutable fact.
88 Posted 04/03/2020 at 16:17:35
89 Posted 04/03/2020 at 16:27:55
90 Posted 04/03/2020 at 16:58:03
I used to refuse to believe the game was corrupt but after Clattenburg, Mike Riley, Collina, Atkinson and Moss you would have to believe there is some sort of conspiracy because some of those decisions are so ridiculous they couldn't even be called a mistake.
91 Posted 04/03/2020 at 17:54:31
You are correct and also add Clive cheating Thomas to that list. Horrible, Horrible man.
92 Posted 04/03/2020 at 23:53:52
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.