We’ve been here before… he isn’t alone.
3 Likes
I would guess the man has a high moral and ethical standard.
Anyone with such would be unable to cope with the treatment meted out on Sunday
3 Likes
He did say something stupid like “you cannot run and shoot”. Sorry, what? Try and shoot without running, see how that goes. I mean, I understand what he wanted to say, just expressed himself a bit wrongly. I also understand the refs point of view. I don’t think Jurgen is getting tired or anything, it’s just who he is and that’s it. When we lose/drop points/have incidents in a game, then he can touch on different topics. With a lot of them he’s right (like a lot of other managers wanting the same), but he’s also not immune to some weird stuff. Just passion and an age where you gave to give plenty of interviews every few days.
In trying to be impartial you’re the only person I’ve come across who seems to legitimately think the ref had a valid opinion. Ex refs, ex players, neutral fans, they’re all laughing at how stupid that excuse for not giving the penalty was.
2 Likes
It’s very much possible that I’m shit at rules of the game, so… it’s okay, I’m only a fan. The Kane incident is worse to me. The penalty can be given, even if it’s not a big one for me, but I don’t mind if it wasn’t. I believe that you get some of those, others you don’t. Until we have robots or whatever refereeing without any mistakes (probably not in my lifetime), I can live with it. It’s more other rules and decisions that are problematic, at least for me.
OK well let me just state I don’t think it’s ever been OK to do a two handed shoulder barge from behind on the player on the ball, probably not even in the 70s. Even when you go shoulder to shoulder you have to worry about putting too much pressure on with that arm as a ref might give a penalty against you if they go down.
1 Like
Very good news, hopefully we can keep up the pressure on that Wigan rat.
12 Likes
The FA has reviewed Jurgen Klopp’s post-match comments about referee Paul Tierney and would have gone further and called him a cunt.
3 Likes
How exactly? I thought Tierney’s reason for not giving the penalty was astonishing, absolute drivel. Even if Jota did stop, which he didn’t, where in the rules does it say, ‘ players are not allowed to stop running’? It’s the most ridiculous explanation I’ve heard, for not giving a penalty.
4 Likes
That’s because the FA know, everything Klopp said after the match was justified.
3 Likes
Basically, Jota shouldn’t have stopped ergo no penalty. Robertson shouldn’t have moved ergo no red card.
3 Likes
He didn’t say he’s not allowed to stop (Klopp is our only source here and he can make mistakes expressing himself), but maybe he felt like he was waiting for the contact. I’m not saying that immediately means it’s not a penalty.
I think there were two very similar situations against Milan in the latest game, one in our own box (Tsimikas against someone) and one in Milan’s. Perhaps not 100% the same, but similar.
The weird thing about the Jota stopping situation is when I watched it on MotD, it didn’t look like Jota stopped at all, just steadied himself to take the shot. There didn’t appear to be any abrupt, unusual stopping, just the usual planting so as to form a strong base for a shot. It looked perfectly normal to me. Am I alone on that?
10 Likes
Or where does it say if you stop, which he didn’t, you are allowed to run him over like a freight train. If one believes that shite one should apply for a referee job in the PL, one would fit right in with most of the twats.
1 Like
The argument was probably that he could’ve taken the shot earlier (like I did, but in real time, I know that’s not a glorious chance and it wasn’t easy). Jota’s weaker side/foot is good, but not everyone is Sergio Aguero, that it ends up being a goal after 1-2 touches. I don’t believe the ref wanted to say that Jota can’t stop, but maybe that he was looking/waiting for it. Which also doesn’t mean it cannot be a penalty. Which also doesn’t mean it was the ref’s only reason why he didn’t give it. Probably a mix of him thinking Jota was looking for one and then the contact itself.
No, you’re definitely not alone on that.
4 Likes
Jota was 2metres from the goal with his left peg getting primed for a thunderbolt…
Why would he want to stop and look for a penalty…
Our attackers have every right to stop dead on the spot if they want…
But then so can defenders, so why did the defender take him out when he could have stopped also
Penalty all day long that tackle
6 Likes
If you’re running at speed and want to kick the ball, you decelerate before striking it.
It’s that simple really. Claiming Jota was looking for it because he was supposedly ‘stopping’ is a nonsense explanation. Jota decelerated, made sure his body was between player and ball (which is allowed) and was barged over from behind.
Clear foul and penalty.
Whenever PGMOL open their mouth it becomes apparent why they make so many mistakes. Fatal misunderstanding of how the game is played and should be refereed.
12 Likes
I think rather Tierney is alone and everyone else is on the same page as you.
To me it looked like Jota was in the middle of trying to out his foot through the ball to shoot with power. Any change of speed was dictated by linking his left foot up with the ball.
The only questions for a penalty decision would be did the defender get the ball? Was it a fair shoulder to shoulder challenge? I think the replay is pretty clear that the answer is no for both.
5 Likes
Jota had no idea a player was coming at him from speed from behind him when his eyes are on the front where there’s a defender sliding in, a goalkeeper and an open avenue from the ball to back of the net.
1 Why would he take chance trying to win a penalty as scoring was easier?
2 How did he even know the player was there when he came from so far away?
3 How does it even matter? If Jota has decided to stop and stand still in the middle of the area and do the fucking vogue it’s still a foul to barge someone over with force, from behind, especially when using your arms.
8 Likes