Liverpool (H) | PL | Post Match Thread

Newman Noggs said:
Apart from all the above, I was highly impressed with our physicality today. We were actually stronger in the physical battles than they were. For me, this had been a weakness this season up to now.

Also, apart from the corner Van Dyke scored from, we are getting really good at dealing with set pieces and corners. We've seen off Arsenal's, liverpool's, united's and Brentford's main threat with some ease. Now if we could just score from a corner....
Click to expand...
Liking the lower case usage! These things matter for Bert points.
 
noseve said:
Not all BBC is biased against City - this report could have been written by somebody on here:

"Video
Man City make ominous statement on chastening night for Liverpool"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cwy52el0vp1o#:~:text=Video,night for Liverpool
Click to expand...
This part of it is commendable as regards our first goal:-

"City weaved their way out from facing Liverpool pressure near their own corner flag with a glorious sequence of passes from back to front.

This symphony of Guardiola's style ended in a familiar crescendo as Haaland soared above Liverpool defender Ibrahima Konate to meet Matheus Nunes' cross and send a header past keeper Giorgi Mamardashvili." That's great - and true.

What I find unimpressive - and this goes for every other media article and piece of commentary I've seen - having watched the BBC, ESPN, and various Youtube analysis channels - is that nobody is analysing the offside decision on Liverpool's disallowed goal properly from the goalkeeper's angle.
( I know it doesn't really matter coz we fuckin' hammered them 3-0, but hear me out.)

It was very poor defending from City because we gave VVD a free header, and he's proved over the years to be a lethal weapon on corners for Liverpool. But, when he heads it, Robertson is offside. It looks unlikely that The Don would save it, but, he's got Robertson very close to him, and who is offside. If Robertson stands still, the balls hit's him. If the balls hits him, or he heads it in, he's offside.

Instead, he ducks out of the way. That interferes with play. IMHO, that's the same as playing the ball. If he doesn't duck out of the way, he's in the way, and the ball doesn't go in without it hitting him. Then, it would have been disallowed for offside. Therefore, he is offside and he interfered with play and the goal was correctly disallowed.

But, but but - Liverpool's goalie moved too early, and the penalty should have been retaken.

But, but, but, but, but - every player in the City team touched the ball on City's 1st goal: this wasn't shown and wasn't even mentioned on MOTD, where they had MUFC supporting Chappers presenting and the 2 routine scousers as pundits - Rooney and the forgettable anonymous moron who frequently drones on, but whose name escapes me.... got it: the journeyman scouser, Danny "Gizza job" Murphy.

But, hey ho! SFW. Altogether now, "We are not, we're not really here!...."

Cunts.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
I’m glad it was ruled out. I’d be annoyed if it was against us though.

By trying to get out of the way of it, he’s made himself active. Seems counter productive and one of those things that have gone for us today.
Click to expand...
We have had NUMEROUS decisions against us at Anfield so about time we got a dodgy one against the Victims!
 
Blue tiger said:
Agreed. In the words of Brian Clough, "if a player isn't interfering with play, he shouldn't be on the pitch!" Fuck the scouse cunts
Click to expand...
Bill Shankly, surely. And wrong, even as offside was applied at the time.
 
Last edited:
Shirley said:
Did I say it is the law?

The vast majority of people do wear it to show appreciation to those who sacrificed their lives …imho.
Click to expand...
He's Irish, he probably has a totally different historical experience and collective memory of the British military colonisation, subjugation and partition of his country and people.
The last thing he'll be wanting to do is wear a poppy.

Let's just stick to the football shall we.
 
Delighted but not surprised by today’s showing.

Still loads to improve on but the team is going in the right direction and has the potential to become significantly better, which is a very exciting prospect.

It’s a great end to a very good week of football for City.

What particularly pleases me is that there are several players in the team who had been written off for one reason or another by plenty of the online fanbase that are starting to shove the negativity back down the throats of the doubters. It is still early days but hopefully they will keep doing that as it is a real pleasure to see players develop the way the likes Nunes and the Nicos are. The return to form of Foden, Dias and the irrepressible Bernardo is so important.
 
the blue panther said:
This part of it is commendable as regards our first goal:-

"City weaved their way out from facing Liverpool pressure near their own corner flag with a glorious sequence of passes from back to front.

This symphony of Guardiola's style ended in a familiar crescendo as Haaland soared above Liverpool defender Ibrahima Konate to meet Matheus Nunes' cross and send a header past keeper Giorgi Mamardashvili." That's great - and true.

What I find unimpressive - and this goes for every other media article and piece of commentary I've seen - having watched the BBC, ESPN, and various Youtube analysis channels - is that nobody is analysing the offside decision on Liverpool's disallowed goal properly from the goalkeeper's angle.
( I know it doesn't really matter coz we fuckin' hammered them 3-0, but hear me out.)

It was very poor defending from City because we gave VVD a free header, and he's proved over the years to be a lethal weapon on corners for Liverpool. But, when he heads it, Robertson is offside. It looks unlikely that The Don would save it, but, he's got Robertson very close to him, and who is offside. If Robertson stands still, the balls hit's him. If the balls hits him, or he heads it in, he's offside.

Instead, he ducks out of the way. That interferes with play. IMHO, that's the same as playing the ball. If he doesn't duck out of the way, he's in the way, and the ball doesn't go in without it hitting him. Then, it would have been disallowed for offside. Therefore, he is offside and he interfered with play and the goal was correctly disallowed.

But, but but - Liverpool's goalie moved too early, and the penalty should have been retaken.

But, but, but, but, but - every player in the City team touched the ball on City's 1st goal: this wasn't shown and wasn't even mentioned on MOTD, where they had MUFC supporting Chappers presenting and the 2 routine scousers as pundits - Rooney and the forgettable anonymous moron who frequently drones on, but whose name escapes me.... got it: the journeyman scouser, Danny "Gizza job" Murphy.

But, hey ho! SFW. Altogether now, "We are not, we're not really here!...."

Cunts.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
goalmole said:
He's Irish, he probably has a totally different historical experience and collective memory of the British military colonisation, subjugation and partition of his country and people.
The last thing he'll be wanting to do is wear a poppy.

Let's just stick to the football shall we.
Click to expand...
Yes I agree I got sucked into this.
Btw the Germans were it war with the world including Ireland.
 
Eccles Blue said:
Slot is a very poor loser isn't he? Taking over from the teeth man. Awww shame. *rofl*


I've just seen all the goals. (I wasn't watching the Match thread) Poor Erling has to stop taking penalties!! ;-)
Click to expand...
Our penalty record has been awful since the year dot.
 
Great team performance today Spanish NIC seems to have found his feet and Nico was great had salad in his pocket doku was something else today if can do it constantly we have a gem of a player on our hands can go both ways and people are terrified of his pace
 
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