Former Premier League referee Mark Clattenburg believes the officials made one incorrect decision during Liverpool’s 2-0 victory over Burnley.

The victory for Liverpool seemed fragile until Diogo Jota’s late goal added to Darwin Nez’s early score, owing primarily to the disqualification of two visitors’ goals. Cody Gakpo scored the opening goal before halftime, but it was disallowed by referee Paul Tierney for what he thought to be a foul by Nez on Charlie Taylor. VAR upheld the decision because there was insufficient evidence to overturn it, despite the fact that playback showed little contact from the Reds’ number nine.

Clattenburg noted after the game, when watching it on Amazon Prime, that Tierney, who he thought did an excellent job overall, got this wrong.

“See, I thought Paul Tierney refereed this game really well, he played a wonderful advantage for Liverpool’s second goal but this one I don’t agree with,” he was quoted as saying. “Look at the Burnley defender’s reaction — he puts his hands to his head.” He’s moved in front of Nez, and I don’t see any contact from Nez when I look at it from different angles, so I don’t consider it a foul.

“Once Paul Tierney gives it — and this is why there are so many arguments about whether or not the VAR is doing his job — this is such a subjective call.” He made the pitch decision, and the VAR responded, ‘You know what? There isn’t enough to stop it’.

“I disagree; I believe the best decision would have been to play on and let the goal stand.” I don’t have enough contact to call a foul.”

Another score from the Euro 2016 final that was ruled out by the referee was also investigated. Harvey Elliott graded it, and it had passed Tierney’s scrutiny first. VAR Simon Hooper, on the other hand, encouraged him to have another look at it on the pitchside monitor. He then ruled that Mohamed Salah was in an offside position and had impeded the goalkeeper’s view.

There was more discussion about this because Salah had been pushed offside, and Elliott’s shot was too powerful for goalkeeper James Trafford, who was running in the opposite direction, to stop. Clattenburg, on the other hand, could see why this decision was made because it is the referee’s job to enforce the rules as they are, not to make decisions on how goalkeepers should move.

“I can see it from both sides,” he explains. “The officials are following the rules of the game exactly as written — was Mo Salah in an offside position?” Yes. Was he pushed offside on purpose? Yes. Was that sufficient to warrant a penalty? No. He is, in reality, on the wrong side of the ball. Is he on the goalkeeper’s line when Elliott scores? Yes.

“You could argue that the goalkeeper is only going one way. Is he attempting to move in one direction to save the ball? We’re not goalkeepers, therefore we have no idea. Referees are simply enforcing the established regulations of the game.

“We also take distance into account.” Mo Salah is in the six-yard box, extremely near to the goalie, Trafford. Trafford might have a chance to stop the shot if Mo Salah was five or ten meters higher up, but when the ball is struck, there is an argument that Trafford is only going one way. Would he have been able to keep it safe? That is not the decision of the referee; it is the outcome of executing the laws as written.

“Was Mo Salah playing offside?” Yes. Was he in the frame of reference? Yes, I can see why it was rejected. “The easiest decision for the referee to make once he’s gone to the screen, in my opinion, is to disallow it.”

He pointed out that if Elliott had hit the left side of the goal instead of the right, Liverpool may have doubled their lead much earlier in the game.

“I don’t think it would have been an issue if it had gone in the other side [of the goal], because Salah has blocked that side where the ball has gone and doesn’t give him a chance to save it.” We don’t want to foresee what the goalkeeper will do next because we’re just refs implementing the rules. Even if we disagree, the referees follow the rules as they are now stated.”

“If it had flashed into the top corner on the other side it would have been a very different goal because the goalkeeper would certainly have not had a chance to save it.”