Liverpool 3-1 Man City - Sunday 10th November, 2019

[The Artful Dodger]

2 minutes ago, Stan said:

Is that your only purpose here?

You live a seriously sad life if so. 

I pity you.

Haha. Like you're in a position to pity anyone. 

[Happy Blue]

8 minutes ago, The Artful Dodger said:

It's not about North versus South. 

There's a lot to criticise Liverpool Fc for but the abuse people face and this goes for Everton from people from places like fucking Leicester, Wolverhampton, Manchester and Leeds ffs. This goes for Everton as well, because they might ally themselves against Liverpool but Ll the 'sign on' stuff is just as much about Evertonians as is it Liverpool.

 

Shut up and get a job ffs!

[The Artful Dodger]

1 minute ago, Rick said:

Neither are intentional, but both of them under the letter on the law are handballs. I think the officials have dealt with a complicated situation by just allowing play to continue. City still had more than enough time to defend, so they should be getting no sympathy for conceding the Fabinho goal. 

There is no real way anyone can justify a Manchester City penalty logically. But because it is Liverpool they will find a way. 

[Dan+]

You've yourself justified a Liverpool free-kick in an incident they got the goal from - a goal that was obviously significant and changes the game considerably. There is no doubt Liverpool deserved it over the 90 but to pretend there's no debate on that incident specifiically is a nonsense.

[The Artful Dodger]

Absurd. If you foul me and then my teammate fouls you in quick succession, both with similar consequences, why not just allow play to run? 

We know why this is an issue because 

... It's Liverpool. 

[Dan+]

In a non-VAR world, which I want, that's what you'd get, and I'd be happy to go along with that. This again sums up why VAR should go.

[Danny]

3 minutes ago, Dan said:

In a non-VAR world, which I want, that's what you'd get, and I'd be happy to go along with that. This again sums up why VAR should go.

Why? VAR made the right choice. Neither is a handball, if the ball ricochets off of another player onto your arm it won’t be given. Liverpool player belts it onto Bernardo who runs through it and it bounces off of him into TAA. Neither player can do anything about it as another player has caused the ball to suddenly hit them so it’s not given. VAR made the correct decision.

Its easy to see why you might think it’s a peno as TAA has his arms slightly raised but the richochet means it’s not given 

[Dan+]

Just now, Danny said:

Why? VAR made the right choice. Neither is a handball, if the ball ricochets off of another player onto your arm it won’t be given. Liverpool player belts it onto Bernardo who runs through it and it bounces off of him into TAA. Neither player can do anything about it as another player has caused the ball to suddenly hit them so it’s not given. VAR made the correct decision.

Ball hit Willy Boly's arm against Leicester first day of the season, completely accidentally, ruling out a Wolves goal because they have decided any contact with an arm in the build up means the goal can't count - it happened to Chelsea against Ajax midweek as well.

Therefore because the ball hit TAA's arm (which it 100% did) in what turned out to be the build up to a Liverpool goal, the goal shouldn't stand.

And this is ridiculous - but it's the culture that VAR has created and why fundamentally this over-analysis, brought about to a completely new level this season because of VAR, is the problem.

In my ideal world (aka north v south, brexit v liverpool etc... apparently) the goal is given and we move on.

In the actual world, with VAR and the over-scrutinising of everything, every technicality in the book, the play should go back to a Liverpool free kick.

I cannot add any more than that.

[Stan]

19 minutes ago, The Artful Dodger said:

Haha. Like you're in a position to pity anyone. 

Why not? 

Is everything okay at home for you? Weekends seem to be a bit rough for you. 

[Danny]

1 minute ago, Dan said:

Ball hit Willy Boly's arm against Leicester first day of the season, completely accidentally, ruling out a Wolves goal because they have decided any contact with an arm in the build up means the goal can't count - it happened to Chelsea against Ajax midweek as well.

Therefore because the ball hit TAA's arm (which it 100% did) in what turned out to be the build up to a Liverpool goal, the goal shouldn't stand.

And this is ridiculous - but it's the culture that VAR has created and why fundamentally this over-analysis, brought about to a completely new level this season because of VAR, is the problem.

In my ideal world (aka north v south, brexit v liverpool etc... apparently) the goal is given and we move on.

In the actual world, with VAR and the over-scrutinising of everything, every technicality in the book, the play should go back to a Liverpool free kick.

I cannot add any more than that.

That rule only applies if it hits the players hand/arm after bouncing off of another player’s head/body/foot. Specifically doesn’t mention the arm in this instance, I think because it last hit Bernardo’s arm before it hit TAA’s there is no rule stating play has to be brought back. Because the rule does not mention the hand/arm even though it has in the handball section identified the hand/arm as it’s own thing and not being part of the body.

[Dan+]

1 minute ago, Danny said:

That rule only applies if it hits the players hand/arm after bouncing off of another player’s head/body/foot. Specifically doesn’t mention the arm in this instance, I think because it last hit Bernardo’s arm before it hit TAA’s there is no rule stating play has to be brought back. Because the rule does not mention the hand/arm even though it has in the handball section identified the hand/arm as it’s own thing and not being part of the body.

See what I mean though. These technicalities are just so over the top. 

[Danny]

1 minute ago, Dan said:

See what I mean though. These technicalities are just so over the top. 

Not VAR’s fault though, it’s just handball rule in general. It’s always been specific and more annoyingly constantly changing leaving people with no idea about what is and isn’t handball. In this instance VAR has looked at the incident, decided no handball has been committed and play doesn’t need to be brought back and its a goal.

Peoples understanding of the handball rule has caused the issue

[Dan+]

1 minute ago, Danny said:

Not VAR’s fault though, it’s just handball rule in general. It’s always been specific and more annoyingly constantly changing leaving people with no idea about what is and isn’t handball. In this instance VAR has looked at the incident, decided no handball has been committed and play doesn’t need to be brought back and its a goal.

Peoples understanding of the handball rule has caused the issue

So what should've been given, based on your own interpretation of the rules?

If I can give VAR one thing - it's exposed some serious flaws in both the rules and the officiating in football, the latter in-particular.

[Danny]

11 minutes ago, Dan said:

So what should've been given, based on your own interpretation of the rules?

If I can give VAR one thing - it's exposed some serious flaws in both the rules and the officiating in football, the latter in-particular.

Based on my interpretation, nothing. Play carries on.

Bernado’s arm was not in an unnatural position, didn’t make his frame bigger, didn’t handball on purpose, didn’t gain any attacking advantage from it. Play carries on.

The ball then strikes TAA’s arm after last touching Bernado’s. As it’s a richochet this rules out a TAA handball. The FA’s rules make consistent distinctions between hand/arm, the body, the head and the foot. In terms of play stopping after it hits TAA’s arm, the rules state this only happens if it previously comes off of another player’s head or body and then in brackets includes the foot, but makes no reference to the hand/arm after clearly laying a distinction between the hand/arm and the body. Therefore there is no rule to penalise Liverpool, they’re free to attack and score.

That is what I’ve taken from the FA’s rulebook...

[Mel81x+]

@Happy Blue I will agree that you'll were the better team for large parts of the game because when it started City were absolutely going to get something if they persisted with the attack. It could have all gone very wrong for us if Sterling doesn't get in Aguero's way or if De Bruyne puts a little less pace on the ball across the box for Aguero to hit. But, having said all that, if you don't take your chances you're going to lose and that's what happened on the day. I don't think this City side are going to get brushed away so easily and they proved yesterday why they are the current champions because I had doubts before the game started and I'd put money on it that if you present Aguero with those chances on any other ground City walk away with 3+ goals on the night. 

You'll also have a good player in Angelino and before the game people were scratching their heads but I think he was your standout player on the night because he not only caused Trent issues he actually presented the attack with good chances as well.

[Happy Blue]

4 minutes ago, Mel81x said:

@Happy Blue I will agree that you'll were the better team for large parts of the game because when it started City were absolutely going to get something if they persisted with the attack. It could have all gone very wrong for us if Sterling doesn't get in Aguero's way or if De Bruyne puts a little less pace on the ball across the box for Aguero to hit. But, having said all that, if you don't take your chances you're going to lose and that's what happened on the day. I don't think this City side are going to get brushed away so easily and they proved yesterday why they are the current champions because I had doubts before the game started and I'd put money on it that if you present Aguero with those chances on any other ground City walk away with 3+ goals on the night. 

You'll also have a good player in Angelino and before the game people were scratching their heads but I think he was your standout player on the night because he not only caused Trent issues he actually presented the attack with good chances as well.

I was nibbling for bites mate   ..both great teams, we miss a lot of chances in most games which is slightly worrying, Aguero is coming to the end of the road while Jesus is still a boy many years from his prime and we try pass the ball into the net alot of the time and fuck it up instead of just pulling the trigger early ..Angelino has come through the youth system with Foden and is going to be a very tidy player for us in time, with Mendy's injury record he should get a fair bit of game time

We have come back from being more points behind than we are now to win the title but it's advantage Liverpool, you can afford to lose 2 and draw 2 while staying top but nothing is over 3mths into a season

[Harry]

11 hours ago, Dan said:

My question on the first goal - even if it's not a penalty, the ball has undoubtedly hit his arm in the build up to a goal. Surely this rules Liverpool's goal out?

Football is honestly fucked. It's gone even more spectacularly badly than I thought it would.

I can't believe anyone would be suggesting the right outcome for that situation would be fabinho's screamer 45 seconds or more after the event should be ruled out.

If the other team can get the ball down the other end and score before VAR can make a decision its too late and should not be able to come into play imo.

11 hours ago, Storts said:

You read it right - I think there’s definitely an element of bias in the magnitude of this game and the teams playing. There’s no reason to have a 4 minute check for an offside yesterday and not have a proper check of Salahs which looked equally as tight. 

But my comment was in reference to VAR and it’s usage. Hence the game is gone - I hate it

Like the firmino situation last week I think the video ref factored in that the moment to make the overrule had passed by the time he was reviewing it, therefore was reluctant to do anything... Even though the Firmino VAR call was wrong I think it was correct not to change the decision that far after the fact. If that could be applied consistently it's be an improvement imo.

10 hours ago, Storts said:

Mate it was ridiculous, given offside eventually and I’m not even convinced he was off. 

I didn't see it but that is a fucking outrage. Shocking refereeing to make that overrule.

9 hours ago, Lucas said:

We will agree to disagree.

Bernardo's is clearly accidental. We can all see that. Trent's got his arm out where he shouldn't. Asking for trouble.

I don't see how the two can be compared. We are all pretty smart and clued up people to tell the difference.

Got away with a big one there but maybe that cancels out what happened last week with Firmino.

I don't believe that is relevant when it's the attacking player..? When it comes to handball the standard for the defensive player vs the attacker is not the same.

A few weeks ago the ball bounced and hit Mane's hand and was clearly accidental before he buried it in the net to be disallowed by VAR and everyone here told me that was the correct decision because although not intentional it aided his attack. If the Bernardo situation led to a penalty then the same should be true.

[Harry]

9 hours ago, Lucas said:

I honestly don't see how Bernardo's handball is even comparable? He's not even looking at the ball when its gone back and hit his hand?

I think there is enough fume across all media platforms to suggest they got that call wrong and I'd be gutted if that happened to us and we didn't get a pen but each to their own.

The Bernardo handball (if TAA not present) would have resulted in them disallowing any goal city scored after than on VAR as per the rules.

So in that situation, if the VAR had intervened and said it was a Liverpool freekick back upfield and thus disallowed the Fabinho goal I think that would have been far more outrageous.

9 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

This pretty much sums it up for me. Ideally the ball would have fallen to Sterling anyway and he could have scored and had it disallowed so that neither side gave an advantage.

However, if Bernardo handles it, then it hits Alexander-Arnold's arm and City score from a penalty as a result, then it's not fair because then City have gained an advantage from Bernardo handling it.

The actual fair thing to do would have been to call TAA's a handball, but it's not a penalty because Bernardo handled it first and it's a Liverpool free kick.

All that said, I don't think it ultimately affects the result. The bigger issue here is not whether Liverpool have received an unfair advantage, the issue is that it highlights another grey area in these new rules that have been brought in alongside VAR.

Play on to our advantage vs a freekick is splitting hairs imo. 

[Harry]

6 hours ago, Dan said:

I agree. Correct decision for me is a Liverpool free kick.

Often refs let play go on to the advantage of the team that deserved the freekick. You're suggesting that because they should have had a free kick rather than play on you reverse 30 seconds of play and take the goal away from the attacking team?

That's like saying pay advantage to them but if they actually score a goal bring it back and make them take the freekick. 

I don't think it's right to say we had the rub of the green in that. It was a confusing decision that should have been a free to us and instead was play on. More than half a minute later we scored a goal. 

Of the three possible outcomes we've discussed... penalty City, free to Liverpool back upfield, play on, I think the one that played out on the day was the fairest overall.

[Harry]

With their current points tally City would be top in La Liga right now.

That city are fourth in the EPL is testament to just how good Leicester and Chelsea have been.

 

Final comment... Klopp was asked in his post Match interview why he was more reserved with his goal celebrations today... He basically said because he knew they'd be reviewed by VAR so he didn't want to waste his energy celebrating what might not be given...

If that is an unintended consequence of VAR its one worth thinking about. It's an indication VAR is getting involved in too many decisions if everyone's second guessing themselves to that extent, and it's actually making one of the most fun parts of the game less fun.

[LFCMadLad]

2 hours ago, Harry said:

With their current points tally City would be top in La Liga right now.

That city are fourth in the EPL is testament to just how good Leicester and Chelsea have been.

 

Final comment... Klopp was asked in his post Match interview why he was more reserved with his goal celebrations today... He basically said because he knew they'd be reviewed by VAR so he didn't want to waste his energy celebrating what might not be given...

If that is an unintended consequence of VAR its one worth thinking about. It's an indication VAR is getting involved in too many decisions if everyone's second guessing themselves to that extent.

Yeah Klopp barely celebrates goals anymore due to VAR. Its fucking ruining the game in basically every aspect. Football as we knew it is basically dead. It's a real shame.

[LFCMadLad]

When the kop sang this....

 

They thought they’d come to Anfield

Beat us before the Kop

But they went home with nothing

‘Cause bald fraud is no Klopp

We ripped up their defences

Destroyed them on all fronts

So fuck off, Guardiola

And all you cheating cunts

Allez Allez Allez 

Allez Allez Allez 

Their away shirt is so gay

Allez Allez Allez

[LFCMadLad]

£200m Pep has spunked on FB's, ours cost a combined £8m.

Just let that sink in 

[Harry]

The Liverpool City rivalry is great for the premier league. Particularly because it seems to turn out games that are consistently much more interesting and good football than Liverpool United games or other major derby's or grudge matches...

[Stan]

4 hours ago, Harry said:

I can't believe anyone would be suggesting the right outcome for that situation would be fabinho's screamer 45 seconds or more after the event should be ruled out.

If the other team can get the ball down the other end and score before VAR can make a decision its too late and should not be able to come into play imo.

Like the firmino situation last week I think the video ref factored in that the moment to make the overrule had passed by the time he was reviewing it, therefore was reluctant to do anything... Even though the Firmino VAR call was wrong I think it was correct not to change the decision that far after the fact. If that could be applied consistently it's be an improvement imo.

I didn't see it but that is a fucking outrage. Shocking refereeing to make that overrule.

I don't believe that is relevant when it's the attacking player..? When it comes to handball the standard for the defensive player vs the attacker is not the same.

A few weeks ago the ball bounced and hit Mane's hand and was clearly accidental before he buried it in the net to be disallowed by VAR and everyone here told me that was the correct decision because although not intentional it aided his attack. If the Bernardo situation led to a penalty then the same should be true.

Time taken between phases of play does not come in to the current VAR ruling. Comparing if VAR can check it while play is going on is irrelevant at the moment.

 

59 minutes ago, Harry said:

The Liverpool City rivalry is great for the premier league. Particularly because it seems to turn out games that are consistently much more interesting and good football than Liverpool United games or other major derby's or grudge matches...

Agree. It's like how Arsenal vs Utd used to be in the 90s.

Not sure I'm allowed to agree with it though as I'm from the south and not allowed to like anything northern-based. Might need to check with a fellow member on here what I can and can't think.