Subscriber Mel81x+ Posted October 19, 2020 Subscriber Posted October 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, Stan said: It's because the offside took precedence - it's the first incident. The rules state that no further action can be taken (despite the reckless nature of the challenge endangering an opponent) because of the offside. There's no penalty to give because the offside happened. So not sure what the 'potential penalty incident' is? That's not what I mean. There is a foul in the box, you've heard VAR and as a ref because its a potential penalty that you haven't reviewed yourself you should be at a monitor just as much as I'd expect them to go there if the linesman doesn't raise his/her flag to go see the incident themselves which in this case happens to be true. This also doesnt mean Pickford should see red or that he should be sent off the pitch.
Administrator Stan Posted October 19, 2020 Author Administrator Posted October 19, 2020 9 minutes ago, Mel81x said: That's not what I mean. There is a foul in the box, you've heard VAR and as a ref because its a potential penalty that you haven't reviewed yourself you should be at a monitor just as much as I'd expect them to go there if the linesman doesn't raise his/her flag to go see the incident themselves which in this case happens to be true. This also doesnt mean Pickford should see red or that he should be sent off the pitch. But the foul in the box happens after the offside decision? No point looking at the monitor because the offside gets looked at first. As soon as Van Dijk is adjudged to be offside, everything else that happens after that is a moot point.
Subscriber Mel81x+ Posted October 19, 2020 Subscriber Posted October 19, 2020 8 minutes ago, Stan said: But the foul in the box happens after the offside decision? No point looking at the monitor because the offside gets looked at first. As soon as Van Dijk is adjudged to be offside, everything else that happens after that is a moot point. But the ref didn't make the offside call, VAR did. And, the game was let to go on and at that point the linesman hasn't raised his flag so the ref is literally going on what VAR is saying. Meanwhile, there is a foul in the box post the offside which no one is clear on until VAR review for the offside. The player is already receiving medical attention why not just jog up to the monitor have a look take a look while VAR does it analysis and everyone is on the same page? Just to be clear my point of contention isnt the act post the offside which was not the reason for VAR to be involved in the first place its the fact that the referee stops the game to have the incident reviewed as its a foul then waits for VAR to give the decision and should it not be an offside I still think the ref has to go to the screen to review the incident.
Burning Gold Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 1 hour ago, RandoEFC said: It's one thing idiot fans doing it in their echo chambers on reddit and Twitter but Julien Laurens is a reputable, usually insightful and intelligent neutral commentator. He isn't even a former Liverpool player like so many of the others. Surely you can see the difference? Here's another one who's supposedly an unbiased commentator, just look at the hypocrisy: I'm sorry but last time this happened to one of our players, Son basically had a national media campaign trying to get his ban overturned and it was "by the way, hopefully Gomes is alright too". It leaves a pretty vile taste in the mouth when you contrast it with all this hysteria. It's shite losing a key player for a long period of time but it happens to everyone at some point and when you've all come to terms with it you'll look back and accept that Pickford clearly didn't put any intent into that challenge and all this talk about assault and 8 month bans was just a little bit ridiculous. I can actually accept Liverpool fans still being angry because they're emotionally invested but some of these neutral commentators are just jumping on the bandwagon because it's a good opportunity to get liked and retweeted by those thousands of fuming Liverpool fans. To be fair, Jim Beglin played for Liverpool for six years, so hardly unbiased. Also, there is a mechanism for players to get retrospective bans if the referee didn't see the incident, so it's not a completely ridiculous question. You're unlikely to see it these days as VAR has seemingly unofficially replaced retrospective review, but it does exist For the record, Son's challenge was shocking and it's an absolute disgrace the red was overturned
Burning Gold Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 14 minutes ago, Stan said: It's because the offside took precedence - it's the first incident. The rules state that no further action can be taken (despite the reckless nature of the challenge endangering an opponent) because of the offside. There's no penalty to give because the offside happened. So not sure what the 'potential penalty incident' is? Where do the rules state that? Obviously the penalty doesn't matter because play stops as soon as there's an offside, but that doesn't change the nature of Pickford's challenge
Administrator Stan Posted October 19, 2020 Author Administrator Posted October 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, Mel81x said: But the ref didn't make the offside call, VAR did. And, the game was let to go on and at that point the linesman hasn't raised his flag so the ref is literally going on what VAR is saying. Meanwhile, there is a foul in the box post the offside which no one is clear on until VAR review for the offside. The player is already receiving medical attention why not just jog up to the monitor have a look take a look while VAR does it analysis and everyone is on the same page? But what's he going to the monitor for? If he gave a punishment for the foul (through VAR or looking at the monitor or not), the officials would literally be making the laws and taking the rules in to their own hands as it will have been determined there was an offside in the build up and anything that happened after that isn't necessarily relevant. Even if he looked at the monitor and deemed it was a dangerous play/reckless foul, he's probably being told in his ear there's an offside decision to determine as well which takes precedence.
LFCMadLad Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 So the next time we have an offside decision... Mane (for instance) can walk over and nut Luke Shaw (for instance) and its ok because offside had already been given? What a load of old bollocks
Administrator Stan Posted October 19, 2020 Author Administrator Posted October 19, 2020 1 minute ago, LFCMadLad said: So the next time we have an offside decision... Mane (for instance) can walk over and nut Luke Shaw (for instance) and its ok because offside had already been given? What a load of old bollocks Well no because that would then be violent conduct?
LFCMadLad Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 Just now, Stan said: Well no because that would then be violent conduct? Pickfords challenge wasnt fucking far off tbf.
Subscriber Mel81x+ Posted October 19, 2020 Subscriber Posted October 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, Stan said: But what's he going to the monitor for? If he gave a punishment for the foul (through VAR or looking at the monitor or not), the officials would literally be making the laws and taking the rules in to their own hands as it will have been determined there was an offside in the build up and anything that happened after that isn't necessarily relevant. Even if he looked at the monitor and deemed it was a dangerous play/reckless foul, he's probably being told in his ear there's an offside decision to determine as well which takes precedence. Just to be clear my point of contention isnt the act post the offside and it being a red card/sending off/violent conduct which was the reason for VAR to be involved in the first place its the fact that the referee stops the game to have the incident reviewed as its a foul then waits for VAR to give the decision and should it not be an offside I still think the ref has to go to the screen to review the incident. I dont think they could ever have given Pickford a red for that incident and I really doubt they will ever go back on it personally in any shape or form as rule amendments but what I am saying is that any infraction in the box that can lead to a goal-scoring opportunity when its called by the ref for stop in play requires the guy on the pitch to go to a monitor and review the incident with VAR.
Bluewolf Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 You can just tell that this is going to drag on forever...
Administrator Stan Posted October 19, 2020 Author Administrator Posted October 19, 2020 10 minutes ago, Burning Gold said: Where do the rules state that? Obviously the penalty doesn't matter because play stops as soon as there's an offside, but that doesn't change the nature of Pickford's challenge It's not in those specific words of course but someone mentioned it earlier on in this thread I think. Think it's why some are saying - in jest - that Van Dijk shouldn't have got himself offside and then he would have avoided injury and/or got a penalty so it's his own fault
Administrator Stan Posted October 19, 2020 Author Administrator Posted October 19, 2020 Just now, LFCMadLad said: Pickfords challenge wasnt fucking far off tbf. I don't disagree! It was horrible!
Subscriber Mel81x+ Posted October 19, 2020 Subscriber Posted October 19, 2020 Just now, Bluewolf said: You can just tell that this is going to drag on forever... Will be gone by next weekend. Replaced by some new horror VAR hasn't shown us yet.
LFCMadLad Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 1 minute ago, Stan said: I don't disagree! It was horrible! In which case it should be dealt with! Otherwise its giving permission for anyone to do such things.
Burning Gold Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, Stan said: It's not in those specific words of course but someone mentioned it earlier on in this thread I think. Think it's why some are saying - in jest - that Van Dijk shouldn't have got himself offside and then he would have avoided injury and/or got a penalty so it's his own fault Oh, someone said it on the internet? Well case closed then Come on mate
Subscriber RandoEFC+ Posted October 19, 2020 Subscriber Posted October 19, 2020 Their reason/excuse for not looking at retrospective action was that the officials saw and evaluated the incident during the game. This rule has always been in place even before VAR and was the reason why you couldn't get a yellow card to be changed to a red for example. It makes no sense though. You're allowed to overrule a referee who has mistakenly given a red card to remove the ban, so why is it only allowed to do the opposite when the reason a red card wasn't given was because of the incident going unnoticed and never because the officials made a mistake?
LFCMike Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 37 minutes ago, Mel81x said: Don't agree with what Julien is saying about length of bans or anything else but what he does say at the end is important when he says "Michael Oliver should go to the screen to see for himself". Why he didn't go we'll never know but if anything good should come out of all this its referees going to the monitor to review the incident. This was a potential penalty incident to be decided by an offside call in the box, the ref should be at the monitor not with his hand to his ear. Lots of teams are getting decisions pushed on them while refs just hand around waiting to hear and for me thats the biggest thing that needs changing about VAR when it comes to crucial decisions - goals, penalties and fouls that are considered malicious (anywhere on the pitch). Because the VAR official has to initiate it and should have asked Oliver if he'd seen it. It appears that Liverpool were told on Saturday night that the VAR official was preoccupied with checking the offside and didn't analyse Pickford's challenge. Fast forward to Monday and the story has changed to that is was reviewed.
Administrator Stan Posted October 19, 2020 Author Administrator Posted October 19, 2020 1 minute ago, LFCMike said: Because the VAR official has to initiate it and should have asked Oliver if he'd seen it. It appears that Liverpool were told on Saturday night that the VAR official was preoccupied with checking the offside and didn't analyse Pickford's challenge. Fast forward to Monday and the story has changed to that is was reviewed. And the VAR official in question gets to carry on doing a job and referee tonight's Leeds/Wolves game!
LFCMadLad Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 2 minutes ago, LFCMike said: Because the VAR official has to initiate it and should have asked Oliver if he'd seen it. It appears that Liverpool were told on Saturday night that the VAR official was preoccupied with checking the offside and didn't analyse Pickford's challenge. Fast forward to Monday and the story has changed to that is was reviewed. I honestly think they just make shit up as they go along.
LFCMike Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 1 minute ago, LFCMadLad said: I honestly think they just make shit up as they go along. Yep they do
Cicero Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 5 minutes ago, Stan said: Sigh. But @Gunnersauraus told me the officials all meet after games and take off points on each other or what not?
LFCMadLad Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, Cicero said: But @Gunnersauraus told me the officials all meet after games and take off points on each other or what not? @Gunnersaurausis exactly like the officials to be fair. He just makes it up as he goes along.
Devil-Dick Willie Posted October 19, 2020 Posted October 19, 2020 Pickfords challenge was super hard, but not at all dangerous conduct and likely not a red (but certainly a penalty) if VVD was onside. Stop crying.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.