Premier League Match Centre explains why controversial John Stones goal stood in Man City win v Wolves
Chris Kavanagh awarded John Stones’ controversial winner against Wolverhampton Wanderers as he deemed Bernardo Silva had not interfered with Jose Sa’s eyeline.
Stones’ header in the fifth minute of injury-time secured a crucial three points for City that saw them, at least temporarily, move top of the table with a 2-1 win. City’s players experienced a contrast of emotions after Stones’ header crashed into the net.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe initial joy was replaced with despair as Kavanagh disallowed the goal on the pitch, indicating that Silva was in an offside position, before he made his way over to the side of the pitch to check the VAR monitor.
As he watched, both sets of players and coaching staff franticly pleaded their case, with the likes of Jack Grealish and Rico Lewis particularly adamant that the goal should stand. They proved to be correct as Kavanagh decided Silva’s interferance was insufficient to cancel out the goal. As City celebrated, Wolves were dejected, with Matheus Cunha picking up a booking in the aftermath for his complaints.
Explaining the decision via the Premier League Match Centre account on X, the league 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.”
It was a largely frustrating day for City, with the champions held for 95 minutes by the side that were bottom of the table. The Blues were a little open on the counter and failed to find a way through Wolves’ organised backline. Indeed, the City goals came via a Josko Gvardiol strike from distance and Stones’ header.
Comment Guidelines
National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.