Andoni Iraola Furious as Liverpool Blame Fourth Official for Controversial Nottingham Forest Goal

Andoni Iraola did not hold back after Liverpool were forced to settle for a second successive 2-2 draw, with the Reds boss questioning the professionalism of fourth official Tim Robinson following a controversial sequence that unfolded moments before Nottingham Forest scored.

Liverpool were preparing to make a triple substitution at Anfield when Forest were awarded a penalty after Alisson brought down Neco Williams inside the box. Morgan Gibbs-White converted from the spot to put the visitors 2-1 ahead.

But Iraola’s frustration centred on what happened immediately before the penalty.

Liverpool angry over substitution delay

The Liverpool manager had reportedly submitted the changes several minutes earlier, but the substitution boards were not ready when the opportunity came to make the triple switch.

That allowed Forest to take a quick throw-in, catching Liverpool before the changes could be completed. The move eventually led to Alisson’s challenge on Williams and the penalty.

Television footage showed Iraola visibly furious with Robinson as the fourth official struggled to prepare the boards.

After the final whistle, the Liverpool boss remained unhappy.

“I will analyse the penalty, yes, but a professional fourth official cannot take three minutes for the subs,” Iraola told TNT Sports.

“We gave the subs two or three minutes before. I was angry because in the previous stop we couldn’t make it. And before the throw-in I said ‘let’s do it now’, but I don’t know how to explain it but it has taken ages to prepare two boards.”

Alisson also loses his temper

The penalty decision itself sparked another angry reaction from Liverpool.

Alisson was booked after protesting against referee Sam Barrott’s decision and remained visibly frustrated throughout the remainder of the match.

His anger boiled over again at full-time when the Brazilian goalkeeper was seen kicking one of the substitution boards, leaving a hole in it.

The incident added to a highly contentious afternoon for Liverpool, who felt the timing of the substitution delay had contributed to Forest being able to attack before the changes were made.

Former referee explains the problem

Former Premier League referee Graham Scott subsequently offered an explanation for why the process had taken so long.

Writing on X, Scott argued that the current Premier League substitution boards are cumbersome and time-consuming to operate.

“The subs boards are not fit for purpose,” he wrote.

Scott explained that each number must be entered manually and that the device counts upward one number at a time. In this particular situation, he said, entering number 38 alone could take several seconds, while six different numbers needed to be entered.

He also pointed to the physical design of the boards, saying sponsor advertising makes them “heavy and unwieldy”, which is why the fourth official had placed them on the ground.

Scott added that UEFA competitions use a different system in which clubs enter the substitution numbers themselves, allowing changes to be processed more quickly.

However, the fourth official would still have needed to verify the names and numbers of all six players involved against the official team sheet before authorising the changes.

Liverpool rescue another point

The controversy overshadowed another frustrating performance from Liverpool, who have now drawn their opening two league matches of the 2026/27 campaign.

Forest took the lead when Dan Ndoye finished after Liverpool failed to deal with a long ball.

Alexander Isak brought the hosts level with a close-range finish from Cody Gakpo’s cross, before Gibbs-White restored Forest’s advantage from the penalty spot.

Liverpool eventually rescued a point in the 82nd minute, when Victor Munoz produced a powerful effort that struck the underside of the crossbar before finding the net.

For Iraola, however, the performance was almost as concerning as the result.

“It’s not the result we want. I think two very different halves,” he said.

“I think we were poor in the first half, even being poor, we were unlucky in terms of their goal.”

The Spaniard demanded a much greater level of intensity after the interval.

“We were very poor in the first half. We were much better in the second half. The intensity was different – if you are going to lose, you have to lose like in the second half.”

Liverpool improved significantly after the break, creating more pressure and threatening Forest’s goal far more consistently.

“A lot more intense, more threatening, happy with the second half, but it was late in the game,” Iraola admitted.

The result leaves Liverpool still searching for their first league victory of the new campaign, while Iraola now has another contentious refereeing incident to examine alongside his team’s uneven start.