Jump to content
talkfootball365
  • Welcome to talkfootball365!

    The better place to talk football.

Man Utd 1-1 Liverpool - Sunday 20th October, 2019


football forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 462
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Anyway, thought Lallana had a good game today. I've been critical of him in the past for not making enough of a tangible impact, but he was threatening and constantly involved when he came on. Really pleased for him that he got himself on the scoresheet. Feels like that could be "the" moment people look back fondly on when they think about his time at Liverpool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

That’s the whole VAR argument though. There’s Liverpool fans that didn’t think it was a foul to be fair.

We are not taking about brexit sorry var again today 

Although it does prove klopp was wrong about it being clear an obvious. I like klopp but I don't like his excuses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Grizzly21 said:

I am not the issue, regardless of what you want to believe.

I didn't attack anyone until I got attacked. Claiming I only put in ridiculous arguments, the other day Eco saying I am ignorant and a headache for saying football isn't popular in the States. None of that is my fault cos I was just debating my points. Again, saying how its a pattern with me doesn't make it true.

If you're going to talk about me, might as well tag me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DeadLinesman said:

That’s the whole VAR argument though. There’s Liverpool fans that didn’t think it was a foul to be fair.

Yeah - when I watched it I thought it was a foul, but not as clear cut as some believe.

But that's an issue I see with VAR. Are ref's going to NOT call a foul because it's borderline, but also upon further review not reverse it because it's not 100 percent clear, whereas before VAR they would have called that a foul? That's my only issue with VAR as a whole. not this particular instance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even Gary Neville said it should have been disallowed xD

I’m just glad that Solskjaer has so many pals in the media. Would Scholes have called today’s performance good if it were under Mourinho? Probably not. Would Keene sit there grinning after the United manager said the ref was their best performer at home to Liverpool if it wasn’t his mate? Not so sure.

The press plays a big part in shaping public narrative. The media played a big part in saving Roy Hodgson’s skin for a few months after it was evident he should have been sacked with us... and Solskjaer is getting an even easier ride than Hodgson.

I’ve seen a lot of United fans elsewhere saying that’s their best performance of the season. But it’s against us at Old Trafford, a fixture where they always put in a good performance.

Have United actually improved under Solskjaer? I should probably consult @RandoEFC’s point differential thread to see the comparison between this season and last season. But on the face of it they haven’t. And that’s after a big spending summer. And even though we got a point from the same fixture last year, if Ole’s plan was to shut us down... he did a worse job of it than he did last year. Despite having made 2 big signings in defense (one of whom cost more than our whole back 4 lol).

I saw some Manc post something about Solskjaer’s friendly relationship with so many in the media (and the fact he seems like a nice guy probably helps him out with the pundits who aren’t ex-United players as well) meaning he doesn’t get anywhere near the criticism that fan thinks he should... and it got me thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

On var most of your arguments have been bad. On most subjects you are very good. You put a good argument the other day for why you thought Japan is better than Mexico. Which I actually said you had a good point on. I don't give you any credit on your var arguments because they are terrible and based to much on emotion. 

An opinion based on emotion can be reasonable when the arguments are about the disruption of the game and the impact as a spectator event.

To some extent the VAR is a head, and anti VAR is a heart perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
12 minutes ago, True Blue said:

Both goals by Rashford and Mane shouldn't have stood the later didn't obviously. Shearer said on sky that not once the ref's approached the VAR screen to review the situation this season. Why is there the option for it at all?

Think I have said it before but the Premier League is one of the very few places where its frowned upon to go to the monitor and review the VAR output. Which makes no sense to me as its there for a reason so use it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, True Blue said:

Both goals by Rashford and Mane shouldn't have stood the later didn't obviously. Shearer said on sky that not once the ref's approached the VAR screen to review the situation this season. Why is there the option for it at all?

I would've preferred both goals be let stand tbh. 

The tackle was miles away from the Liverpool goal, the United players did well to get it down the other end and score. The moment to pull it back had passed.

With Mane he didnt intend to touch it and I think he'd have controlled it anyway, so for me I'd say play on. Not a deliberate handball.

Just use VAR for offsides, goal line, and to review awarded penalty kicks (to ensure its not flat wrong to give a penalty) and leave it at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
12 minutes ago, Harry said:

With Mane he didnt intend to touch it and I think he'd have controlled it anyway, so for me I'd say play on. Not a deliberate handball.

Sorry but that's not the rule any more. Intention is taken out of the question when it comes to attacking players touching the ball with their hand/arm in the opposition penalty area. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Harry said:

With Mane he didnt intend to touch it and I think he'd have controlled it anyway, so for me I'd say play on. Not a deliberate handball.

I don't think they care anymore about deciding if it's deliberate or not. Truthfully, it appears that if Mane hadn't of handled it, the ball would have gone quickly to his left, which would have destroyed his great scoring chance. The hand, while inadvertent, did help him and therefore is was a good over turn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
17 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

Where the handball rule is ridiculous is that wouldn't be a penalty in the other box. 

This is something that I find weird too. The attacker is given no benefit of the doubt but the defender is? I suppose they'll amend that next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
23 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

Where the handball rule is ridiculous is that wouldn't be a penalty in the other box. 

 

5 minutes ago, Mel81x said:

This is something that I find weird too. The attacker is given no benefit of the doubt but the defender is? I suppose they'll amend that next season.

I agree but I can see why it's like that.

It prevents footballers just smashing the ball at defenders and almost aiming for their arms knowing they might not be able to get it anywhere else. Whereas you're unlikely to get attackers doing that when they're actually aiming for goal in the attacking penalty area. So it's right in that sense that defenders will get that advantage as opposed to conceding a penalty even if their arms are by their side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
Just now, Stan said:

It prevents footballers just smashing the ball at defenders and almost aiming for their arms knowing they might not be able to get it anywhere else. Whereas you're unlikely to get attackers doing that when they're actually aiming for goal in the attacking penalty area. So it's right in that sense that defenders will get that advantage as opposed to conceding a penalty even if their arms are by their side.

I agree there is no easy way to give the attacker the benefit because lets face it they can and some have used their arms to get the ball into favorable positions. I just think that its harsh on the attacker if the ball genuinely hits the defender with no fault of their own and an attacking opportunity is missed as a result. I think VAR sorts this out rather well in the box-foul department and I am thinking they will find a way because a rule like that will certainly meet some kind of edge-case they'll have to account for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was unpinned

On a side note away from VAR, from a tactical perspective that was a great watch. Manchester United to Ole's credit were set up correctly, and Klopp did well at half time to switch in the centre to allow his side to create more opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Sign up or subscribe to remove this ad.


×
×
  • Create New...