Premier League 2023/24 Gameweek 3 - 25-27th August, 2023

[Stan]

I deleted it because it was detracting away from the topic conversation. Inane chat between the two of you once again. 

[Harry]

That's two very tenuous red cards for Liverpool this season. Trent lucky to still be on the pitch. But unlucky to recieve the first yellow card when he was clearly fouled and should've had a free kick rather than a Newcastle throw in. Definitely deserved a yellow for the later pull back though.

[Stan]

21 minutes ago, Harry said:

That's two very tenuous red cards for Liverpool this season. Trent lucky to still be on the pitch. But unlucky to recieve the first yellow card when he was clearly fouled and should've had a free kick rather than a Newcastle throw in. Definitely deserved a yellow for the later pull back though.

What is tenuous about Van Dijk's? 

He cleaned out Isak when he was through on goal outside the box. Denied a clear goal-scoring opportunity. 

Alexander-Arnold's first yellow wasn't one, agreed, even under the new rules referees are employing with regard to dissent/time-wasting etc. 

[Harry]

22 minutes ago, Stan said:

What is tenuous about Van Dijk's? 

He cleaned out Isak when he was through on goal outside the box. Denied a clear goal-scoring opportunity. 

Alexander-Arnold's first yellow wasn't one, agreed, even under the new rules referees are employing with regard to dissent/time-wasting etc. 

To me it was debatable whether it was a foul at all. The type of incident that sometimes gets a whistle and sometimes not. To go from "ok yes a foul" bypass yellow card and go straight to red is not reasonable imo.

But it will definitely be upheld now he remonstrated so much afterwards.

[Harry]

I'm sure to have different views on this than others but I hate all penalties for which the punishment does not for the crime. E.g. feather of contact, at the byline half a step inside the 18 yard box should never be a penalty. It's a 1% chance of scoring a goal. Awarding a penalty is gifting a 90% chance of scoring a goal.... Regardless of what the rules say the punishment doesn't fit the crime, so the rules are wrong.

I know it will sound like Liverpool bias but I hate soft penalties no matter which way they go 

[Stan]

11 minutes ago, Harry said:

To me it was debatable whether it was a foul at all. The type of incident that sometimes gets a whistle and sometimes not. To go from "ok yes a foul" bypass yellow card and go straight to red is not reasonable imo.

But it will definitely be upheld now he remonstrated so much afterwards.

He takes out Isak before getting the ball. I'm not sure what is debatable.

And the reason it goes straight to red is because it denies a clear goalscoring opportunity. Like when Pope got sent off against Liverpool last season; it bypasses a yellow because of the severity of the offence i.e. goalkeeper handballs outside the area. 

5 minutes ago, Harry said:

I'm sure to have different views on this than others but I hate all penalties for which the punishment does not for the crime. E.g. feather of contact, at the byline half a step inside the 18 yard box should never be a penalty. It's a 1% chance of scoring a goal. Awarding a penalty is gifting a 90% chance of scoring a goal.... Regardless of what the rules say the punishment doesn't fit the crime, so the rules are wrong.

I know it will sound like Liverpool bias but I hate soft penalties no matter which way they go 

What would you propose as a solution? Change the penalty area, in which goalkeepers would lose a lot of their 'privilege' too? It's not just about the 1% chance of scoring the goal, it could be a foul on the player that could have set up or assisted a goal. 

I don't think you can plainly say the 'rules are wrong'. You just don't like them! Everyone knows a foul (soft or not) in the 18-yard box results in a penalty.