Liverpool (H) | PL | Post Match Thread

TheBeautifulGame said:
So your argument is that this is how it's supposed to work? Funny how we've never seen something like this before. You would have us believe that it's normal for goal celebrations to be interrupted after long delays of inaction.

The narrative that seems to have taken shape here from the powers that be is that the decision was wrong, the goal should have stood, but that VAR not getting involved was the correct decision. This is infuriating on a number of levels. First of all, the lino does not need the referee's permission to put his flag up. And if VAR isn't to be used to review interference on offsides decisions, then what it's there for?

If the official line from the pro-VAR crowd that VAR isn't to be used in these kind of situation, that we're stuck with whatever the lino on the field decides, and this isn't concerning to you, then I don't know what to tell you. Those involved with VAR and using VAR has no clue what they're doing, in this case the assistant just took matters into his own hands and seemingly shut the door on it being looked at properly.

In football, traditionally mind you, if the ball hits the back of the net, as a player you give a quick look to the lino to make sure the flag is down then you go nuts in celebration of the goal.

Let me ask you this - what do you think the lesson should be learned as a result of this situation? That we should rely fully on the on field decision if and only if the lino decides there was interference, but if he doesn't or doesn't specify there was interference, then it should go to review?

It sounds like they're just trying to cover their own arse, and pretend like the standard protocol was followed here. When in reality, they clearly took matters into their own hands, decided this was interference on the pitch and refused to go to VAR apparently, even though i was said to be looked at briefly. No one has a clue what's going on, but anyone watching can see the absolute shambles it was and the damage control they are trying to do to pretend like it was handled
Click to expand...

TheBeautifulGame said:
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.
Click to expand...
FFS, it’s ‘offside’ not ‘offsides’…. No S required.
 
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 still here?
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
You didn't address my point. I was not arguing there whether or not it should have been offside. My point was that the panel were under the impression that VAR did not intervene or couldn't, whilst some posters here are claiming VAR did intervene and confirmed it. Which is it? Did VAR intervene or not? And generally, should these kind of decisions by reviewed by VAR fully or do you agree that the onfield assistant should be the one deciding interference? I am happy to move on, but please address that issue!
Click to expand...
VAR confirmed the onfield decision
 
Metal Biker said:
I've not heard anyone other than Dippers saying it should have stood.
Click to expand...
Dippers and the dipper loving media. I am in Whitby for the weekend, talked to a couple of Leeds fsns earlier, they wondered what all the fuss was about, said it was a 50:50 call, that went against the dippers (and hence why there’s a media furore about it)
 
Please be careful giving air to this obsessive. Just looked at his post history, there are literally 22 pages of post after post on the VAR thread, and then 3 pages in the dipper thread, I think he has VAR OCD. Let’s not keep him going for another 19 pages
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
It has been widely reacted to by the whole of the football world and the sense I get is that the majority of neutrals and pundits all seem to agree that the goal should have stood. I don't know what has caused you to conclude that it is only the Dippers reacting and that everyone else has concluded that it was ruled out. It might seem that way but that does not appear to be the case from my vantage point.
Click to expand...
Where's your vantage point? What country are you based in? Where are you interacting with neutral fans?
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
It has been widely reacted to by the whole of the football world and the sense I get is that the majority of neutrals and pundits all seem to agree that the goal should have stood. I don't know what has caused you to conclude that it is only the Dippers reacting and that everyone else has concluded that it was ruled out. It might seem that way but that does not appear to be the case from my vantage point.
Click to expand...
www.espn.co.uk

VAR Review: Why Van Dijk's Liverpool goal was disallowed, Doku penalty

Liverpool scored an equalizer against Manchester City. But why was it given offside for a player standing in front of the goalkeeper?
www.espn.co.uk www.espn.co.uk

"My initial feeling in real time was that this was offside. I was concerned with Robertson's position and action; allowing the goal to stand would have felt uncomfortable -- I'm sure this feeling mirrored that of the officials on pitch in real time."

Not everyone saying it was the wrong decision, like a huge sports network and it's var review column.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
It has been widely reacted to by the whole of the football world and the sense I get is that the majority of neutrals and pundits all seem to agree that the goal should have stood. I don't know what has caused you to conclude that it is only the Dippers reacting and that everyone else has concluded that it was ruled out. It might seem that way but that does not appear to be the case from my vantage point.
Click to expand...
#justice
 
BringBackSwales said:
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
Click to expand...
Epic rant!
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
This has been the headline all week so naturally it's being talked about. Is there something else that you would like to talk about instead? If there is another subject you would rather discuss please let us know.
Click to expand...
Let “us” know? YOU are the one keeping it alive on here, not me! I got over it the minute the ref restarted the game after giving the offside.

And, just to make 100% certain of my position, I just rewatched the offside about 5 times to make sure I was seeing it as I thought I had seen it the first time. I was.

Having played football for half of my life, including professionally, I’m going to go out on a limb and say, “It was the correct decision. The end.”

Move on…
 
Last edited:
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