Liverpool (H) | PL | Post Match Thread

[ChicagoBlue]

I'm merely asking you, could they have called for a VAR review there, should they have and why didn't they? So that moving forward if we have a similar situation, we have a clear understanding of how they intend to handle these kind of situations.

EVERY GOAL IS REVIEWED BY VAR.
VAR DIDNT TRY TO OVERTURN THE DECISION.
THE ONFIELD DECISION STANDS.

Which part are you having so much fucking trouble understanding?

You can call it “subjective” if you want, and I realize you and the the Rags EXPECT subjective decisions to go your way, but grow the fuck up and move the fuck on!

The result, for perpetuity, is CITY 3 LIVARPOOL 0, and all the whining and boarding of words and but, but, buts in the world isn’t going to change it!

Want to talk about a handball against Spurs in the CL that cost us the game? The offside goal that was chalked off in the last minute that cost us the game? How about the comeback at the Etihad after your mob bricked our players’ arrival at Klanfield?

It’s fucking tedious to listen to a fan of one of the Chosen Few clubs (LiVARpool, Stratford Scum and The Arse) whining about how hard done to they are. FUCKING TEDIOUS, when you’ve had all your own way for my entire fucking life…and I’m in my 60s!

Now, fuck off back to RAWK, where you can tell the rest of The Cult how you had us on toast…!

Numpty!

 

[ChicagoBlue]

We are even getting away with a few dodgy challenges in the Women's Derby! The Rags manager looked like he was going to cry. What a great week of officiating.

Stuff the fuckers! Don’t let them get a foothold and put another few past em!!

 

[typical]

I think you know what I mean. I am asking you, as a general principle, is it satisfactory to have offside interference decisions decided in such a way?

Yes.

By the onfield decision? OR should these type of situations be reviewed by VAR? The excuse that VAR shouldn't review these because it's subjective is curious because plenty of VAR decisions are subjective and they still get reviewed.

Not sure how much clearer we can be. So I'll shout. VAR DID REVIEW THE INCIDENT. THEY AGREED WITH THE ONFIELD DECISION. YOU CAN HEAR THEM REVIEW IT IN THE AUDIO.

 

[typical]

Just in case your scouse to English dictionary isn't to hand;

review
/rɪˈvjuː/


noun
noun: review; plural noun: reviews

1. a formal assessment of something with the intention of instituting change if necessary.
   
   Liverpool scored. The linesman and ref communicate and decide it was offside. VAR REVIEWED it (ie assessed it formally which you clearly hear on the audio ) and decide NO INTERVENTION is necessary ie there is nothing clear and obvious they can see to change the on field decision. The goal is disallowed.
   
   A panel look at it after the game and decide that in their opinion it should have stood but that VAR was correct, AFTER THEIR REVIEW, NOT TO INTERVENE. It was subjective not factual. If you don't get it now you never will.

 

[blue61]

And why do you think he pushed Donna? What happened before that? Doku pushed him from behind, no? Which appeared to cause him to lose his balance and right himself by reaching onto Donna momentarily.

This pushing and grabbing, both by Doku and Robertson weren't enough to warrant a foul to be given, as we see this kind of stuff often on corners and rarely are fouls called for modest pushing and grabbing like that.

Robertson's reaching onto Donna doesn't have anything to do with whether or not offsides should be given or not because that was before he was in an offsides position.

If your argument is that the hand on Donna by Robertson may have affected his decision making or ability to save the ball, I wouldn't dispute that, but since that action didn't occur while Robertson was in an offside position (it was before he was offside) that would not be part of any offside interference. And due to this nuanced detail, to see this and work this out, it would require a full VAR review in which the VAR team had the time to go through all the angles and break this sequence down to make this determination themself, which wasn't allowed to happen it would seem.

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.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

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.

 

[blue61]

 

[blue61]

In that clip if Doku pushes Robertson he can only go forward, somehow he manages to go backwards into the GK with his arms pushing that is not possible when being pushed forward

Donnaruma ends back on his line. He is coming out to narrow the angle at the time. That is a foul

 

[Bournemouth Blue]

This is going to run and run for years, “they don’t like it up ‘em Captain Mainwaring”

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

In that clip if Doku pushes Robertson he can only go forward, somehow he manages to go backwards into the GK with his arms pushing that is not possible when being pushed forward

Donnaruma ends back on his line. He is coming out to narrow the angle at the time. That is a foul

If you watch the full clip, you can see that Doku has a hold of him and Robertson is trying to fight through it towards the keeper. Donnarumma puts out his right arm to keep Robertson off, with Doku pushing him forward and to his left, at that point, Robertson grabs ahold of Donnarumma briefly before letting go, whilst still onside and before the ball was headed.

So all 3 men are in contact with one another as the ball was kicked in. Doku holding Robertson from behind then leaning on hm, which in part caused Robertson to interact with Donnaruma.

Once Doku moved forward to put Robertson offside, from that point on there was no interaction between Robertson and Donnaruma and there was no attempt by Robertson to interfere.

 

[blue61]

I think we best agree to disagree

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

I think we best agree to disagree

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.

 

[blue61]

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

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

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.

 

[Norbiton]

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.

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

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

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

Reminder - you stated -

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.

^^ 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.




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

 

[blue61]

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

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

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

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.

 

[Chak19]

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.

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.

 

[Chak19]

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.

It's just 1 goof here who's most probably a dipper.