Liverpool Thread - 2022/23

[Deleted member 77198]

I mean this is a fan base that didn't think this flying kung fu kick was a red card:



There victim culture knows no bounds. It's worth mentioning, because you wouldn't realise it from half of their comments, that Jota wasn't sent off. I personally think it would have been a harsh red card, because while he catches him, there's no force behind it.

This one was different to Haaland and Jota’s.

I reckon that’s up there with the top 3 worst challenges I’ve seen in the Premier League.

Any Liverpool fans claiming that one wasn’t a red is mental!

 

[foggy1974]

They’ve said they are going to make the audio public or at least a transcript of it when the process is all concluded.

Is Rick Parry editing it

 

[RadcliffeRick]

You are suggesting he can play the victim here?

It will not be his fault though!!

 

[Chris in London]

Is this a cleverly worked scenario so he can say he was hounded out of the PL?

There’s no way Cleverley could come up with something like that

 

[rickmcfc]

You are suggesting he can play the victim here?

He has a degree in Merseyside Victimisation.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I think our forum can be like that sometimes. Just like RAWK, we can be overly paranoid nonsense conspiracy theorists a lot of the time around referees and VAR.

That video above of the Haaland one, comparing it to Jota, is right. They’re both the same. Neither were red cards. Yet one fanbase is saying Haaland’s should definitely have been a red and the other is saying that Jota’s should definitely have been a red.

Have to disagree there, PC.

Haaland had no idea the Palace player was coming in when he raised his boot.

Jota (like Mane), in contrast, could see Skipp the entire way and still chose to raise his boot fully above his own shoulder, studs first, connecting with Skipp’s face.

Haaland’s challenge probably should have been a yellow for reckless play (never a red), but Jota’s is a clear red for intentionally endangering an opponent.

 

[SouthernPlastic]

Haaland leg wasn’t extended or locked with no where near the same amount of power in it. Also looks like it catches his shoulder rather than his face.

 

[bluenova]

I think our forum can be like that sometimes. Just like RAWK, we can be overly paranoid nonsense conspiracy theorists a lot of the time around referees and VAR.

That video above of the Haaland one, comparing it to Jota, is right. They’re both the same. Neither were red cards. Yet one fanbase is saying Haaland’s should definitely have been a red and the other is saying that Jota’s should definitely have been a red.

I'd usually agree on the paranoid nonsense, but virtually all the refs/pundits I've seen analysing the Jota one have brought up Haaland and said it's different.

Jota was looking in the direction he was kicking, had his studs directed at the face, and was moving forward into the challenge.

Haaland wasn't moving towards the defender, kicked more upwards, with studs less vertical, and the defender wasn't in his line of vision.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I think our forum can be like that sometimes. Just like RAWK, we can be overly paranoid nonsense conspiracy theorists a lot of the time around referees and VAR.

That video above of the Haaland one, comparing it to Jota, is right. They’re both the same. Neither were red cards. Yet one fanbase is saying Haaland’s should definitely have been a red and the other is saying that Jota’s should definitely have been a red.

I think the majority of this forum just want a LEVEL playing field. People are always going to think the worst when you have so many example of teams being treated differently.

 

[old blue]

A phrase banned on Merseyside is mea culpa.