Jump to content

Football 19/20


thetime
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

different situation, different ref, and even different rules for what is handball as they've changed a few times in the last few years.

Amongst other things, it's worth noting that the ref's and TTA's positions meant that the ref wouldn't have seen that TTA's arms were so far out from his side - and VAR is used with that in mind. The ref didn't make a clear and obvious mistake because his relative position didn't allow him to see it as a mistake; VAR is not meant to re-ref the game.

Bollocks, it was clearly and obviously hand ball on Sunday where as the Richards one was never hand ball in a million years. Both decisions went in Liverpools favour.

Thats not the reason we lost the match anyway. We lost the match due to not taking our chances. We had more than enough of the chances to take something from the game.

We played well and looked a good team who play good football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, eastynh said:

Bollocks, it was clearly and obviously hand ball on Sunday where as the Richards one was never hand ball in a million years. 

OK, so the rules of footie mean nothing to you, and you prefer to invent your own. :P 

You cannot compare the two instances, because different rules about what is handball apply to each one.

Why not look up what the rules of handball are today, and tell us how TTA broke those rules? Who knows, you even be right that he did. 

 

Quote

We played well and looked a good team who play good football. 

and Liverpool played better and looked like a team who play better football.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

OK, so the rules of footie mean nothing to you, and you prefer to invent your own. :P 

You cannot compare the two instances, because different rules about what is handball apply to each one.

Why not look up what the rules of handball are today, and tell us how TTA broke those rules? Who knows, you even be right that he did. 

 

and Liverpool played better and looked like a team who play better football.

TAA arm was in an unnatural position.

Every single pundit on Sky said it was a penalty. Every single one on Bein said it was a penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

OK, so the rules of footie mean nothing to you, and you prefer to invent your own. :P 

You cannot compare the two instances, because different rules about what is handball apply to each one.

Why not look up what the rules of handball are today, and tell us how TTA broke those rules? Who knows, you even be right that he did. 

 

and Liverpool played better and looked like a team who play better football.

The rules of football have never ever been that if you attenpt to block the ball with your feet, then it deflects off your feet and accidentaly hits your hand, then its a penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, eastynh said:

TAA arm was in an unnatural position.

no, tho it was wider than the norm.

 

21 minutes ago, eastynh said:

Every single pundit on Sky said it was a penalty. Every single one on Bein said it was a penalty.

And if I take a view separate to the rules I do too.

I've already explained the reasons why I reckon it wasn't called as that - including for how the VAR you wanted and said would be an improvement didn't go with a penalty.

And anyway, if a penalty had been awarded, the rules say you weren't allowed to score a goal from it. :P 
(oddly true, that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, eastynh said:

The rules of football have never ever been that if you attenpt to block the ball with your feet, then it deflects off your feet and accidentaly hits your hand, then its a penalty.

yes they have.

During times past (when i was a kid) the handball rule has been (along the lines of) "deemed to have gained an advantage" and (another version) "controlled the ball", which can - or not - happen from both of accidental and deliberate contact.

And in all cases what is accidential or deliberate or an advantage or controlling are matters of opinion, not something that can be arbitrarily measured to be that or not.

(What exactly is today's handball? I've not too much of an idea ... but I do know how VAR is used against a handball appeal, and VAR worked to the rules on this occasion).

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Wooderson said:

I admire him hugely and think he's in the top 10 footie players in the world but few get more riled up by LFC fans than him. He's yet to have a shot on target at Anfield since he left. Something not quite right there if he's grabbing national team mates by the neck.

I wouldn't read too much into the scuffle (which is probably almost all it was). It doesn't sound like he held him against the wall and held a fist to his face, does it? Far worse things have happened behind closed doors. Look at the response from Gomez, Southgate etc, it's only a big deal to those (media) who want to make it a big deal.

As for not having a shot on target at Anfield, you could argue that the whole City team / Pep has it's own problem with playing at Anfield, that doesn't solely apply to Sterling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

looks like it might have been a bit more than that, from the mark on Joe's face.

To be fair I hadn't seen that. It doesn't look great but I think the right decision has been made so long as it is something that is put behind everybody involved. If it rumbles on ahead of EURO 2020 then the team has a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jyoung said:

To be fair I hadn't seen that. It doesn't look great but I think the right decision has been made so long as it is something that is put behind everybody involved. If it rumbles on ahead of EURO 2020 then the team has a problem.

you're right  that is shouldn't be an issue going forwards, providing both of them can put down whatever the spat was about.

Tho based on it looking like it was carried over from Sunday, maybe it's not something they'll be able to put away (in which case Joe will lose his place).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a spectator I didn't like the way Sterling was conducting himself on Sunday, a winning mentality seems to breed sore losers, they go hand in hand that's just the way it is. But I don't think what Gareth Southgate has done is wrong in anyway, he's essentially given Sterling gardening leave (although it looked like he was back in training?) which on the face of it was there to protect the squad just as much as the player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2019 at 8:28 AM, eFestivals said:

no, tho it was wider than the norm.

 

And if I take a view separate to the rules I do too.

I've already explained the reasons why I reckon it wasn't called as that - including for how the VAR you wanted and said would be an improvement didn't go with a penalty.

And anyway, if a penalty had been awarded, the rules say you weren't allowed to score a goal from it. :P 
(oddly true, that)

Regardless of dodgy decisions, City still should have taken something from the game. They only have themselves to look at in that regard. You can't blame the ref when you have missed chances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, eastynh said:

City still should have taken something from the game.

I'm note sure why you really think that. They had their chances certainly, but I'd say Liverpool were the better team on the day overall.

I saw a "this would be the league without VAR" thing the other day, which reckoned City would only have 2 extra points. Even with a squad of City's strength sometimes other teams can be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I'm note sure why you really think that. They had their chances certainly, but I'd say Liverpool were the better team on the day overall.

I saw a "this would be the league without VAR" thing the other day, which reckoned City would only have 2 extra points. Even with a squad of City's strength sometimes other teams can be better.

Lets agree to disagree. City had more of the ball and created more chances. In a game like that when 2 good teams match up, it is the small margins that allow a team to come out on top. Liverpool were clinical, I did not think they were very good though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Comfy Bean said:

Just reading that if Scotland make it through the play offs in to the Euro finals then they will be in England’s group and play 2 games at Hampden with their 3rd game at Wembley against England.

Great incentive to win 2 play off games. The first guaranteed to be at Hampden.

 

you're not having the goalposts this time.

:P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

you're not having the goalposts this time.

:P 

?

I don’t imagine we’ll collect any points or goalposts but it would just be great to be involved again after all this time.

I reckon we’ll qualify. They can’t give tickets away for the game at Hampden tomorrow night. Our game needs a boost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting write up on The Athletic re Steve Walsh. Says when he was at Everton he had Harry Maguire and Andy Robbo lined up for 20m, a bid accepted for Jonny Evans and 4m for Erling Haaland (the young Norwegian with 7 in 4 CL games). Stark contrast to some of the big transfers they've made recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jyoung said:

Interesting write up on The Athletic re Steve Walsh. Says when he was at Everton he had Harry Maguire and Andy Robbo lined up for 20m, a bid accepted for Jonny Evans and 4m for Erling Haaland (the young Norwegian with 7 in 4 CL games). Stark contrast to some of the big transfers they've made recently.

I’ve heard a lot of people speaking about The Atheltic. Some of my favourite LFC journos have gone there too.

Any good?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DareToDibble said:

I’ve heard a lot of people speaking about The Atheltic. Some of my favourite LFC journos have gone there too.

Any good?

I signed up when they were first launching their big 'best UK football writers' campaign so I got it for a discount and it's quality to be honest. Some really interesting stories that go way further than any coverage you'd read in the papers or on other digital platforms. They genuinely dig a lot deeper - well worth it. There is a lot of LFC stuff and obviously James Pearce writes for them so he gets unrivaled insight. I'll send you a discount referral (obv you don't have to use it). 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2019 at 10:50 AM, jyoung said:

I signed up when they were first launching their big 'best UK football writers' campaign so I got it for a discount and it's quality to be honest. Some really interesting stories that go way further than any coverage you'd read in the papers or on other digital platforms. They genuinely dig a lot deeper - well worth it. There is a lot of LFC stuff and obviously James Pearce writes for them so he gets unrivaled insight. I'll send you a discount referral (obv you don't have to use it). 

Agreed its a quality publication. At first I felt it had too much focus on current premiership, but I feel that they are now a lot more varied about the types of stories they write.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard a lot of people throughout the British media in recent weeks talk about England having "the best attacking line up in world football". At present would it be more accurate to say possibly the best in Europe against mid/poor ranking opposition, or am I just being a bitter Welshman?

To me a team with that label needs to have evidence of doing it against the bigger nations in the bigger matches and the jury is still out on that one.  Also if you look at these attacking players I would argue most have won very little at club level and possibly dont have that much big game pedigree.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I don't think you can measure things in terms of 'world class' or 'best in the world'. But bloody hell, I don't think people realise how grateful we should be to have these options as our forwards. Even our midfield options have plenty of goals and assists in them. This team is better than the golden generation. I think in 10 years time we will realise how good this team are and how much we took them for granted. An in-form Rashford might not even get picked in the starting 11.

Sterling / Kane / Sancho / Rashford / Abraham

P.S People's memory is piss poor, we were terrible in 2010/2014. I don't know why English fans are moaning right now.

Edited by santowhir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, santowhir said:

Well I don't think you can measure things in terms of 'world class' or 'best in the world'. But bloody hell, I don't think people realise how grateful we should be to have these options as our forwards. Even our midfield options have plenty of goals and assists in them. This team is better than the golden generation. I think in 10 years time we will realise how good this team are and how much we took them for granted. An in-form Rashford might not even get picked in the starting 11.

Sterling / Kane / Sancho / Rashford / Abraham

P.S People's memory is piss poor, we were terrible in 2010/2014. I don't know why English fans are moaning right now.

Im not an English fan, but just asking the question.  I have no doubts these players can score lots of goals against mediocre (often championship level and below) nations.  I dont think the evidence is there one way or the other that they can do it against the big teams which is why I would reserve judgement that they are the best attacking lineup in the world, as I feel that needs to be proven at a higher level.  In terms of the golden generation again the jury is out if they are better, the evidence is not yet there if they can do it in a big knockout game against big opposition.  I think international football is weaker then when the golden generation were playing, so maybe that will make it easier for them.

In terms of the forwards you mention (Sterling apart) they arent players who have won many trophies from their attacking play, they are still young and maybe they will in the future, again maybe they wont.  Kane in my view has pretty much flopped in the majority of big games he has played.  I am not sure Sterling has yet had that defining performance in a big champions league, international match.  To me there is plenty of potential, but "the best" is about delivering when it really matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...