Liverpool (A) | PL | Post Match Thread

Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Here's a thought...

Cherki blasted that free kick over the bar, game restarts with a goal kick and Alison hoofs it up field, one bounce and Salah latches on to it and buries it in the top corner... There would have been a fucking riot.
Click to expand...
The commentator said we had 15 secs but did the players know, if they didn’t they should’ve took it to the corner, wouldve been typical City if what you said happened
 
ROCKET80 said:
VAR got the correct decision.

The goal is chalked off because of the tug by Erling Haaland. Once that’s identified no goal has been scored, and play quite rightly goes back to the foul on Haaland, which has denied a clear goal-scoring opportunity.

For me, the frustration isn’t the decision, but the laws of the game. The punishment doesn’t fit the crime: a red card and a free kick outside the box when a goal was guaranteed? There's been examples of this before, think Luis Suárez and the handball on the line at the World Cup.

Football could learn something from rugby here. A penalty goal (awarding a goal without the need of a penalty) in situations where a goal is certain would better reflect the offence. However, with the current crop of officials on VAR, is that opening another can of worms, or fixing a long-standing flaw?
Click to expand...
Yep, if the ref deemed that Haaland had also committed a foul then the correct decision was made. However, what I think is slightly confusing for many fans is that the ref confidently awarded the goal as an 'on-field' decision. By doing so, it appears that he allowed advantage to be played for the foul on Haaland, and didn't warrant the tug by Haaland to be sufficient to award a foul against Haaland.

It appears that the ref didn't initiate the review, as he seemed quite clear with his on-field decision, therefore we must conclude that VAR suggested in his ear-piece that he goes to the screen (VAR cannot initiate a review - they can only suggest one). The ref could have still told VAR to do one and stuck with his on-field decision, and I don't think either team would have bothered too much. That's the way it is - ultimately the correct decision but it doesn't half take some enjoyment out of the game.
 
Oyster28catcher said:
John Bishop, Brookside, Fred's weather map, the voice of Thomas The Tank narration, Merseybeats, Stephen Graham, Ricky Tomlinson, W.E. Gladstone, 2 birds on top of a building, sculpture men in the sands, Dr Dre, Daniel Craig... you guys took one hell of a beating.
Click to expand...
Beat me to it…
Cilla Black, John Bishop, Jimmy Tarbuck, Ken Dodd, Steven Gerrard, Sir Thomas Beecham, Arthur Askey, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, the Bishop of Liverpool. Your boys took one hell of a beating!!
 
steviemc said:
Yep, if the ref deemed that Haaland had also committed a foul then the correct decision was made. However, what I think is slightly confusing for many fans is that the ref confidently awarded the goal as an 'on-field' decision. By doing so, it appears that he allowed advantage to be played for the foul on Haaland, and didn't warrant the tug by Haaland to be sufficient to award a foul against Haaland.

It appears that the ref didn't initiate the review, as he seemed quite clear with his on-field decision, therefore we must conclude that VAR suggested in his ear-piece that he goes to the screen (VAR cannot initiate a review - they can only suggest one). The ref could have still told VAR to do one and stuck with his on-field decision, and I don't think either team would have bothered too much. That's the way it is - ultimately the correct decision but it doesn't half take some enjoyment out of the game.
Click to expand...

Eh? Var always initiate the review.
 
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