Post Match: Spurs, Hooper, VAR, PL v Liverpool (EPL 30/9/23 5.30pm)

It doesn’t though does it.

I said we can criticise his performance but you won’t achieve an investigation based on a shit refereeing display or you’d have 8/10 games a week (which it should be but that’s then the issue).

If you focus on the fact the clear rules of the game were followed on the Jones tackle and whatever they did on that offside then it is far more fertile ground for the club.

If truth be told we’ve had one decent display by a ref this season and that was the game Chris Kav did last week which is a surprise in itself.

Guy against Bournemouth wasn’t bad but VAR didn’t help him out on that.

1 Like

Perhaps that’s where the difference lies. I want an investigation into that. Thoroughly inexcusable that refereeing performance overall is so poor.

Also, it’s not like Hooper was even adequate in his most recent previous game, was he?

The whole thing needs a root and branch review but evidently everything has closed rank so I think the best we can do is focus on procedure on these two incidents.

2 Likes

Really?
I very much doubt that, because if there is no grounds for rescinding then the club wouldn’t try.

I suspect they know that the appeal will fall on deaf ears, thus compounding the corruption in this match.
All evidence for a legal battle perhaps

I think the fascinating, under appreciated, aspect of how bad a performance that was is there was nothing about the approach of the sides that made it a difficult game. Even in a game with 2 red cards and Gapko’s injury there was not a nasty tackle in the entire game. For all the complaints about Maddison engaging the ref and Udogie waving the card, there was very little cynical about either team’s conduct. That is a game that could have reasonably ended with just 2 or 3 cards. To have given 12 (I think that was the final count) in a game like that is indefensible. It’s just a performance from a guy who spiraled out of control

5 Likes

And not mention the penalty foul on Gomez.

So we need to wait a full week yet for this audio - won’t be released until Howard does his need “mic’d up”

If the Mic’d up show doesn’t disclose full audio, I’d like to hope the club would do so - if they’ve received in full. That includes right to the throw in post Spurs freekick.

1 Like

I don’t agree with you on the Virgil red card, because your reading of the laws doesn’t coincide with what actually happened, literal or not.

Also
I wasn’t the only one to disagree with the red card. But you chose to use me in your argument.

Again you won’t get anything out of that.

The club is right to focus on the performance overall and the two incidents, you pick your battles and the club has rightly done so.

2 Likes

No, you just don’t agree with what the law literally says. It’s not a question of interpretation.

Mind you, I might well be getting which incident it is mixed up. But my impression of the incident I was talking about was that what you really disagreed with was the rule, rather than the implementation/interpretation of it.

The performance overall is not adequately covered by the two main incidents.
The first yellow for Jota.
Yellow for Salah
Penalty claim…
All of these add to the evidence of bias/corruption…and that’s without mentioning their trip to the desert

2 Likes

You might be getting the incidents mixed up but can still tell me my views on it?

I think its best to leave it there…

Yes, true to an extent. But let’s face it, most decisions are not that hard to fathom are they? We’re talking about a game of footy.

I’ll give you an example, Trent’s yellow after being shoved off the pitch by a two handed push in the back.

There was an explanation given as to how the ref reached the decision. Hahahahaha.

4 Likes

From the BBC:

"BBC Sport understands that Liverpool are now in receipt of the relevant audio footage from the match officials in Saturday’s game at Tottenham and will take the time necessary to review it.

Liverpool, who went down to a 2-1 defeat after Luis Diaz’s first-half strike was wrongly disallowed for offside, criticised the response of referees’ body PGMOL, saying their explanation that it was a “significant human error” was “unacceptable” and “sporting integrity has been undermined”.

On Monday, the club made a formal request for the audio recordings between the match officials - on-pitch referee Simon Hooper, video assistant referee Darren England and his assistant Dan Cook - to better understand how the breakdown in communication happened."

2 Likes

But that is precisely the point isn’t it? If the explanation is so absurd to be unbelievable, then there is something valid to criticise, and therefore to improve the situation.

Otherwise, all you have left is simple innuendo.

1 Like

If even people who might agree with your underlying point are calling you blinkered and ill-informed, perhaps it’s time for you to review your own behaviour and thinking?

1 Like

No-one says it was fair, but replaying it just creates more layers of unfairness.

Football matches are not played in laboratory conditions. Players have different levels of form and fitness, the weather has a massive impact. Who you are playing around the fixture etc.

The conditions of that game can’t be recreated, so it can’t be replayed.

Nah, I’m not having that. When I click @Quicksand’s username it says “JT”, but his avatar isn’t a bastard J, is it?

Something else is going on here, and I want a goddamn explanation.

1 Like

I saw the point made elsewhere that the number of cards means the clubs are likely to be charged with a failure to control their players. The only person on the pitch who lost control was Hooper.

5 Likes

I think the club are fully aware that PGMOL is such a fucking shambles, the mentality of ‘we got one wrong, so we’ll give you this’ is exactly the level they are dealing with.

1 Like