Liverpool (H) | PL | Post Match Thread

Don’t be so arrogant challenging my honesty. I was implying that the foul was a part of the action and yes he was definitely offside. How could he not be he was stood alone in front of the GK

It is subjective but factually he was offside and that is an offence. If he stood still that is different but he didn’t he moved to allow the goal to be scored
 
The last couple of pages of this are cringe worthy.
Some of us seem to have been infected by the Scouse and media narrative this week to the point where it gets forgotten that they were played off the park and even if that goal were given it would not have led to a poor dipper side winning.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Just be honest about what happened. There's no point denying that Doku was involved, it's clear from the footage that all 3 men were interacting and affecting one another. But this was before Robertson was put offside.

The fact that you are arguing a foul as opposed to offside interference is telling. The facts involved simply don't support the decision of offside interference, and I'm afraid there's no getting around that.
Click to expand...
The facts don’t support the decision of offside interference? Was Robertson in an offside position? Yes. Was he in close proximity to the goalkeeper? Yes. Was he in line with the flight of the ball? Yes, he ducked to avoid it? Is that sufficient interference to disallow the goal? That’s a judgement call based on those facts. The onfield officials thought it was (personally I thought it wasn’t). The one thing we were promised about VAR was that it wouldn’t re-referee judgement calls like that, and I’m glad they didn’t
 
blue61 said:
Don’t be so arrogant challenging my honesty. I was implying that the foul was a part of the action and yes he was definitely offside. How could he not be he was stood alone in front of the GK
Click to expand...
Reminder - you stated -
blue61 said:
You have obviously not seen the clip where he pushes Donnaruma. It did not in anyway precede him being pushed by Doku off balance

The only person that was anywhere near Robertson was Donnaruma.
Click to expand...
^^ which is untrue. When he "pushed" Donnaruma, Doku was indeed engaged with Robertson.

See these screenshots -

Doku pushing /moving Robertson forward / to his left towards Donnaruma, Donna trying to push him away with his right arm.

handon.jpg
handon2.jpg

Now you can see the ball coming into the frame, Robertson still onside, not ahold of Donna, Doku still has hold of him.

h3.jpeg
 
There is a clip of Robertson clearly pushing Donnaruma before standing alone offside.

I am not responding anymore because you will never accept any opinion other than your own
 
blue61 said:
There is a clip of Robertson clearly pushing Donnaruma before standing alone offside.

I am not responding anymore because you will never accept any opinion other than your own
Click to expand...
The "push" was very clearly a result of being engaged with and moved around by Doku. And this contact is irrelevant to the offside interference argument since it occurred before he was put offside. I think it's important to put what happened into its proper context.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Just be honest about what happened. There's no point denying that Doku was involved, it's clear from the footage that all 3 men were interacting and affecting one another. But this was before Robertson was put offside.

The fact that you are arguing a foul as opposed to offside interference is telling. The facts involved simply don't support the decision of offside interference, and I'm afraid there's no getting around that.
Click to expand...
Lol oh there's plenty around that, it's all subjective anyway and imo it was the correct decision since Robertson ducking to avoid the ball from an offside position is interference, if you don't agree good for you, now go and light the candles and cry back to RAWK.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
The last couple of pages of this are cringe worthy.
Some of us seem to have been infected by the Scouse and media narrative this week to the point where it gets forgotten that they were played off the park and even if that goal were given it would not have led to a poor dipper side winning.
Click to expand...
It's just 1 goof here who's most probably a dipper.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Just be honest about what happened. There's no point denying that Doku was involved, it's clear from the footage that all 3 men were interacting and affecting one another. But this was before Robertson was put offside.

The fact that you are arguing a foul as opposed to offside interference is telling. The facts involved simply don't support the decision of offside interference, and I'm afraid there's no getting around that.
Click to expand...
Oh and I forgot to tell you, I'm afraid the score is still 3-0 and there's no getting around that, so suck on that.
 
I’ve had few debates on the offside and quite clearly all the scousers who thought Bernardo was offside, all think Robertson wasn’t.

I can see the difference and the rule, but TBH if we score that goal I would like it to stand and it could have done if Van Dijk had gone the other side.

I’m not a huge fan of having someone for no material gain other than to put of the GK and I think it’s asking for trouble.

If you do it, you have to expect the opposing team to push out and you need to do it yourself.
 
For any Scousers lurking in here, fuck off you spoilt twats, you got battered 3 0 fair and fucking square you Scandinavian cunts. There was a contentious decision that for once went in a favour, but never forget Alf grey, the Salah offsides, the Milner failed yellow cards, the Arnold basketball, the team coach bricking and flares thrown under the coach fuel lines, the supporter club bus bricking on the hillsborough anniversary day (impeccably respected by our fans) and never forget the innocent Italian deaths, and fuck knows how many pens not given to us at anfield, the Sane “offside” etc etc. Shameless, shameful and pathetic to the last

Edit and I forgot piss throwing cunts who through pots loaded with stones in little girls faces. Absolute fucking vermin, and the only thing City and united fans agree on, vile cunts. Beating you last week, well it meant more
 
Last edited:
All this reminds me of our reaction when we were truly robbed by an outrageous decision by Clattenburg against Spurs;

"In February 2016, Clattenburg awarded a penalty that led to Tottenham taking the lead against Manchester City. Kompany, despite being unhappy with the decision, urged the team to move on and take strength from the moments"

It illustrates the difference between the respective club cultures both in terms of class and mentality. It's why we dominate them.
 
Chak19 said:
Lol oh there's plenty around that, it's all subjective anyway and imo it was the correct decision since Robertson ducking to avoid the ball from an offside position is interference, if you don't agree good for you, now go and light the candles and cry back to RAWK.
Click to expand...
Since when does ducking to avoid a ball that is out of the reach of the keeper constitute interference? Where in the LOTG does it say that? It doesn't.

If that was the case, then United's second goal against Forest would have been disallowed. The United player ducked the ball whilst in an offside position, the goal was upheld because that not interference.

And I got news for you, most of what VAR reviews is subjective, so that's no excuse to get this wrong and to create such an outrage by how they went about it. It reflects poorly on all involved.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Since when does ducking to avoid a ball that is out of the reach of the keeper constitute interference? Where in the LOTG does it say that? It doesn't.

If that was the case, then United's second goal against Forest would have been disallowed. The United player ducked the ball whilst in an offside position, the goal was upheld because that not interference.

And I got news for you, most of what VAR reviews is subjective, so that's no excuse to get this wrong and to create such an outrage by how they went about it. It reflects poorly on all involved.
Click to expand...
The interpretation of the LOTG is the subjective part here, and imo the rag goal should've been disallowed too, refereeing inconsistencies is one of the biggest problems out there, but this isn't the first time a goal was disallowed because a player moved to avoid the ball from an offside position despite not being in the keeper's eye sight, like in this example between Everton and the rags a few years ago.



as for your and your fellow dippers outrage, you can keep crying and whining and lighting the fucking candles, we've been shafted by the refs so many times against the dippers I've lost count and City didn't write letters to bitch and moan because the club isn't run by a bunch of entitled crying cunts like you lot, but one call that's most probably the right decision and we never hear the end of it, so once again suck on that, it only reflects on what a bunch of insufferable crying wankers that whole club is.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Since when does ducking to avoid a ball that is out of the reach of the keeper constitute interference? Where in the LOTG does it say that? It doesn't.

If that was the case, then United's second goal against Forest would have been disallowed. The United player ducked the ball whilst in an offside position, the goal was upheld because that not interference.

And I got news for you, most of what VAR reviews is subjective, so that's no excuse to get this wrong and to create such an outrage by how they went about it. It reflects poorly on all involved.
Click to expand...
You really are very strange group of people.
 
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