Media Discussion - 2023/24

[bluenova]

This morning that annoying prick Kovehol said when discussing Salah to Saudi Arabia
“We have to be very careful when discussing this as Liverpool fans get upset”

WTF!! Not arsed about taking about any other player or club and upsetting their fans.

Shows the hold the bin dipping bastards have over the media.

It's a public dig at Liverpool fans. I thought most on here would appreciate that.

 

[Inca Roads Bert]

Julian "La Araña" Alvarez aka "El Alena/The Alena"

Fixed

 

[34yearsandstillgoingstrong]

Amused by the faux outrage in ALL the media about the Ake/Akanji "offside" goal. Seems Fulham were robbed of 3 points ( despite City actually winning 5-1 ) . Silly Simon Stone's opening RANT for the BBC yesterday was a classic - his report concentrated in its entirety on the Ake goal - Oliver and VAR were apparently complicit in the worst refereeing decision in footballing history.

Some contributors to this forum drew comparisons to the St Marcus / Ratface / Attwell offside goal against City early this year. At the time, Herr Webb commented that the goal could stand under the letter of the law ( it shouldn't have ) but it was not within "the spirit of the game " . The Laws of The Game specifically avoids subjective notions as to what "interfering with play is" and tries to to put down in objective terms what is and is not offside. Thus :

THE LAWS OF THE GAME ( 11 ) OFFSIDE

1. Offside Position

We can all agree that Akanji ( and of course St Marcus ) were in offside positions But...to quote the rules:-

"......... It is not necessarily an offence to be in an offside position"

2. " A player in an offside position is only penalised if " :

(a) "he is interfering with play (by his) playing or touching the ball"

Akanji deliberately disengages with play by taking avoiding action to prevent his touching the ball

(b) "prevents an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the line of vision"

At no time was the Fulham Keeper's view of the ball obstructed by Akanji's position.

(c) "clearly attempting to play a ball which is close ( to him )

Akanji deliberately takes action to avoid his touching the ball

(d) " Makes an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play a ball"

Akanji simply raises his foot to avoid touching the ball with no Fulham player near him.

So IMHO , I have to admit that Oliver and VAR, under the letter of the law, were quite right in letting the goal stand. Anyway, must dash - have to watch MOTD - I believe Liverpool had a far more contentious offside goal "allowed" without VAR intervening ! ( and the rags lost too - deep into Fergie Time... Happy days ! ) But will the media even mention Salah's positioning ?

 

[Franny 1234]

How does the "running order" work on MOTD?
Fair enough Burnley v Spurs 7 goals (1st). But Chelsea v Forest 1 goal (2nd) !

My thoughts exactly

 

[Franny 1234]

It’s all I’ve heard and read since yesterday! Why did we not get the same media outrage last season when we were robbed at the swamp in a much closer game. I’m sure pigmol will be hell bent on “evening it up” for our next game

I only recall any var or dodgy ref decisions going in our favour. When we win the game easily. Not in a tight game.

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

The headlines still havent died down about the "offside" Akanji goal , it really is going to another level because its the treble winners benefitting , according to some pundits that was a game we could have lost but for the dodgy offside , the 5-1 final scoreline obviously immaterial .Wonder how long the disallowed Garnacho goal that the Goons benefitted from will go on for , will there be polls and a 24 hr loop from Sky Sports.
Maybe not

 

[pauls]

The headlines still havent died down about the "offside" Akanji goal , it really is going to another level because its the treble winners benefitting , according to some pundits that was a game we could have lost but for the dodgy offside , the 5-1 final scoreline obviously immaterial .Wonder how long the disallowed Garnacho goal that the Goons benefitted from will go on for , will there be polls and a 24 hr loop from Sky Sports.
Maybe not

Var today was used almost perfectly, so they are capable.Does make you wonder on the obvious stuff though. How Ten Bob has got the audacity to complain is absolutely unbelievable given what they get awarded, think Luton will be most aggrieved this weekend.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

How Ten Bob has got the audacity to complain is absolutely unbelievable given what they get awarded, think Luton will be most aggrieved this weekend

The Luton one was outrageous.
The ball travelled about 30 yards and wasn't even going that fast.

 

[TinFoilHat]

VAR decisions and Sancho being thrown under the bus this morning by Neil Ashton. Briefing Talkshite about his various misdemeanours.

Buries the truth that no one asking about how shite are the rags.

 

[hertsblue]

The headlines still havent died down about the "offside" Akanji goal , it really is going to another level because its the treble winners benefitting , according to some pundits that was a game we could have lost but for the dodgy offside , the 5-1 final scoreline obviously immaterial .Wonder how long the disallowed Garnacho goal that the Goons benefitted from will go on for , will there be polls and a 24 hr loop from Sky Sports.
Maybe not

It’s so predictable
Zero inquest as to why Dippers 1st goal yesterday stood when Salah was miles offside, standing in front of the keeper clearly Impeding his view as he had to take a unnatural body position by leaning to his left due to Salah being in line with the shot.
And absolutely nothing in the cowardly media about it