In an exclusive interview with SportsLens, former Premier League referee Peter Walton gives his opinion on refereeing decisions from the Everton game in which he believes referee Stuart Atwell made a mistake blowing the whistle before the ball went into the net when he thought Tarkowski fouled Leno. Walton thinks that Everton fans have a right to feel aggrieved for the disallowed goal.

When using the quotes below, please link to – https://sportslens.com/

Use anchor text: Sportslens.com

Interview Highlights:

• Everton have a right to feel aggrieved for disallowed goal
• Atwell might come to different conclusion this week – on Tarkowski foul
• Players need to be aware they may regret post-match interview outbursts

Full Transcript

Question: Michael Keane had a goal disallowed during the Everton vs Fulham game after Bernd Leno spilled the ball in the air. Did you agree with that decision?

Peter Walton: “No I don’t think it was the correct decision. And I think if I was an Evertonian this morning I’d be really upset about that. You must think of the referee and what he feels Tarkowski is making a ‘back’ for the goalkeeper. But if you look at the pictures I’ve looked at, it will appear that Tarkowski is probably aware of a defender behind him or indeed the goalkeeper and he’s almost bracing himself for contact. I think Leno misjudged the flight to the ball and misjudged the way that the defender and the attacker in front of him were positioning themselves and went over the top of Tarkowski with the ball and clearly lost possession of it. So I think that should have stood as a goal. What I was pleased with was the way that Sean Dyche conducted his post match interview and indeed himself on the bench because I think he would have gone quite berserk about that in previous seasons because it’s such an important decision. Fulham were lucky to get away with that one and Everton have a right to feel aggrieved.”

Question: Is it the case that because the referee blew his whistle so early, VAR couldn’t intervene and subsequently change the decision?

Peter Walton: “Yes as we all know, VAR can only intervene if a goal has been scored because the purpose of VAR is to check the goal and check the build up to the goal. At the moment Stuart Atwell had blown his whistle the ball hadn’t entered into the net so it was just perceived to be an on field foul. And that’s down to Stuart’s mindset there. He obviously thought a foul had occurred and didn’t have any second thoughts about just delaying his whistle just in case. I think when he reviews that with his manager during the course this week he might have come to a different conclusion. But the moment was lost and he chose to blow his whistle. But you’re quite right, VAR could not have gotten involved in that particular instance on Saturday.”

Question: Tarkowski blasted Atwell in a post-match interview saying “I think the referee was the only person in the stadium who didn’t think it was a goal.” Should players be speaking about refereeing decisions straight after games? 

Peter Walton: “When anybody gives a reaction about anything they’ve got a personal interest in, they get more animated as their feelings become known. I think a player is quite entitled to give his opinion post-match. But like managers, they need just to make sure they don’t get personal with it. They can give their opinion of the decision, but I would rather they don’t necessarily point all the fingers at the match official. They have to be careful, of course they do, but I can understand his frustration and of course the press would love that because that gives them a bit of a headline. Players just need to be aware that sometimes while they may feel happy with their initial outburst, ultimately they may regret doing it.”