Wembley and a DOGSO dinner of a decision
A look at the weekend's football
The officials made an absolute DOGSO dinner of the decision not to send Dean Henderson off for handling outside his area as Erling Haaland tried to take the ball around him at Wembley. It’s a shocking mistake, one of the worst of the season, and certainly one of the most significant in consequence. All the attempted explanations don’t add, and seemingly come from everyone’s viewpoint except the individual denied - Haaland.
It first needs emphasising that Crystal Palace absolutely deserved their FA Cup glory. They were better organised, better motivated, stuck to their absorb-and-counter game-plan and stuck together. Palace had stellar performances all over the field from Henderson himself in goal to Chris Richards, Adam Wharton, Daniel Munoz and Eberechi Eze. Oliver Glasner showed how to make the 3-4-2-1 system work, and demonstrated what a good coach and tactician he is. Palace fans were immense. And they were leading through Eze’s goal when the Henderson/Haaland incident occurred.
But for all the understandable romanticism about Palace winning, justice was not done in this defining incident. How anyone can look at the incident and not conclude that Haaland was likely to have a shot on goal a second later is beyond comprehension.
It’s worth considering individually the four elements to the denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity. First, “distance to the goal”: Haaland was about to enter the area. He was closing in on goal. Second, “general direction of play”: Haaland was right of centre, trying to take the ball around Henderson, and then place it into an empty net with his right foot. He was not heading away from goal. Haaland was moving slightly to the right to steer the ball around the keeper. It’s what strikers do. The real change of direction of the ball came when Henderson slapped it left.
Third, “likelihood of keeping control of the ball”: very high. Haaland’s toe was about to touch the ball and guide it around Henderson. Haaland was in control. Fourth, “location and numbers of defenders”. Marc Guehi was two yards behind Haaland, not running at the same pace, and would not have caught Haaland before he got his shot away. Maxence Lacroix was coming across from the right but would not have reached Haaland in time. Nobody was getting back in time to block any shot on goal.
The on-field referee Stuart Attwell could be forgiven for not calling it immediately at high speed, and particularly whether Henderson was out of his area. Referees frequently rely on VAR. What is bemusing is that the VAR Jarred Gillett and support VAR Michael Salisbury recommended no action. Anybody who saw the incident back could see it was a potential red card incident. Any real scrutiny of Haaland’s pace and angle of attack would surely conclude it was DOGSO.
Officials don’t want to become the story. That’s understandable. But part of the subsequent debate has been they were right not to act because it would “have ruined the final” coming so early. It should not matter the time of the incident, 24th minute or 84th. Justice is not defined by hour of the clock. Howard Webb, now in charge of elite referees in England, has reflected occasionally how he should have dismissed Nigel de Jong for planting his studs into the ribs of Xabi Alonso after 28 minutes of the 2010 World Cup final. Coming only a quarter through a game is irrelevant.
Because the decision came against uber-wealthy City, many neutrals will love it. Because it benefited plucky Palace, many neutrals will love it even more. It was a great, historic FA Cup final. But not a great day for English officiating.
**
While we’re on City, Jack Grealish has to leave. He cannot be happy sitting there on the bench, watching 19-year-old Claudio Echeverri come on for his debut and his first game in five months followed by midfielder Ilkay Gundogan. The 34-year-old free signing hadn’t scored in 32 games. City were crying out for a dribbler to win a free-kick, a penalty or create a chance for somebody. Pep Guardiola clearly prefers Jeremy Doku on the left, and the Belgian winger did have a decent game at Wembley. Unless Grealish can somehow produce such super-human performances in training to convince Guardiola then he needs to go. Grealish turns 30 in September. If he wants to go to the World Cup with England next year, he has to be starting elsewhere. He should remember the frustration of all those England commercials with him central playing out during Euro 2024 with him absent, overlooked by Gareth Southgate.
Wages are so often a sticking point with players. If Grealish wants to revive his career, he has to lower his salary sights and find a club where he can play again, and be happy again. Because Grealish looks miserable on the City bench, it’s such a waste of a special talent and the clock is ticking.
**
Countless wonderful tributes have been paid to Everton and Goodison Park as the men’s team move out. One of the greatest tributes was the number of former players who returned for the emotional moment. The club, the fans and the grand old ground had clearly got into them during their time wearing the shirt, a bond never broken. For them, Goodison stirred their passion as well as providing an atmospheric arena for their profession.
**
To change captains is always a sensitive subject, let alone decision and process. Martin Odegaard wears the Arsenal armband proudly, and represents the club well on and off the field. He’s a good ambassador. But Odegaard doesn’t seize games with the same vigour as Declan Rice. He has become Arsenal’s driving force, their beacon in dark times in games. Rice, 26 (like Odegaard), doesn’t actually need the armband to inspire him to deliver so Arsenal will doubtless feel they are already benefiting from having two leaders. Just one happens to have the armband. The debate may intensify if, probably when, Rice succeeds Harry Kane as England captain when the striker, 31, eventually steps down.
**
Jamie Vardy’s having a leaving party, and it could not have been better scripted or acted out: 200th goal for Leicester, 500th game for Leicester, bowing out before his adoring Leicester public, who sadly know they are unlikely to see such a hungry goal poacher again. It will be fascinating to see where Vardy goes next. His family is settled in Leicestershire. Vardy himself looks most settled when unsettling centre-halves. There is surely be one more headline-grabbing act in the Vardy script to play out.
**
What an epic weekend that was. Enjoy the week.
Excellent Monday points as always. There were plenty of different stories in football this weekend.
Great for Palace winning the Cup but how Henderson was not sent off as you said was a joke. How can two VAR officials sit in a booth and decide that was not deliberate hand ball outside the area that prevented a clear goal scoring opportunity is madness. They must be watching different screens.
Grealish has to leave City as you say. He is done at City. Not a Pep player now. The substitution’s show that. Where he goes is going to be interesting as he is on a massive wage. But doesn’t go by people now or do anything attacking really. Pep would not be telling him to do this either. He loves attacking players and would want his wingers taking players on and trying to create things. Grealish holds onto the ball to long. Always cuts back onto his right foot. Easy to defend.
Rice without doubt Arsenal’s player of the season and the captain on the pitch. What a goal and what a player. Always fit to. Loves playing. Has to be the next England captain.
Great way for Vardy to go out at Leicester. A typical Vardy goal. What a signing he has been for Leicester. 13 years of great service for a club. But right to move on. Leicester need to restart again now with a new breed of player. Interested to see where he goes.
Enjoy this week’s football.
Good morning Henry, I have a slightly different take on the matter - maybe my membership of the goalkeepers union has a bearing on this. There is no doubt that both Henderson’s feet were in the area. So was he outside of his area? Are the laws of the game explicit? In cricket you can parry the ball back into play, provided your feet don’t touch the ground, therefore saving a six and/or facilitating a catch. In rugby, a defender can create a “ball out on the full” by catching the ball with one foot in touch.
Assuming that the laws of the game aren’t clear (my 1977 version from when I took a ref’s course at school won’t be much help), then surely the fact that part of his body - especially as it was his feet - means he was in the box. To me, common sense prevailed and now we have an explicit reference point, the laws can be amended to cover whatever outcome the powers that be. Perhaps they can address offside flag raising in the same meeting….