Southampton 2-0 Everton - Sunday 25th October, 2020

[Inverted]

Certainly hurts your case for "accidentally" hacking down an opponent if you have your hands up in apology before you've even made the challenge. 

[RandoEFC+]

Don't bother trying to justify it. He was running to catch up, he had a nibble at him already but he was looking at the ball and running in a straight line. Yellow card.

[The Artful Dodger]

Bit of a reality check. Iwobi, ffs, how is he premier league.

[RandoEFC+]

Got what we deserved here but it was always going to happen sooner or later. Credit to Southampton, exposed our weakness in a lack of a right back and been well organised at the back. Maybe could have been difference if Sigurdsson's crossbar shot had dipped in but after they scored we've barely had a sniff.

Shite about that red card. 3 match ban for that is harsh in my opinion. I can see why people think it was deliberate, you can see how upset some people still are about last weekend reading through the thread. We'll be in trouble at the back if Coleman or Kenny don't make it back for the next game. Rodriguez limping around at the end looks like we took a gamble playing him from the start, a gamble we might not have taken if Richarlison was available.

Shit day but you'd still have taken being top after 6 games.

[Stan]

22 minutes ago, Inverted said:

Certainly hurts your case for "accidentally" hacking down an opponent if you have your hands up in apology before you've even made the challenge. 

I thought this too. But then the hands up could have been for the initial nibble. 

I think it's a red. Not really one that can be overturned as there's no clear and obvious mistake from the ref. At the end of the day, the studs on the back of the ankle like that is bad. I think it's just made to look worse that it stayed on for a few seconds and as Walker-Peters went down too. 

[Lucas]

Always a good day when your title rivals drop points.

[Dan+]

A year since the 0-9. I really do rate what Hasenhuttl's done there. They've turned it around no end.

[Stan]

4 minutes ago, Dan said:

A year since the 0-9. I really do rate what Hasenhuttl's done there. They've turned it around no end.

Watch them lose their next couple against Villa and Newcastle...  

[Dan+]

2 minutes ago, Stan said:

Watch them lose their next couple against Villa and Newcastle...  

Wouldn't be surprised they're very good on their day though. Teams struggle to live with them. I remember being pretty amazed by how well they played away here. Could've been about 0-4 at half time.

[RandoEFC+]

7 minutes ago, Stan said:

Watch them lose their next couple against Villa and Newcastle...  

This is the thing with Southampton, if they play like this every week they challenge for top four this season. Seen both extremes of it from them against us alone. Today they were excellent, tactically nailed it and very well drilled.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

Everton waiting til I have $15 on them to get their first L of the season, awesome work you useless bear in the big blue cunts

[Dr. Gonzo]

 

Even if it wasn’t intentional... there are still red cards for reckless challenges. And even if it’s not intentional if it’s a player you’ve literally just fouled seconds before doing something like that... what’s a referee going to think? It’s going to look like you’re aggressively targeting a player.

I’m not sure intent matters here. I do like his victim complex though 

[Stan]

7 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

 

Even if it wasn’t intentional... there are still red cards for reckless challenges. And even if it’s not intentional if it’s a player you’ve literally just fouled seconds before doing something like that... what’s a referee going to think? It’s going to look like you’re aggressively targeting a player.

I’m not sure intent matters here. I do like his victim complex though 

I think it's ironic that Everton fans complained (mainly on Twitter) about how long people were still going on about Pickford's tackle. Then their manager brings it up as an excuse as to why Digne got sent off as well. The 2 incidents are totally unrelated. There's literally nothing to link them. Bit of conjecture from Ancelotti there, needlessly so. If Everton wanted attention away from Pickford there was no need for Ancelotti to mention him

[RandoEFC+]

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

 

Even if it wasn’t intentional... there are still red cards for reckless challenges. And even if it’s not intentional if it’s a player you’ve literally just fouled seconds before doing something like that... what’s a referee going to think? It’s going to look like you’re aggressively targeting a player.

I’m not sure intent matters here. I do like his victim complex though 

He offered it as an explanation. A full week in the media of partisan character assassination against two of our players ensued after the derby. People were throwing words like intent and assault around and pretending it was unbiased commentary. Ancelotti kept his dignity, didn't hit back, said that Pickford and everyone at the club were sorry about Van Dijk's injury and wished him all the best. Friend got his card out so quickly to send a player off for what looked to most honest people to be an accident. It's not ridiculous to suggest that the media rhetoric throughout the week influenced the referee's decision. And if you argue that that's ridiculous, then you'll also have to admit it's ridiculous to suggest that Alex Ferguson used his press conferences to try and influence referees in his pomp. Ancelotti may have been emotional after the game. I'd be pretty cross if it was my players and my team having their reputation dragged through the mud all week, remained professional and then had a decision go against me.

The rest of your logic is unfair in my opinion. If Digne had deliberately tripped him up or pulled him back, or as you put it "been aggressive towards him", he would have got a yellow, every fan praises one of their own for "taking one for the team" in that scenario.

2 hours ago, Stan said:

I think it's ironic that Everton fans complained (mainly on Twitter) about how long people were still going on about Pickford's tackle. Then their manager brings it up as an excuse as to why Digne got sent off as well. The 2 incidents are totally unrelated. There's literally nothing to link them. Bit of conjecture from Ancelotti there, needlessly so. If Everton wanted attention away from Pickford there was no need for Ancelotti to mention him

I think I've answered most of this above. Ancelotti is making the point that it's possible the officials were influenced by the hysteria in the media last week. It's not unreasonable and he wouldn't be the first manager to wake up the next day and think maybe I'd have been better off keeping that one to myself.

I want to make a general point on intent vs consequences when it comes to these decisions. If we as football fans want matches to be officiated in the spirit of the game, we need to stop being so sensationalist over these incidents based on who it happens to. If you're going to argue that Digne accidentally stepping on someone's heel is a deserved three match ban regardless of intent, then you need to be happy to admit that Robertson should have had a three match ban for doing literally the exact same thing to Allan last weekend. Like others have said, one incident has no bearing on another. Robertson stepping on Allan last week doesn't get a free pass just because Pickford got away with his challenge on Van Dijk. That can't be how it works. 

Of course intent matters. Players get injured accidentally all the time. Midweek an Ajax player got injured and is out for months after he got tackled by Fabinho. Now I didn't see a video of the challenge but I heard about it. Nobody said it was a bad tackle, I assume he got the ball, the injury was unfortunate. But the tackle injured the player for a number of months, so by definition "that could have hurt him" because it did.

For me, unless it's really clearly intentional, you've got to leave it as a yellow card. Yes it was nasty the way he stepped on his ankle but if we start throwing red cards around every time you can't prove it was an innocent challenge then where does it end?

I really don't know why I've bothered trying to reason this out though. I'm just going to get shouted down despite taking ages to be careful on the wording here in an attempt to bring some balance to the table.

[Stan]

10 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

He offered it as an explanation. A full week in the media of partisan character assassination against two of our players ensued after the derby. People were throwing words like intent and assault around and pretending it was unbiased commentary. Ancelotti kept his dignity, didn't hit back, said that Pickford and everyone at the club were sorry about Van Dijk's injury and wished him all the best. Friend got his card out so quickly to send a player off for what looked to most honest people to be an accident. It's not ridiculous to suggest that the media rhetoric throughout the week influenced the referee's decision. And if you argue that that's ridiculous, then you'll also have to admit it's ridiculous to suggest that Alex Ferguson used his press conferences to try and influence referees in his pomp. Ancelotti may have been emotional after the game. I'd be pretty cross if it was my players and my team having their reputation dragged through the mud all week, remained professional and then had a decision go against me.

The rest of your logic is unfair in my opinion. If Digne had deliberately tripped him up or pulled him back, or as you put it "been aggressive towards him", he would have got a yellow, every fan praises one of their own for "taking one for the team" in that scenario.

I think I've answered most of this above. Ancelotti is making the point that it's possible the officials were influenced by the hysteria in the media last week. It's not unreasonable and he wouldn't be the first manager to wake up the next day and think maybe I'd have been better off keeping that one to myself.

I want to make a general point on intent vs consequences when it comes to these decisions. If we as football fans want matches to be officiated in the spirit of the game, we need to stop being so sensationalist over these incidents based on who it happens to. If you're going to argue that Digne accidentally stepping on someone's heel is a deserved three match ban regardless of intent, then you need to be happy to admit that Robertson should have had a three match ban for doing literally the exact same thing to Allan last weekend. Like others have said, one incident has no bearing on another. Robertson stepping on Allan last week doesn't get a free pass just because Pickford got away with his challenge on Van Dijk. That can't be how it works. 

Of course intent matters. Players get injured accidentally all the time. Midweek an Ajax player got injured and is out for months after he got tackled by Fabinho. Now I didn't see a video of the challenge but I heard about it. Nobody said it was a bad tackle, I assume he got the ball, the injury was unfortunate. But the tackle injured the player for a number of months, so by definition "that could have hurt him" because it did.

For me, unless it's really clearly intentional, you've got to leave it as a yellow card. Yes it was nasty the way he stepped on his ankle but if we start throwing red cards around every time you can't prove it was an innocent challenge then where does it end?

I really don't know why I've bothered trying to reason this out though. I'm just going to get shouted down despite taking ages to be careful on the wording here in an attempt to bring some balance to the table.

I don't see why you'd get shouted down for it. Just expressing your opinion. 

It's better than the 'Leicester smell, United smell, Chelsea smell' yesterday

 

 

 

[RandoEFC+]

12 minutes ago, Stan said:

I don't see why you'd get shouted down for it. Just expressing your opinion. 

It's better than the 'Leicester smell, United smell, Chelsea smell' yesterday

 

 

 

I sensed a battle royale brewing and didn't want to miss out.

[Beelzebub]

18 minutes ago, Stan said:

I don't see why you'd get shouted down for it. Just expressing your opinion. 

 

 

How expressing opinions on internet ends up 

[RandoEFC+]

4 minutes ago, Azeem said:

How expressing opinions on internet ends up 

To be fair if that's what Gonzo had said, I couldn't really have argued with him.

[Burning Gold]

59 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

He offered it as an explanation. A full week in the media of partisan character assassination against two of our players ensued after the derby. People were throwing words like intent and assault around and pretending it was unbiased commentary. Ancelotti kept his dignity, didn't hit back, said that Pickford and everyone at the club were sorry about Van Dijk's injury and wished him all the best. Friend got his card out so quickly to send a player off for what looked to most honest people to be an accident. It's not ridiculous to suggest that the media rhetoric throughout the week influenced the referee's decision. And if you argue that that's ridiculous, then you'll also have to admit it's ridiculous to suggest that Alex Ferguson used his press conferences to try and influence referees in his pomp. Ancelotti may have been emotional after the game. I'd be pretty cross if it was my players and my team having their reputation dragged through the mud all week, remained professional and then had a decision go against me.

The rest of your logic is unfair in my opinion. If Digne had deliberately tripped him up or pulled him back, or as you put it "been aggressive towards him", he would have got a yellow, every fan praises one of their own for "taking one for the team" in that scenario.

I think I've answered most of this above. Ancelotti is making the point that it's possible the officials were influenced by the hysteria in the media last week. It's not unreasonable and he wouldn't be the first manager to wake up the next day and think maybe I'd have been better off keeping that one to myself.

I want to make a general point on intent vs consequences when it comes to these decisions. If we as football fans want matches to be officiated in the spirit of the game, we need to stop being so sensationalist over these incidents based on who it happens to. If you're going to argue that Digne accidentally stepping on someone's heel is a deserved three match ban regardless of intent, then you need to be happy to admit that Robertson should have had a three match ban for doing literally the exact same thing to Allan last weekend. Like others have said, one incident has no bearing on another. Robertson stepping on Allan last week doesn't get a free pass just because Pickford got away with his challenge on Van Dijk. That can't be how it works. 

Of course intent matters. Players get injured accidentally all the time. Midweek an Ajax player got injured and is out for months after he got tackled by Fabinho. Now I didn't see a video of the challenge but I heard about it. Nobody said it was a bad tackle, I assume he got the ball, the injury was unfortunate. But the tackle injured the player for a number of months, so by definition "that could have hurt him" because it did.

For me, unless it's really clearly intentional, you've got to leave it as a yellow card. Yes it was nasty the way he stepped on his ankle but if we start throwing red cards around every time you can't prove it was an innocent challenge then where does it end?

I really don't know why I've bothered trying to reason this out though. I'm just going to get shouted down despite taking ages to be careful on the wording here in an attempt to bring some balance to the table.

I disagree on the intent thing. A couple of times a season you'll see someone break their leg or suffer some other serious injury because an opponent's thrown in a lazy or reckless challenge without necessarily meaning to 'do' them. Neglectful rather than malicious, but no less dangerous. Challenges like that don't warrant the same level of condemnation, but you still don't want to see them in the game  because they're highly likely to hurt people. Pickford's is a perfect example. You can't have players flying around like that with no care for the consequences just because they're not actually intent on doing damage.

Equally you do have to acknowledge that accidents happen. You can't send someone off just because a player got injured, and you can't ban them for the duration of the injury. That's insane.

That said, I do genuinely think this one's just a coming together. It looks bad because he's already had a dig at him and he's surfed on his ankle, but if you watch it before the collision he is just running. Think KWP sells it a bit as well. He pops up to look at the referee and then starts rolling around

I'm not actually sure what Robertson incident you're talking about. There's one where he gets pushed over and kicks out at someone else on the halfway line? To be honest, while I'd've been livid if he'd been sent off for that because it's something of a regular occurence in football, but I wouldn't be sorry to see that sort of unnecessary dickishness rid from the game. Suarez did it to him in the Champions League and it forced him to miss the rest of the game. That's not deflection, it's an example of what can happen

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

A full week in the media of partisan character assassination against two of our players ensued after the derby.

I'm adding this sentence after typing out the whole post because.. at first I wouldn't blame you for thinking it's a fairly one sided take... but give the whole thing a read I think it's a pretty balanced take (although probably uses too many words, in typical Gonzo fashion).

Tbf if you've got one of the most notable Everton fans in sports media also questioning the intent of those players... I'm not sure you can say it was a partisan attack. I think even you admitted that Pickford was reckless and idiotic and that Richarlison's challenge was a pretty fucking bad challenge on the day it occurred (or the day after?) ... I think it's fair to expect the media to have a pretty loud reaction to a reckless and dangerous challenge that led to the injury of one of the league's highest profile players in the highest profile match that week. And then you've got the red card incident ontop of that, in again... what was the highest profile match of the week.

It's weird because I'd been told I'd been harping on about it for so long... yet here we've got Ancelotti bringing it up again. And really if the wants the media to stop covering it as much, it'd help if he doesn't talk about it as much. And quite frankly, I'm more interested in talking about the latest round of refereeing incidents than the stuff from last week... maybe at the end of the season we can do a "season review" of shite we agreed/disagreed with in the big contentious decisions over the season. Yesterday there was some pretty decent discussion on the strange application on what counts as a penalty and what doesn't upon VAR review. To me, that's probably the big officials discussion I'm most interested in this week.

I can see why you'd be more interested in this decision though. We're all more keenly interested in what's happening to our own clubs, after all. And it looks like we're going to be having a lot of these sorts of discussions each week  - just different flavours of "why are our refs so shiiiiiiite????"

In any case, do I think it was particularly fair Digne was sent off? No, not really - I think if I was the ref, I probably wouldn't have sent him off. But again, I can see an argument being made for why he was correctly sent off... and I made that argument on here. I've seen red cards given that I've disagreed with more than this one - I can at least understand why a red was given, even if it was just unfortunate and Digne didn't have the intent. And I'm not so sure saying "this is last week's bad referee and the media coverage coming back around to bite us in the arse" helps Everton's case here.

I actually think on appeal, it weakens the argument because if the officiating team says "we came to the conclusion it was a red because we thought it was reckless and we judged intent from the circumstances just before the foul too" - I think bringing in evidence of Everton being reckless the week prior and saying that might have affected the referee's judgment might be something that can be argued strengthens the argument for a red if the officials can justifiably make the argument that from their viewpoint it was dangerously reckless.

Comparing Digne's challenge to a similar red card this weekend in Palace v. Fulham... I think the Fulham player getting sent off was a deserved red card and for sure Digne's challenge is nowhere near as clear of a decision. But I do think having a red card for a similar, yet admittedly circumstantially different, challenge on the same weekend might also work against Digne's favour on appeal.

All in all, I get why you (and Ancelotti, Digne, Everton/Evertonians generally...) would be pissed off. It's a challenge that on a different day with different officials would end up a yellow - but there's a better than totally shit explanation for why it was a red... and I think that just makes it pretty easy for the FA to uphold.

It's another reason, imo, why we should be demanding higher standards from refs and more consistency applied throughout their decisions. Because the arbitrariness is infuriating to all of us at different points in the season.

[Dr. Gonzo]

26 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

To be fair if that's what Gonzo had said, I couldn't really have argued with him.

 I actually think really highly of you mate, I'd never say something like that to you

[RandoEFC+]

2 minutes ago, Burning Gold said:

I disagree on the intent thing. A couple of times a season you'll see someone break their leg or suffer some other serious injury because an opponent's thrown in a lazy or reckless challenge without necessarily meaning to 'do' them. Neglectful rather than malicious, but no less dangerous. Challenges like that don't warrant the same level of condemnation, but you still don't want to see them in the game  because they're highly likely to hurt people. Pickford's is a perfect example. You can't have players flying around like that with no care for the consequences just because they're not actually intent on doing damage.

Equally you do have to acknowledge that accidents happen. You can't send someone off just because a player got injured, and you can't ban them for the duration of the injury. That's insane.

That said, I do genuinely think this one's just a coming together. It looks bad because he's already had a dig at him and he's surfed on his ankle, but if you watch it before the collision he is just running. Think KWP sells it a bit as well. He pops up to look at the referee and then starts rolling around

I'm not actually sure what Robertson incident you're talking about. There's one where he gets pushed over and kicks out at someone else on the halfway line? To be honest, while I'd've been livid if he'd been sent off for that because it's something of a regular occurence in football, but I wouldn't be sorry to see that sort of unnecessary dickishness rid from the game. Suarez did it to him in the Champions League and it forced him to miss the rest of the game. That's not deflection, it's an example of what can happen

Yeah I should have explained the intent part better. There is a certain type of challenge that isn't intended to hurt someone but a player goes in knowing that the level of risk in what they're doing is unacceptable, or they simply haven't thought it through. Richarlison's was very much in that category too last week.

Your points are perfectly fair, and yes that's the one I was talking about re: Robertson. 

[RandoEFC+]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Tbf if you've got one of the most notable Everton fans in sports media also questioning the intent of those players... I'm not sure you can say it was a partisan attack. I think even you admitted that Pickford was reckless and idiotic and that Richarlison's challenge was a pretty fucking bad challenge on the day it occurred (or the day after?) ... I think it's fair to expect the media to have a pretty loud reaction to a reckless and dangerous challenge 

That's fine but Graeme Souness called it an assault, others calling it disgraceful and horrible, the media hounding Klopp and Wijnaldum midweek to bring it back up again until Wijnaldum gave them their headline calling it a stupid tackle, which you can't really argue with but it had all already been said on Sunday and Monday, beyond that the media had an agenda to harvest more clicks and likes from a large and angry Liverpool fanbase, that's why they were asking Wijnaldum about it on Tuesday/Wednesday and, even more bizarrely, Hassenhuttl on the Friday. You expect it from fans but the media really pushed and exploited the narrative. They tried to disguise it as righteous indignation but we went well past the point of genuine opinion and deserved criticism and it pissed me off and probably pissed Ancelotti off as well because it came at the expense of undue and exaggerated negative attention aimed at Everton.

Pickford's challenge was bad but I can't remember the last time an incident like this got so much attention and condemnation, when it's far from the worst offence someone has made in that time. And I know you think Tim Cahill criticising them legitimises the exaggerated outrage but on the other hand you've got Carragher who's a massive Red saying it's gone too far and there's no way he intended to do it so it cuts both ways. Bad tackles happen, unless you're Roy Keane with a massive hard man complex, players don't set out to seriously hurt their opponents. Sometimes they see red mist and bring them down on purpose or jab an elbow in their ribs but rarely anything worse, often they make mistaken challenges and hurt each other by accident, sometimes they hurt each other pretty badly. It's fair to say the amount of pearl clutching over Pickford's challenge since last Saturday went way too far. Fair enough everyone's going to have their say for about 48 hours or so when it happens in a high profile match but by the time you're asking the Southampton manager in a Friday press conference for the next game to comment on it, that's just the media fishing for quotes that will generate headlines they know will land. Just look out for next time this happens to Liverpool or Man Utd and it will happen again, but the next time it happens to Wolves or Brighton, you won't hear a peep from the national media beyond the next day's papers.

The rest, fair enough. I've been trying to be as scathing of poor decisions in our favour and in other games as I am when it goes against us, because I just think it's damaging for all of us when people base their reaction to daft decisions on who it happened too, or who needs something "evening up" from a previous grievance.

For me I don't think it's too much to ask for referees to be trusted to use their judgement. If something is unduly aggressive, cheating, dangerous, unfair, then penalise it. Football should be a simple game, the rulebook shouldn't be as big as it is. I know it's ideological but you shouldn't have to get a rulebook out to decide whether or not something is a foul or a red card. If you've seen enough football, and as a top flight referee I'd assume you've seen a lot of football matches, then you should be able to look at an incident and decide whether what happened was fair or not and what would be a fair punishment. People will say that leads to a lack of consistency but if the referees get together at the end of each set of games, agree that most of them would have called an incident differently than the decision that was made, and the individual that made the decision acts accordingly in future, then you eventually reach an equilibrium if reasonable consistency without over-regulation. Fair enough some things are written in black and white in the rulebook - the offside rule, all of the ball has to cross all of the line, the goalkeeper can't use his hands outside the box - but the rest should be broad strokes.

The problem with the over-regulation is that stupid stuff happens based on technicalities. Players get sent off for collisions because technically they stamped on their opponent, players get away with dangerous tackles because the victim was offside in the build up so technically nothing after that counts, teams get penalties because VAR is technically allowed to review whether the incident was in or out of the box but not allowed to review whether it was actually a foul in the first place, but if the referee had originally given a penalty instead of a free kick then they could have overturned that (seriously the thing where VAR can overturn minor mistakes in specific circumstances but isn't allowed to overturn clear and obvious mistakes in other circumstances is the best example I can think of of over-regulation).

It's just really tiring and it's turning into the only thing we end up talking about after games. Everyone being armchair referees gives the money men and media sites endless clicks as well which just fuels the fire. Everyone ends up really pissed off apart from the bellends who revel in other people's misfortune and relish perceived "revenge" against another team's fanbase when actually it's the decisions of the authorities and the officials that wronged them in the first place but it's twattish fans on social media who end up abusing each other before moving on to sending death threats and abuse to players, referees and sometimes even their families.

[Dr. Gonzo]

18 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

It's just really tiring and it's turning into the only thing we end up talking about after games. Everyone being armchair referees gives the money men and media sites endless clicks as well which just fuels the fire. Everyone ends up really pissed off apart from the bellends who revel in other people's misfortune and relish perceived "revenge" against another team's fanbase when actually it's the decisions of the authorities and the officials that wronged them in the first place but it's twattish fans on social media who end up abusing each other before moving on to sending death threats and abuse to players, referees and sometimes even their families.

Tbh, with this only being VAR's second season in use here... I don't think it's surprising that these decisions are taking up so much of the discussion. I think there's a fair amount of reasonable frustration with how it's implemented and it's led loads of people, myself included, to think "what's the point?" because the way it's currently implemented now... I feel like it's just another layer of human error being used to make officials even more frustrating than they were before. It's something new that leads to contentious decisions, often times emotion is running high because it's football and we're football fans so we've emotionally invested ourselves.

I agree it's boring it's THE talking point in English football right now and it has been for over a season tbh. And I think we'd all rather talk about football the way we used to before referee errors were so under the spotlight. There's just something that needs to be done about how VAR is implemented. I also think if referees had to explain themselves more often... maybe fans would be a bit more understanding on why the fuck the officials did what they did.

With the media stuff, we'll probably never agree - as a Liverpool fan, I've seen both ends of it where sometimes it feels like the media is pushing for what Liverpool fans want and at other times it feels like the club just can't get out of negative limelight by the media. I think all of the big English sides have legitimate claims to getting favourable coverage when they maybe shouldn't and getting over the top attacks on them at times. So I can understand your frustration, but also... I've seen my club in the same situation with the negative press for a week (or more) and just thinking "god the media should fuck off" and eventually they will... so maybe I'm a bit less sympathetic because I like when it happens to a club I don't like 

I also think Pickford got way more media attention because: 1.) Everton are sitting pretty at the top of the table, which is sort of a story in itself; 2.) who got injured. Because when that one fucking shite player who's name I can't even remember and don't really care to remember went in on Origi then kissed the badge after breaking him, which tbh... was probably more egregious of an offense than Pickford getting the stay on the pitch despite being a reckless idiot... and that didn't really hit the national media in the same way. But it was a lower profile Everton then & a lower profile player for Liverpool.

I do think you brought up a good point with Ancelotti trying to sway referee opinion, and I think you should also consider that with those remarks when an interviewer asked Gini that question immediately after the news of Pickford not getting suspended. Gini's saying what he's saying so in the future if there's ever a challenge like that on him or his teammates, it's more likely that a red card is given.

[RandoEFC+]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

With the media stuff, we'll probably never agree - as a Liverpool fan, I've seen both ends of it where sometimes it feels like the media is pushing for what Liverpool fans want and at other times it feels like the club just can't get out of negative limelight by the media. I think all of the big English sides have legitimate claims to getting favourable coverage when they maybe shouldn't and getting over the top attacks on them at times. So I can understand your frustration, but also... I've seen my club in the same situation with the negative press for a week (or more) and just thinking "god the media should fuck off" and eventually they will... so maybe I'm a bit less sympathetic because I like when it happens to a club I don't like 

But we do agree, this is the exact point I was trying to make. I was even going to use some of the Suarez-based pearl clutching that used to happen but couldn't fit it in. The media went way over the top with him at times as well, which is saying something when he literally bit other players. Liverpool are a highly emotive club for a lot of people, a) because they have a lot of fans and b) because they're massive rivals of Man Utd and Everton who also have a lot of fans who hate Liverpool more than any other team and c) because they're one of the most successful clubs in the country which makes a lot of other neutrals dislike them too. It is the same for Man Utd. Whenever there's a big hot take related to either club, the media milk it to wring out as many clicks and reactions.

You've missed a reason in your next paragraph. The fact that Pickford is England's goalkeeper makes anything involving him twice the story it would usually be, I still don't understand this phenomenon in the English media but it's there too.

And I have no problem with Wijnaldum giving an honest answer to that question. In fact you'd expect it from a club and international team mate when your local rivals were the ones on the other side of it. What gets my goat is the way parts of the media ask that to try and get a reaction that'll make a good headline. They've been doing it all week up until the point where Ancelotti was asked on Friday if he specifically mentioned that James picked up a knock from the challenge with Van Dijk as a way of point scoring or words to that effect. They know what they're doing and I'm glad he made reference to it after the game. Too often our managers have sat on the fence in circumstances like this in the past and rolled over when the media have tried to use us as part of an unfavourable rhetoric.