The Footie Thread

[RRidges]

What’s Zaha got to do with Liverpool?

Ah! My bad! Apologies all round!
CP definitely needs to keep him!

 

[clubchamp98]

Our finishing again let us down.
Palace tactics were good in the main.
Can’t remember their keeper saving to many.

The ref pulled Palaces captain over about time wasting then did nothing about the keeper wasting time until the 91st min ,thought they were clamping down.

 

[Red devil]

Relegation battle next Monday night then At the swamp ??

Big 6 pointer

 

[Tashyboy]

Well I quite enjoyed that. For a friendly ? it was a good game to watch. For the life of me though, why they picked the King power stadium it is beyond me. Normally a game where the fan base is 50/50 one set of fans go one way, the other set the other. Yet at King power all the fans have to go the same way. It was asking for trouble. I think both sets of fans will be happy with that performance. I would be surprised if there is more than 3 points between them at the end of the season.
couple of things from the game.
Liverpool brought on a couple of kids re subs. Do Liverpool have any players out, is the squad thin. I don’t know.
Liverpool for the first time I have noticed managed to slow the game down at certain points.It will give the team a “ breather “ from there high intensity pressing etc. Is that a new thing or just something I have not seen before.
City do play narrow and compress the game in one half. Liverpool,early on hit a few cross field balls and stretched City.
Liverpool do play or played very high. City never really took advantage. Other teams could.

a post of mine from the community shield. Palace did tonight and I think it could be Liverpool’s undoing This season.

 

[Tashyboy]

Big 6 pointer

???

 

[Deleted member 15344]

a post of mine from the community shield. Palace did tonight and I think it could be Liverpool’s undoing This season.

They have been playing a high line for 4 seasons now since VVD arrived ?

 

[Blue in Munich]

Wasn't that before VAR (2016)? So the only action possible was subsequent/retrospective action?

It's not about the way the issue is, or isn't being dealt with; it's about the fact that exactly the same action is or isn't an offence depending on which way the wind's blowing, what day of the week it is or any other factor that the guardians of the game choose not to disclose to us mere mortals that keep them in gainful employment. It's about honesty, transparency & consistency.

 

[Slime]

Ridiculous headbutt by Nunez, but stunning goal from Diaz, absolutely superb goal.

 

[clubchamp98]

Ridiculous headbutt by Nunez, but stunning goal from Diaz, absolutely superb goal.

Yes think he will be on Klopps office carpet tomorrow

 

[RRidges]

It's not about the way the issue is, or isn't being dealt with; it's about the fact that exactly the same action is or isn't an offence depending on which way the wind's blowing, what day of the week it is or any other factor that the guardians of the game choose not to disclose to us mere mortals that keep them in gainful employment. It's about honesty & consistency.

So you are comparing incidents 5-6 years apart and want consistency. That's simply unrealistic! And, frankly, a bit sad!
FWIW. I'm pretty sure that the rules about hair-pulling haven't changed all that much though, but it's always about how serious the offence was - and maybe in the context of the game also.

 

[Blue in Munich]

So you are comparing incidents 5-6 years apart and want consistency. That's simply unrealistic!
FWIW. I'm pretty sure that the rules about hair-pulling haven't changed all that much though, but it's always about how serious the offence was - and maybe in the context of the game also.

It's not unrealistic if the laws of the game haven't changed in that respect. If there was retrospective action 6 years ago & there was no specific offence then it was violent conduct; so what's changed that means it wasn't violent conduct yesterday? The met of dealing with it may have changed, the offence is the same.

 

[clubchamp98]

I can’t belive hair pulling isn’t a foul!
If you pull someone back be it shirt ,shorts, foot ,hand ,arm or Hair it’s a foul.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Yes think he will be on Klopps office carpet tomorrow

With a book down the back of his tracksuit bottoms?

 

[clubchamp98]

With a book down the back of his tracksuit bottoms?

He can just put his wallet there that should do.

 

[RRidges]

It's not unrealistic if the laws of the game haven't changed in that respect. If there was retrospective action 6 years ago & there was no specific offence then it was violent conduct; so what's changed that means it wasn't violent conduct yesterday? The met of dealing with it may have changed, the offence is the same.

I believe it's related to how hard, therefore how violent, the act is. so the 2 cases are very likely different.
In this case both the ref and VAR seemed to deem that it wasn't 'Violent Conduct'. I'm ambivalent about that, though there are plenty of other acts that would come into a similar category - such as shirt-pulling (from the neck) and a significant number of tackles!

 

[Blue in Munich]

I believe it's related to how hard, therefore how violent, the act is. so the 2 cases are very likely different.
In this case both the ref and VAR seemed to deem that it wasn't 'Violent Conduct'. I'm ambivalent about that, though there are plenty of other acts that would come into a similar category - such as shirt-pulling (from the neck) and a significant number of tackles!

Yes, indeed they are;

Fellaini remained standing & elbowed back, Cucurella was put on his arse. So in light of that perhaps you could explain why one was punished & one not?

 

[Swango1980]

I can’t belive hair pulling isn’t a foul!
If you pull someone back be it shirt ,shorts, foot ,hand ,arm or Hair it’s a foul.

No one said it isn't a foul. Even the referees will say it is a foul. The question is not about it being a foul, it is whether is should be a red card or not.

There is no way in my mind that Taylor saw the guys hair being pulled and just allowed play to continue. If he'd seen that, it is a foul all day long. Whether he gives yellow or red is unknown. But, the VAR couldn't intervene for it simply being a foul. Only if they thought it was a red.

 

[RRidges]

Yes, indeed they are;

Fellaini remained standing & elbowed back, Cucurella was put on his arse. So in light of that perhaps you could explain why one was punished & one not?

Another from 6 seasons ago.
You'll have to ask the individual refs (and VAR for the 2nd one)! But I expect they didn't deem it 'Violent Conduct'! Btw Cucurella ended upon his arse - and within a few yards of the Ref. I suspect there was suspicion of some simulation involved - and again, VAR didn't seem to overule.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet (barnet?) about this. Is there some reason?
Btw. According to Luis van Gaal, it's not allowed except in sex masochism. Then it's allowed! Not something I can comment on!

 

[Deleted member 1740]

Dominated the game against a really tough, organised low block of 9 men behind the ball. Had a few good chances before we conceded.

Thought Fabinho was very poor in the build up for their goal, Eze sold him an easy dummy, he didnt need to get in that close or try and take him out. Eze was superb all game.

Sending off changed the game. Nunez' reaction to be being pushed was stupid, utter madness, Andersen's was even worse.

Notable mention to Tierney, he was determined to book the goalie but it was never going to be a second before 90mins, the worst PL ref by a margin, hes that bad i wouldnt wish him on Everton.

 

[BrianM]

No one said it isn't a foul. Even the referees will say it is a foul. The question is not about it being a foul, it is whether is should be a red card or not.

There is no way in my mind that Taylor saw the guys hair being pulled and just allowed play to continue. If he'd seen that, it is a foul all day long. Whether he gives yellow or red is unknown. But, the VAR couldn't intervene for it simply being a foul. Only if they thought it was a red.

In fairness if he couldn't see that he shouldn't be referring, he was literally staring right at the incident.