I am positive he wont see anything controversial in it all, pointing to questions about control and distance to goal. Im not going to lie though…I did already have a look to see if me wrote anything about it last night 
I don’t like the whole shit being decided by the referees.
In the same way , can an obvious foul on the penalty area be denied because the foul happened in the corner of the penalty box and the referees decide that it wasn’t a foul because there was no way someone could shoot from that angle.
1 Like
A foul in the penalty box is always a penalty so the DOGSO doesn’t apply.
Of course, that doesn’t stop referees deciding that a clear foul isn’t a foul, but that’s a different matter.
1 Like
So why did Gravenberch get sent when that foul was further away from goal than the handball?
And to be honest, I’m more concerned at VAR mentioning nothing about DOGSO at the time and only pulling that out of their arses after the fans when they realised they’d fucked up.
2 Likes
Because distance from goal is just one of the 4 considerations.
Yeah, precisely this. In the hypothetical situation where he’s brought down he has already by definition controlled the ball and is running in on goal making the defender have to bring him down. The defender though prevented Hugo even being able to control the ball and start in on goal by knocking it away from him. It leaves more questions to answer about what he’d need to do to get a shot off and that’s why they’ll argue it wasnt DOGSO
1 Like
As usual the laws are a mess and that’s what causes the issues.
Ekitike is a long way from goal but I don’t think it’s so much the distance but the action of the defender that changes the decision. If he’s dived in a caught Ekitike instead of handling it then the perception is he’s taken himself out of the game by trying to make a tackle so had he not committed the foul he’s not getting back. But, because the handball prevents Ekitike from gaining control of the ball and the defender is still close enough to chase back had Ekitike controlled it then the perception of it being a DOGSO is skewed.
What it’s essentially telling defenders is if you’re in trouble and making a last ditch action, deflect it with your hand rather than commit a foul that takes you out the game. Madly, despite both offences resulting in the same outcome one is seen as less of an offence.
1 Like
Everyone including Gary Neville and shearer were flabbergasted when the guy was not sent off and I was not surprised in the least that both Taylor and the suspect Oliver came up with that guff.
It was so blatant that when they often screwed us over in the past it was covered up in a more believable way. We were lucky in the end that it did not affect the result.
I just saw the Dubravka incident and it was notable that after the ref blew the whistle one of the spurs players ran up to him to try to get the ball so they could take the corner and he threw it away. No booking. So yeah, it seems we have completely discarded that rule now.
1 Like
Add it to the ever growing list of ‘things that should have gone Liverpool’s way that Anthony Taylor missed until VAR stepped in’.
Except this time there was another corrupt cunt as VAR so it made no odds.
2 Likes
Why did the Defender deliberately swat at the ball?
For me he panicked and in his mind, if he hadn’t had done so, Hugo would be through on goal.
2 Likes
I genuinely think they looked at the wrong handball.
I think sometime after the incident, they realised their fuck up and put out the not a DOGSO bollocks. At the time of the stoppage, all the Sky pundits were saying that the VAR feed was saying it came of his leg.
2 Likes
i think ill have to watch it again, i swear there was no contact on the second one…and the first one wasnt a handball either
to me the correct decision was made.
happy to watch again and review…but i absolutely remember thinking he didnt even touch the ball on that ‘reach’…and he was lucky he didnt because t really looked bad…
1 Like
He absolutely touched it, an instinctive reaction perhaps, but it was definitely handball.
At the 0.37 mark.
2 Likes
You need some jamjars bottoms to wear xxx
1 Like
Alternatively, @redbj has the perfect CV for a VAR official. Job is yours!
2 Likes
It’s Howard, knew it!
…no foul…good process lads…
1 Like
Dale Johnson’s explanation this morning doesn’t explicitly say this and ignores the seemingly contradictory follow up communication from the PGMOL, but he does claim that Oliver appeared to only review the first incident.
Verdict: The incident was cleared too quickly, with Oliver only considering the first touch of the arm. This was clearly wrong as Senesi then deliberately knocked the ball from Ekitike’s run.
1 Like
Have they offered any explanation - regardless of VAR - why it was given as a Bournemouth free kick?
Having watched the ManU / Arsenal game - any sort of nudge, touch or shove from behind was given as a foul. Yet Bournemouth were aggressively clattering and haranguing Liverpool players all game with very little being given as fouls. I get that they need to let some of it slide for game flow reasons, and it is a contact sport. But some teams use it as a tactic to unsettle, break the rhythm of teams like Liverpool and there needs to be some consistency in how the rules are applied.
2 Likes
When the defender ultimately cleared it Gakpo tried to catch it assuming that the handball was so obvious that we’d get at least a free kick. The ref penalized that. It was a long way from where the free kick was ultimately taken from, even in the wrong half, which added to the confusion.
2 Likes