Liverpool (A) | PL | Post Match Thread

[malg]

I quite liked Slott when he first came to Pool. Calm on the touchline, no histrionics. Its a shame he has gone full Klopp now. Must be something in the air off the Mersey.

 

[noseve]

Yes that was my take on it too.

THere would be none of this nonsense if they scrapped this VAR shit. It's never been fit for purpose.

I actually like VAR in principle, but it's the implementation that is so poor.

It takes me 10 seconds to rewind SkyQ to watch it again. They obviously have to check more camera angles, so why not give VAR, say, 60 seconds maximum to come up with a firm decision. If they are undecided after that time, the on-field decision stands.

I agree with the decision over the 3-1 goal yesterday, rule-wise, but they'd have a right to complain had they lost both a goal and a player for the same incident.

In spirit, it was obviously bollocks, though.

But why did he have to go over to the monitor and waste the time, anyway? It wasn't as though he'd missed anything. He should just have pulled it back once Erl complicated matters by fouling Szobozlai. The 'suggestion' to check the monitor is surely when VAR feel that there's something he needs to see?

I haven't researched it but I'm sure that VAR delays grow longer every season.

 

[Lovebitesandeveryfing]

if you look on his profile he has a big steau 86 flag as his moniker, the stereotypical scouse twat, happy to use the aftermath of Heysel as a tool to bait Evertonians about their lack of european cup, i fucking hate them

It beats me that there are people on here who profess to hate Arsenal more than Liverpool. If we're simply looking at the fans, Arsenal fans are full of themselves, and like to give it the big ’un. You could almost laugh at them.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, about a certain proportion of the LFC fan base that makes me want to laugh. And the entire country, up and down the land, knows it. They are vicious scum (not all, but a certain proportion of them), who have been associated with violence ever since I've been following football, and that's well over half-a-century. Even when I used to go there in the sixties and seventies, it was easily the “heaviest” ground to go to, along with Elland Rd.
I have said over and over on here that I do not have a prejudice against the city of Liverpool as such (probably because I'm not a manc by birth — perhaps by adoption, if you'll have me!). At one time I used to go over there for reasons other than football. There's a scouse sense of humour, especially of the gallows sort, that I like very much. But red dippers seem to have a fanatical viciousness to them that is rare. When — at which ground? — have you seen a team coach effectively trashed? Personally, I've never seen it. Even at grounds like the Boleyn where, at one time, you certainly had to watch your back.
That's my considered opinion, and it's based on experience — not prejudice. But postjudice, if you like.

 

[noseve]

Barn Door Penalty

You wot? Please explain.

Cast-iron, stonewall, nailed-on etc - all meaning something solid. But why 'barn-door'?

 

[i kne albert davy]

Yep - he was definitely beating the fella for pace

Would have beat him to the ball by a couple of yards in my opinion.

 

[big gaz]

The cunts still might like they did at the swamp.
Wonder what the point of no return is?

When you say " you're on the pill right " ;-)

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

In what way is that a parallel?

Because if they'd applied the "letter of the law" Henderson would have also been sent off. But they chose to ignore it, even though it was blatantly clear, I assume because (in their view) an early red card for the underdogs would have "spoiled the game".

They can be very selective about how they apply "the letter of the law" when they want to be. If you don't understand that then it's a very stupid question.

 

[ancoats]

He hit it towards the goal if Haaland hadn’t been held back with a foul Haaland would have scored in the open net

Some people just don't understand, Cherki is different and that's what makes him a special player
That pass was for Haaland to run onto and he would have scored if not for the foul

2.1 or 3.1 makes little difference, but the win makes a huge difference
It was one of those squad-bonding moments that we were looking for and now it's game on

 

[ancoats]

Because if they'd applied the "letter of the law" Henderson would have also been sent off. But they chose to ignore it, even though it was blatantly clear, I assume because (in their view) an early red card for the underdogs would have "spoiled the game".

They can be very selective about how they apply "the letter of the law" when they want to be. If you don't understand that then it's a very stupid question.

For me, it was another show of intent by PGMOL, saying to City we are never going to give you anything
115 charges and the verdict are becoming clearer by the game that City have won

 

[SMB75]

What I found annoying was some commentators and you tube posters saying it was peps 1st win at Anfield.
It wasn't, its was the 2nd. Irrespective of covid we still won in 2020.

 

[Zenmanc]

Ok Devils advocate here as it's fooking moot--- Cherki knocks the ball as he did- Erl runs all the way down- but in this case he judges the speed of the ball has it going in- knows Sonotsosly is behind him- he basically acts as a defender and sheperds the ball over the goal line just like a defender whould do to shepherd a ball out so the trailing player can't get to it them as the ball is on it's way in- but Sonotsosly fouls Erl... what's the call? (There's no second foul from Erl to Sonot)

 

[ysmsa]

I think now the dust has settled and we got the 3 points everyone probably knows it was the right decision. Keane called it right - he said he lost the league on goal difference and also said Sunderland wouldn't be happy playing the Dippers midweek if the Slobby fella played and scored.

Shay Given has just nailed it on the MCN

All this silly talk about winning the league on goal difference if the goal stood etc

He said "City could lose the league by 1 goal"

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Im pretty sure that VAR is set up independently from the TV companies footage. So it can't be influenced by the broadcasters. The TV commentators can hear the conversation between the the VAR and the ref. Thats why the commentators seldom get their prediction of the outcome wrong.

I would be surprised if there was a two-way conversation between the TV commentators and officials. But why are they so secretive and why are the paying customers excluded? I believe that the broadcasters have far to much influence on the sport. Why have time-outs suddenly started happening during games? Why are Arsenal players allowed to leave the pitch for team talks whenever there is a stoppage? Why do the broadcasters never mention it?

 

[noseve]

Because if they'd applied the "letter of the law" Henderson would have also been sent off. But they chose to ignore it, even though it was blatantly clear, I assume because (in their view) an early red card for the underdogs would have "spoiled the game".

They can be very selective about how they apply "the letter of the law" when they want to be. If you don't understand that then it's a very stupid question.

Before you start calling somebody stupid you ought to make sure that you understand what you're saying. That doesn't seem to be the case here. Do you know what parallel means?

Nothing of what you say explains why that was a parallel - in fact, your own post confirms that the circumstances were completely different.

Yesterday, the ref played on because of the advantage rule - it looked to all the world that Erling was going to tap it in.

The FA Cup disgrace was nothing to do with the advantage rule whatsoever.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Before you start calling somebody stupid you ought to make sure that you understand what you're saying. That doesn't seem to be the case here. Do you know what parallel means?

Nothing of what you say explains why that was a parallel - in fact, your own post confirms that the circumstances were completely different.

Yesterday, the ref played on because of the advantage rule - it looked to all the world that Erling was going to tap it in.

The FA Cup disgrace was nothing to do with the advantage rule whatsoever.

I don't care about playing advantage. My point was that they chose to apply the law in one incident, but not in the other despite both going to VAR. That's the parallel.

 

[unicorn]

Smile hasn't left my face all day.

 

[Indaparkside]

Honestly best away day I’ve been to in years
Great support nearly all Mancunians loads of young/ and old singing there hearts out fucking brilliant. Got home today sore head but worth every ache and pain I feel come on city I love you

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I actually like VAR in principle, but it's the implementation that is so poor.

It takes me 10 seconds to rewind SkyQ to watch it again. They obviously have to check more camera angles, so why not give VAR, say, 60 seconds maximum to come up with a firm decision. If they are undecided after that time, the on-field decision stands.

I agree with the decision over the 3-1 goal yesterday, rule-wise, but they'd have a right to complain had they lost both a goal and a player for the same incident.

In spirit, it was obviously bollocks, though.

But why did he have to go over to the monitor and waste the time, anyway? It wasn't as though he'd missed anything. He should just have pulled it back once Erl complicated matters by fouling Szobozlai. The 'suggestion' to check the monitor is surely when VAR feel that there's something he needs to see?

I haven't researched it but I'm sure that VAR delays grow longer every season.

I agree with you on this by the way. As you rightly say, VAR is fine in principle but the implementation (in the PL specifically) is really poor.

 

[super_city_si]

Cherkis free kick at the end.... Knowing there was only 15 seconds left, did he intentionally just hoof it in to the crowd so we could reset and avoid risk of a counter if it came off their wall or Alison saved it? Or was it just a shit shot?
Surprised we didnt play it short but then theres a risk of turn over?

 

[manimanc]

I see Sky are pushing the notion that Liverpool should have had a penalty just before the disallowed 3rd goal

They even have close up video evidence... which shows Rodri making a perfectly time tackle

They are but did you hear what the sky presenter said at the end?
"We don't think it was a penalty, do you?"

VAR obviously looked at it and said nah but I actually thought for a second they was checking that incident and not the nonsense for the 3rd goal.