I like this post, but I did celebrate.
In my defence, it was on my phone on the other side of the room whilst I was bathing my son, couldn’t see shit.
Plus he laughed when I jumped up like an idiot, so I stand by my actions.
5 Likes
Re Alisson…at first I thought he should’ve done better…but seeing the replay the ball is heading straight for Gomez and then he moves out the way. If he didn’t turn his back the ball hits him and it cleared. The ball then hits the inside of the post and goes in so it was placed well if Fornells meant it which he didn’t.
Just a fluke goal but at the moment those are going against us.
2 Likes
Only it wasnt really an obvious foul was it? The keeper landed on Manes leg, he had to slide to get to the ball. It wasnt as clear as you suggest.
2 Likes
Re the mane tackle …he has every right to go for that and so did keeper…they both collide but it’s mane who’s punished yet if the ball broke lose he wouldn’t be able to tap it in as keeper was still on him.
The keeper is free so had no issues trying to save Jotas shot while still being on mane…yet the goal is ruled out.
It shouldn’t have been but seeing as it involved a keeper and a Lfc goal it was always gonna be ruled out.
1 Like
99 times out a hundred that would be disallowed at all levels of football. Contact on or by a keeper is always viewed differently. Always has been and no doubt always will be. In real time I knew it wouldn’t stand. If that had been Calvert-Lewin on Allison, no-one here would be arguing that it wasn’t a foul.
4 Likes
When the ref went to the monitor Klopp could be seen. I think he knew and agreed already that it would not stand. Maybe he saw it on the monitor before the ref did.
From the FA website :
“# LAW 12: FOULS AND MISCONDUCT
IFAB Laws of the Game 2020-21
Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct
Direct and indirect free kicks and penalty kicks can only be awarded for offences committed when the ball is in play.
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
- charges
- jumps at
- kicks or attempts to kick
- pushes
- strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
- tackles or challenges
- trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.”
The offence is based purely on the actions of the opposing player. So if Mo was tackled illegally in the penalty area, he should automatically win a penalty, regardless how he falls or not fall.
The reason players overact in falling is because the refs don’t award the penalty if they don’t do so.
Improve the refereeing standards and this will die off, especially with VAR in play.
Just my humble opinion.
4 Likes
Excellent result, really the most important thing, even if we do end up have to take the scenic route to get there.
Best moment? Seeing Moyes in post match interview looking exceptionally pissed off becuase he got nothing, nada, zilch from the match. Lovely!
2 Likes
Was it a clear and obvious error that came to VARs attention. Were they checking for Jota offside? Some reports post match was that the foul was on the defender which blows your opinion on tackling the keeper out of the water.
Maybe move away from the notion that everything is even and fair? Yesterday Mane was fouled in the box and no notion of a review or a penalty. Then he puts in a challenge for the ball and there is fluting around until a ‘reason’ is decided to disallow the goal.
Add that to the Fabinho decision last week, add that to the travesties (yes, plural) in the Derby and the Mo penalty vs Villa…and ask yourself if all us fair and even…
No conspiracy. But bias. It always existed to a degree, but the LiVARpool narrative perpetuated by Pep, London Press, Ex Reds trying to be “reasonable” has coloured the decision making process. Refs are unable to free themselves of the fear of calling it as it should be.
If Pickford is sent off in the derby then Richarlison probably doesn’t smash Thiago? But weakness and bias allowed that to happen.
Add to this Murphy whining about Salah going down too easy yesterday, whilst lauding Kane etc for doing the same thing?
Its there in front of you. You chose not to see it, fair enough.
10 Likes
Funnily still being accused of playing sideways backwards which was what he has been accused for past three years now, still being an integral part of Klopp’s winning sides. Maybe Klopp is an idiot who keeps playing him for no reason.
The likes of Bobby, Keita, Jones get roasted for losing possession because they are adventurous. The likes of Gini get roasted because they aren’t adventurous. Maybe we do have the right balance and players are doing what is expected them to do and hence Klopp is persisting with them?
Given the defensive issues we have, are we still expecting our midfielders to go gung-ho and expose our defense further that has likes of Rhys and Philips playing? Geez. Anyways if we are looking for an upgrade on Alisson of all people, there’s not much you can argue.
11 Likes
No-one knows for sure why it was disallowed. Only Kevin Friend who went to the monitor and he isn’t saying…
Everything is reviewed. Where’s our resident VAR expert @Limiescouse when you need him.
When does the VAR check an incident?
Every moment is watched for an infringement or missed incident.
Wijnaldum is a perfect example for what we over here call “the Dutch disease”, playing the ball sideways or backwards keep position don’t take any risks. That’s why I can’t wait to get Thiago back who has the guts to play true to middle right in the feet of our front three.
2 Likes
Unbelievable disrespect on here. Gini has been an integral part of possibly the greatest ever Liverpool team. He does what he does extremely well and just because he isn’t scoring spectacular goals or performing goalline heroics doesn’t mean that he’s not important to our success. Games are usually won and lost in the midfield and winning and retaining possession can make all the difference. He’s come in, changed position and has done an excellent job in a thoroughly professional manner.
19 Likes
I thought Gini was great yesterday. Especially in the second half. Skipping round tackles and retaining the ball under pressure.
13 Likes
Could almost feel competitors thinking ffs on 85th min w/Jota winner, crazy season begun
1 Like
The trouble is it wasn’t ruled out for a foul on the keeper it was ruled out it was for a foul on the defender.
1 Like
Couldn’t follow all of the game but we showed plenty of grit and determination, Nat Phillips had a good Prem debut by the sounds of it. Jota what an impact he’s making.
2 Likes
He didnt foul the defender. Next thing is Jota was offside?
At least two incorrect excuses for a poor decision so far.
2 Likes
The only one that comes to mind is from last season against Wolves. Wolves were robbed that day.
Other than that, I’m struggling.
On yesterday’s decisions, nowhere near as blatant as the Everton game or Sheffield Utd, but it’s the accumulation now that’s getting annoying.
-
The challenge on Mane was a clear penalty. It isn’t a coming together. The West Ham lad puts his leg in front of Mane and brings him down. I don’t think it even got checked.
-
The Salah one is also pen as the West Ham player takes a swipe at his foot, but Salah can now expect to go two months without getting anything for the dive. The irony being, it’s only buy throwing himself down that he gets the pen, and if he doesn’t the ref gives nothing. Harry Kane does that and he’s congratulated for drawing attention to the foul.
-
I don’t see anything wrong with the first Jota goal. Three lads go for the ball, all equally and without recklessly endangering each other. Jota benefits from the rebound. I suspect that if that happens at the other end the referee has no problem with it.
3 Likes
The guy stood on Salahs foot, a clear foul. Souness was being stupid.
2 Likes