Liverpool (A) Post Match Thread

[blue cigar]

Not correct. You can't nominate a temporary goalkeeper if your regular goalkeeper goes to take a penalty.

Wrong, you can, rule 127.5a in the FA handbook entitled rush goalkeepers.

 

[Paladin]

It's all down to shit referee's, they have var now and not one player has been booked for diving this season as far as I know. It's like the surrounding of referee's it went on for years and still does, at one time they tried to legislate against that, no need the ref has a card in his pocket if four or five players surround you in an aggressive manner book them all, it could be stamped out in two weeks, same with diving.

They brought in the clarification to stop players like Smalling from manhandling attackers at corners. Who was one of the first players to fall foul of the new, improved, clarified law? Wasn't it Sterling, whilst Smalling carried on regardless for a season before being shipped out?

Then they brought in the amendment to say that any touch of the ball by the hand of an attacker is an offence, only for Jesus to become one of the first to have a goal chalked off.

Then they said VAR would be used to retrospectively punish players who are later found to have deceived a referee. Clubs voted to accept VAR on the basis of this, and other promises. Who was the last person punished in the PL for simulation? No, I can't remember one either. It wouldn't surprise me if certain clubs insisted on assurances that this wouldn't be enforced when VAR was introduced.

And now we have the interpretation of foul play. In the context of the Salah penalty, we have this (paraphrased):

"A direct free kick* is awarded if a push is committed, in a careless or reckless manner, or using excessive force."

Also "A direct free kick is awarded if a player holds an opponent or impedes an opponent with contact."

* Or penalty.

So it can be argued that Salah's push on Dias did not in itself merit a foul to City, because it was not careless, reckless or excessively forceful. But under the second set of offences by which a free kick can be awarded, Salah clearly impeded Dias with contact, before Dias held Salah. Therefore, the first offence should have been punished and a free kick should have been awarded to City.

I assume Oliver didn't think the push by Salah was enough to warrant a free kick, or he didn't see it. It should have been picked up by VAR then.

This stuff about 'was it enough to warrant a penalty' is just nonsense though. This might apply to the first set of offences that must be accompanied by carelessness, recklessness or excessive force, but it doesn't come into play for either the pull by Dias (if indeed it was a pull) or when Salah impeded Dias with contact.

What we should be looking at here is:

1. Did Salah impede Dias by making contact with him? If so, foul for City.

2. If not 1 above, did Dias pull Salah or did Dias' arm on Salah impede Salah? If so, penalty.

It's all about opinions. Mine is that Salah's contact with Dias was similar to Dias' contact with Salah. Foul to City, or caution Salah for simulation.

 

[Gingers Dad]

Penalty all day mate. I reffed in the

Used to ref in the National League North, EDS & Womens Championship up until 2 years ago. I would give that all day long no matter what level it was at. Some people on here need to remove the blinkers. How would you have reacted if this happened down the other end and nowt was awarded??

I don't believe for one second you'd give that in the National League North. Sorry mate I'm not having it. You'd just wave play on and tell the striker to get up and get on with it
Watched the match with my lad who is also a ref. He's reffed to a decent level at both City and Utd academies. Admittedly he's a Blue (Alty if anyone asks). His opinion was that he couldn't believe that the commentators thought it was a pen and only focused on Dias making an error.
If a City player did that I wouldn't be happy at all. Seen far worse fouls on City players in the last few games where commentators have claimed there was nothing in it and they've gone down too easily. Jesus at Burnley and shove on Torres are two that spring to mind

 

[Gordyola]

I detest diving as much as anyone, the likes of Salah, Mane and the rags are some of the worse. However, there is also the problem with refs not giving fouls / pens when a player is fouled but stay on their feet, even getting an attempt away, now that fouled may well have hindered the opportunity, but that isn't taken into account. Consequently players will therefore feel justified into going to ground. Salah was fouled on Sunday so, he went to ground theatrically but to me it was a penalty. Mane dived in the first half, IIRC he dived on the edge of the penalty area and tried his hardest to get into the area Oliver gave a FK but on replays it was a clear dive but, he gets away with it because of the Salah incident

 

[richardtheref]

Now you've seen it could you respond to Chris in London's point. Is it only a foul if the defender touches the forward not the other way round?

As Salah is in control of the ball, in this instance I would say he is entitled to fend off Dias. Was not really a push in my opinion. When I used to play one of our coaches used to tell us to get our wings out to protect the ball. This, in my opinion is what Salah was doing. That might be a bit of a Phil Dowd fudge but thats what I think. As I said earlier I would still like to see Salah booked for diving and if the ref didn't give the penalty because he thought Salah was looking for it then Salah might think twice before doing it again. I doubt it though.

 

[trumpton]

It irritates the fuck out of me that this guy has somehow been elevated to the level of being known just by his first name.

I can just about live with Elton John and Ringo Starr, and Yaya had the excuse of having a brother in the same team. But where did "Trent" come from as though he's some sort of national treasure?

Because commentators like Carragher, Ferdinand, Mcmanaman etc are that fucking thick and illiterate that if they tried to pronounce Alexander Arnold in the first minute of the game, the half time whistle would blow before they got their words out correctly!

 

[richardtheref]

I don't believe for one second you'd give that in the National League North. Sorry mate I'm not having it. You'd just wave play on and tell the striker to get up and get on with it
Watched the match with my lad who is also a ref. He's reffed to a decent level at both City and Utd academies. Admittedly he's a Blue (Alty if anyone asks). His opinion was that he couldn't believe that the commentators thought it was a pen and only focused on Dias making an error.
If a City player did that I wouldn't be happy at all. Seen far worse fouls on City players in the last few games where commentators have claimed there was nothing in it and they've gone down too easily. Jesus at Burnley and shove on Torres are two that spring to mind

I think you would find that in the National League North that I have given pens for similar incidents. As I useds to say to some players when I reffed "you are all entitled to an opinion, unfortunately the only one that matters in this instance is the referee on the field of play". I can see your point & another ref on the day may not have given it but my feeling a high percentage would.
With regards to your sonI have reffed City ladies in the FA Cup & City U18s in a national competition. This is even though the FA were fully aware I was a City season ticket holder at the time. I was told by the FA to not let the opposition know I was a City fan.

 

[Father Paul]

And the second lesson is that referees appear to be only too willing to allow themselves to be conned by the "diving, cheating prick".

Too true. Nightmare for defenders because if you stand off the fucker he is well capable of finding the corner of the net.

 

[tornandfrayed]

As Salah is in control of the ball, in this instance I would say he is entitled to fend off Dias. Was not really a push in my opinion. When I used to play one of our coaches used to tell us to get our wings out to protect the ball. This, in my opinion is what Salah was doing. That might be a bit of a Phil Dowd fudge but thats what I think. As I said earlier I would still like to see Salah booked for diving and if the ref didn't give the penalty because he thought Salah was looking for it then Salah might think twice before doing it again. I doubt it though.

I'm not sure top level refs with VAR should be fudging decisions.

 

[BringBackSwales]

Penalty all day mate. I reffed in the

Used to ref in the National League North, EDS & Womens Championship up until 2 years ago. I would give that all day long no matter what level it was at. Some people on here need to remove the blinkers. How would you have reacted if this happened down the other end and nowt was awarded??

It is nearly always the case that minimal contact down the other end results in nowt being awarded. Do ALL refs stick together then, not just PIGmol?

 

[BringBackSwales]

I'm not sure top level refs with VAR should be fudging decisions.

Fudging decisions would be an improvement on blatant pro red anti Blue cheating

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

. . . . . . . I have given pens for similar incidents. . . . . . .

And what would the offence be? Holding? Barely held him, and if he did, how come the diving bastard fell forward? A push? Don't think so! How about a trip 'cos yer can use yer hands to trip someone. I think that Diaz has been punished for 'touching' an opponent and I'm fucked if I can see that anywhere in the LotG. There is no doubt whatsoever that Salah embellished any kind of 'foul' perpetrated by Ruben by a blatant dive. It seems that the only people who don't see the dive are Dippers and refs. Would be interesting had The Bottler awarded the pen and booked Salah for the simulation.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

It is nearly always the case that minimal contact down the other end results in nowt being awarded. Do ALL refs stick together then, not just PIGmol?

I posted earlier that I can swallow any pen awarded against City as long as the same 'fouls' result in the same award in both areas. We have seen over the last, say, four or five seasons that has hardly been the case. Players, teams, and fans have been left gobsmacked at the variation that PL refs have delivered between two penalty areas on the same pitch. And the notion, which I long held dear, that the sole arbiter of fact is the ref, seems to not be the case when 'some' decisions are rescinded or overturned later the following week.

 

[Sir Joe Aguero]

One of the Swansea players almost ripped Rodri's shirt off challenging for an aerial ball. Didn't go down, didn't look 1 bit bothered. Salah dived. It's not natural to go down like that.

 

[Paul1970]

It's not diving just for pens either, remember the Vinny thunder bolt against Leicester season when Liverpool were playing Newcastle and Salah dived for a free kick late on well outside the box when the game had draw written all over it and the cnuts went on to score from it.

Thankfully at the end of the day they never benefitted from it as we went onto win the league by a point.
But that small cheating margin could have cost us

I think he did the same the season b4 against Newcastle to cheat another pen.

Fabinho did the same aswell in that game .

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

One of the Swansea players almost ripped Rodri's shirt off challenging for an aerial ball. Didn't go down, didn't look 1 bit bothered. Salah dived. It's not natural to go down like that.

Ah but isn't Salah 'supernatural'?

 

[Chris in London]

As Salah is in control of the ball, in this instance I would say he is entitled to fend off Dias. Was not really a push in my opinion. When I used to play one of our coaches used to tell us to get our wings out to protect the ball. This, in my opinion is what Salah was doing. That might be a bit of a Phil Dowd fudge but thats what I think. As I said earlier I would still like to see Salah booked for diving and if the ref didn't give the penalty because he thought Salah was looking for it then Salah might think twice before doing it again. I doubt it though.

Hang on, the laws of the game say that Salah is allowed to hold Dias off, but Dias is not allowed to clear Salah’s arm out of the way?

As they might say themselves, I’m norravvin dat, lar. It’s water under the bridge now, but strictly by the laws, Dias only commits the offence once he has been offended against.

 

[KPXBLN]

Just spitballing here but maybe, nearly 200 pages in, it doesn’t matter anymore if Salah dived since we won 4-1. I dunno, just thinking out of the box here.

 

[Karl8]

I’m trying to be as objective as possible when thinking about the Salah penalty.
I honest cannot believe a penalty should be given in this instance. Again, trying to be as objective as possible, Dias, simply DID NOT impede of bring Salah down. Both players were grappling for posiitions, they were fighting for space and the ball,....it’s a mans game. Dias did not make Salah fall over, Salah chose to do so. That simply can’t be a penalty, as Salah, wasn’t impeded. He’s a dirty cheating scouse bastard,... and that’s my honest and very impartial opinion

 

[Chris in London]

Just spitballing here but maybe, nearly 200 pages in, it doesn’t matter anymore if Salah dived since we won 4-1. I dunno, just thinking out of the box here.

Of course it doesn’t matter.

Your point is?