Liverpool (A) | PL | Post Match Thread

brian the blue said:
You’re missing the point.

Work it backwards. Cherki has scored, any reason to rule it out? Yeah, Szoboszlai was about to clear it and was fouled by Haaland. However, the only reason Szoboszlai is in a position to clear it, is because he has fouled Haaland ahead of him, who would have got to the ball and scored.

Szoboszlai being able to clear the ball before he was fouled is the reason they have to go further back and give the red card.
Click to expand...
But it's not a DOGSO situation in the first place because fouling Haaland doesn't deny a goal. The manner of the foul is irrelevant, a shirt pull or a slide tackle.

It was proven that the ball was going in from Cherki so fouling Haaland doesn't change that. Why is it going back for DOGSO when he didn't deny us a goal.

Plus, again, it was given and the referee clearly saw both instances at the time.
 
hilts said:
And why on earth would he do that when he could score and not risk being tackled or giving a free kick for obstruction.

The mental gymnastics are quite staggering when we win the game anyhow.
Click to expand...
There's no mental gymnastics, just a fact.

Are you saying it's impossible for that to have happened?

The goal wasn't denied so ruling it DOGSO is mental gymnastics
 
Under the laws of the game the goal was correctly disallowed. I was amazed however that the player who fouled Haaland got up and ran to the ref to appeal for a foul. Surely it crossed his mind that if it all came back he would be sent off ? I have no idea if it would have just been left to stand if they hadn't kicked up a fuss but seeing how VAR operates I imagine it would still have been disallowed.

The only way around it I suppose is having a veto like in American football if a decision goes in your favour but actually puts you in a worse position. You can decline the decision. Today both sides would have to agree to decline their fouls to let the goal stand and the player stay on the pitch. Or both take the fouls, goal disallowed and he walks. Possibly something hardly ever used but would have suited both teams today I imagine.
 
malg said:
Cherki won't have done himself any favours there. First with the shot from the halfway line when he really should have just played Haaland in and the free kick right at the end where he just blasted it over when others were saying play it wide and hold onto the ball.

I think he'll be a great player for us but he just needs to engage his brain a little.

Away win at Klanfield.....
Click to expand...
Eh? Played Haaland in? Pretty sure Haaland was through on goal protecting the ball before he was pulled back lol
 
Dial M 4 Mercer said:
Unable to recall who the match commentator was on Sky but all throughout the match his adulation of the Kop and Liverpool fans was off the scale. I’m sure at one point in the second half he referred to “the tens of thousands behind the goal” meaning the Kop end. The actual capacity is 12850. Hyperbole personified!
Click to expand...
I found it bizarre too when he and Neville singled out Sbozlai (sp) for gushing praise because... wait for it... he was a midfielder who was doing a good job at full back.
If only City had one of those.
 
citytill1die84 said:
Like I said neither of them touched the ball. Cherki hit it and scored. Haaland and Szoboszlai should be irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Haaland is relevant because his foul stops Szobozlai stopping the goal. But the earlier foul stops Haaland having a goal scoring opportunity.

Once advantage is played, when Haaland commits the foul, I don't see the logic in taking it back to an earlier foul. They only do that when they deem no advantage has been gained.

If Haaland didn't commit the foul, and Szobozlai clears it, fine, the advantage isn't gained and it goes back to the origonal foul. But once Haaland fouls him, is that not the new point to take it back to?
 
Great game that with us dominant in the 1st half and then then coming back into it in the 2nd

I thought their goal was superb and I wouldn't mind losing to that, but then Haaland woke up. The assist for Bernardo was world class as was the finish. The penalty was superb and it feels like this was a massive moment.

I wish VAR would fuck off. I absolutely hate it - the goal should've stood. It was fantastic drama and is the kind of thing you WANT to see in football games. It's getting beyond a joke when there's almost 14 minutes of injury time due to it FFS.

Absolutely monumental performance that and I hope we can push on now and make it interesting for the run in.

Great game, amazing result!
 
pudge said:
But it's not a DOGSO situation in the first place because fouling Haaland doesn't deny a goal. The manner of the foul is irrelevant, a shirt pull or a slide tackle.

It was proven that the ball was going in from Cherki so fouling Haaland doesn't change that. Why is it going back for DOGSO when he didn't deny us a goal.

Plus, again, it was given and the referee clearly saw both instances at the time.
Click to expand...
You’re still not getting it.

imagine everything is the same, but Haaland isn’t there… Szoboszlai on his own would get back in time to stop cherki’s shot from going in.

That’s why Haaland and Szoboszlai are relevant. Either Haaland gets to cherki’s shot and taps it in, or Szoboszlai gets to cherki’s shot and clears it. The only reason it goes in directly from Cherki is because they both foul each other, preventing the other from interfering with the ball, so you have to take action on the fouls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top