Liverpool (H) | PL | Post Match Thread

JackM said:
Liverpool players, fans,sports writers, pundits and all the other City haters are seething about the kicking City gave them. Gives me more joy than watching the game.Goal disallowed and penalty both straightforward descisions, but what about the nasty off the ball foul on Foden by that slimy Szoboszlai caught by the commentator but not by the officials? Nobody talking about that.
Click to expand...
Can’t make this shit up can you?! Absolutely embarrassing. Always the victim! I hope they have complained and I hope they get absolute pelters from all angles! Got absolutely battered but as per usual, somebody else’s fault! This sort of stuff is what makes beating them so enjoyable.
 
noseve said:
I think Ait-Nouri's best chance is as some sort of attacking player. He's no defender. Looking like a squad player to me at best, but it's still very early days for him.

Then again, I'd also rather see Josko further up the park - I think he could be a genuinely world-class midfielder - whereas rarely a game goes by without him giving me palpitations in defence.

I still think that we haven't been tested properly in defence, that the UCL might find us out, but we're twice the team with Donnarumma and NOR in the lineup, so things definitely looking up. Really appreciating being competitive again.
Click to expand...
Fucking hell ive seen some weird takes on here but Gvardiol as a midfielder because we are uncomfortable with him in defence? the only time we have looked secure at the back anytime in the last 18 months is when he starts at CB he solidifies the whole defence, also he is nowhere near mobile enough to run a midfield he would look so out of place in there.
 
OB1 said:
I think Rudolph has plenty to offer. We need a strong squad that gives Pep a variety of options and th ability to rotate players. Tijjani needs time to adapt fully to City and English football - a couple of goals would help him along.
Click to expand...
Yep. He’s getting there slowly. Was highly rated in Italy and will come good here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OB1
Colin Bells Boots said:
" they do not accept the decision was arrived at for subjective reasons " - I might be wrong here, but doesn't the wording of that statement imply that they are claiming that the decision was as a consequence of a biased/corrupt decision by the officials in control of the game ?

Should the PL not be charging LFC for bringing the game into disrepute ?

or are cartel members exempt from the normal rules ?

Aren't there rules about making such claims or are LFC above such laws/rules ?
Click to expand...
“Subjective reasons” not nice from Liverpool, the ref believed it was off side.
 
deano ou812 said:
Why is it when a decision goes against the red scousers it’s a travesty and the media go all in calling it out,strange when decisions go against City or other teams it’s deemed as one of those things and it evens itself out over the season or just the shrug of the shoulders and get on with it ..
Click to expand...
Red mafia.
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
" they do not accept the decision was arrived at for subjective reasons " - I might be wrong here, but doesn't the wording of that statement imply that they are claiming that the decision was as a consequence of a biased/corrupt decision by the officials in control of the game ?
Click to expand...
My first thought was “are they saying John Oliver is a cheat?” but then I thought the wording was all wrong, because it would need to be “objective” not “subjective.”

However, upon a reread, it appears it is CityXtra’s wording, not Liverpool’s, that is wrong in the above posting.

I’d like to see what Liverpool actually said before inferring they were effectively calling Oliver a cheat!

Fucking social media setting the agenda with dodgy reporting will be the death of me!
 
noseve said:
I think Ait-Nouri's best chance is as some sort of attacking player. He's no defender. Looking like a squad player to me at best, but it's still very early days for him.

Then again, I'd also rather see Josko further up the park - I think he could be a genuinely world-class midfielder - whereas rarely a game goes by without him giving me palpitations in defence.

I still think that we haven't been tested properly in defence, that the UCL might find us out, but we're twice the team with Donnarumma and NOR in the lineup, so things definitely looking up. Really appreciating being competitive again.
Click to expand...

I despair at times on here.
 
Vienna_70 said:
Yeah, but we’re cheats.
Click to expand...
As it's a rainy afternoon I have spent a large part of watching YouTube videos of Liverpool fans reactions during the . game. I even squeezed Mark Goldberg in. In fairness to them all they all acknowledged we were far the better side and deserved to win. Yes they had a moan about the disallowed goal but that's fans for you.
In terms of Doku's display everyone thought he was brilliant and MG thought it was the best display from a winger he had watched.
As somebody commented elsewhere it really is the mainstream media who have issues with us not true football fans.
 
They’re all so f’kin butthurt,they refuse to see the obvious.Robertson was offside and was impacting the keepers thoughts and actions,as he was so close.Line of sight with the ball,has fuck all to do with it in this case.I’m sure our friends in the media will give them all the support they need with their little spat with Webb and co,..fuckin unbelievable!!
 
BringBackSwales said:
Fucking main news story on sly sports, they even had stuttering karveh, well, stuttering. Apparently the dippers haven’t complained for themselves but for the good of the game, bless em. Fucking help us at candlefield later in the season
Click to expand...

And that clearly demonstrates the blatant lying and scheming ideology that runs throughout their fucking cult members.
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
" they do not accept the decision was arrived at for subjective reasons " - I might be wrong here, but doesn't the wording of that statement imply that they are claiming that the decision was as a consequence of a biased/corrupt decision by the officials in control of the game ?

Should the PL not be charging LFC for bringing the game into disrepute ?

or are cartel members exempt from the normal rules ?

Aren't there rules about making such claims or are LFC above such laws/rules ?
Click to expand...
Sums them up the fucking fannies.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
It’s not as simple as that though. Bernardo also moves when Stones scores last season.

The biggest difference is that Robertson is on the same side of the goal as where the ball goes, so I can see that there is more scope for him to be deemed offside.

Had we had the goal disallowed, the VAR/ref threads would be going berserk.

It’s one of those marginal decisions where you could justify both sides and not be wrong. I’m just glad it went our way this time.
Click to expand...
I don't know if they really interpret the law this way, but to me, "in the keeper's eyeline" shouldn't just mean "between the keeper and the ball". If the player is in front of the keeper, even if the ball's coming from a slightly different angle, he's still interfering being a visual distraction. This definitely applies to Robertson, but not to Bernie, who was more to the opposite side of the Wolves goalie and he also dropped down to be even less of a visual distraction before the header came in. The bigger justification for ruling out the City goal v Wolves would be that Bernie bumps the goalie before he gets out of the way. Of course, if they decide to rule out goals for fouling the goalkeeper, Arsenal would be mid-table at best this season...
 
paulchapo said:
They were looking at going nine points clear before our game until the last gasp Sunderland equaliser. If that win would have happened, even in spite of our win yesterday, they would still have been six points clear. Now its down to four. That and the way we destroyed Liverpool yesterday is bound to have their arses twitching a bit.
Click to expand...
Half of our team know what winning the title is like, half of the Tarquins know what bottling it is like.
 
Marvin. said:
Good article in the BBC for most distance covered in PL games this season

Foden is the Running Man
View attachment 174577
Click to expand...
Our two pocket rockets. I'm gonna miss Bernie v the Dips when he goes; he needs to educate one of the newbies in the art of a #buyacoffee where the Dips are concerned. I do believe he dislikes their fanbase ( cult) as much as any of us do!
 
NorCalBlue said:
I don't know if they really interpret the law this way, but to me, "in the keeper's eyeline" shouldn't just mean "between the keeper and the ball". If the player is in front of the keeper, even if the ball's coming from a slightly different angle, he's still interfering being a visual distraction. This definitely applies to Robertson, but not to Bernie, who was more to the opposite side of the Wolves goalie and he also dropped down to be even less of a visual distraction before the header came in. The bigger justification for ruling out the City goal v Wolves would be that Bernie bumps the goalie before he gets out of the way. Of course, if they decide to rule out goals for fouling the goalkeeper, Arsenal would be mid-table at best this season...
Click to expand...
I can go along with that as well as going along with the reasoning that penalising Robertson for trying to get out of the way of the ball seems counterproductive.

That said, Donnaruma doesn’t know he’s trying to get out of the way, so he’s still active in that sense.

The law isn’t specific enough, so there is still some subjectivity, which is why both disallowing the goal or allowing it are possible outcomes.

The bumping of keepers was done while they were both onside as they only become in an offside position after the headers were made. Neither were enough to suggest a foul on the keepers.
 
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