Other Games 23/24

[Alex 35571]

2 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

Looked like he clipped his heels to me 

He did. He didn’t intend to but that’s irrelevant as he took out a player he was never going to be able to win the ball fairly against. Similar to the straight red. Jones was unlucky in the sense he.was going for the ball. But the intent doesn’t matter there. It’s a very dangerous challenge the Spurs player kind of realises at the last minute and manages to somehow prevent his foot from being planted in the turf. Otherwise it could’ve been much worse. They’re the exact kind of challenges for which players should get sent off. 

[Dr Gloom 22143]

15 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

If we could keep injury free I'd fancy us as dark horses. Obviously we won't be anywhere near injury free though. 

the injuries to Botman and Joelinton in particular are massive. But Lascelles and Anderson have so far stepped up. The problem is the games are coming thick and fast and our bench suddenly doesn’t look too clever. We could do with Willock making a quick recovery 

[Dr Gloom 22143]

20 minutes ago, Renton said:

Looked like the Spurs player hit Jotas knee and then tripped over himself to me. I don't think Jota intentionally or otherwise clipped him. Stupid second yellow mind. 

whether intentional or not, he takes the bloke out from behind who is breaking quickly. Automatic yellow  

[toonotl 3106]

PGMOL have released a statement acknowledging that Liverpool's goal was wrongly disallowed.  

 

VAR & the entire refereeing fraternity are just wonderful. Never doubted them. Never had a bad word to say about them.

 

More grist to the mill for Klopp's industrial granary of a gob.

[wykikitoon 20713]

Bin dipper last night was full on fume like. Saying on the LiVARpool stuff was sour grapes and they never get decisions 🤣

[Dr Gloom 22143]

3 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

Bin dipper last night was full on fume like. Saying on the LiVARpool stuff was sour grapes and they never get decisions 🤣

no, never 

 

[wykikitoon 20713]

I mentioned Isak and he was too pissed to remember. 

 

Funny  Pgmol come out straight away to apologise to Liverpool yet they don't bother with anyone else. 

[Dr Gloom 22143]

1 minute ago, wykikitoon said:

I mentioned Isak and he was too pissed to remember. 

 

Funny  Pgmol come out straight away to apologise to Liverpool yet they don't bother with anyone else. 

I can understand why they did that in this case given the nature of the fuck up. The bloke in the var booth said check complete presuming that they had given the goal onside. Human error, probably a result of them not wanting to be seen to be taking too long on decisions. They realised the mistake after the game kicked off again, by which time it was too late.

 

such an unfortunate thing to happen to liverpool

 

 

[Kid Dynamite 7169]

7 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

no, never 

 

That's tight, but Isak's shoulder is marginally ahead of the defenders foot. We get enough shit decisions without having to claim conspiracies about dubious ones 

[Kid Dynamite 7169]

2 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

I can understand why they did that in this case given the nature of the fuck up. The bloke in the var booth said check complete presuming that they had given the goal onside. Human error, probably a result of them not wanting to be seen to be taking too long on decisions. They realised the mistake after the game kicked off again, by which time it was too late.

 

such an unfortunate thing to happen to liverpool

 

 

Ref should have just blown after the game had restarted and awarded the goal. I know there would have been hell on, but it doesn't make sense to just ignore the mistake and then admit it at full time 

[Dr Gloom 22143]

14 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

That's tight, but Isak's shoulder is marginally ahead of the defenders foot. We get enough shit decisions without having to claim conspiracies about dubious ones 

that decision is dodgy AF man. I thought it at the time and I still do. His feet are behind the Liverpool defender’s

[Dr Gloom 22143]

16 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Ref should have just blown after the game had restarted and awarded the goal. I know there would have been hell on, but it doesn't make sense to just ignore the mistake and then admit it at full time 

it was probably panic stations in the booth. Realising the size of the fuck up then no one doing anything about it. It’d be interesting to hear the audio back from that one 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Dr Gloom

[wykikitoon 20713]

This is where VAR falls for me. The total lack of transparency. The mics should be on from the ref and when it goes to VAR you should be able to hear everything 

[Gemmill 46023]

Has any other club ever had a PGMOL apology statement come out within hours of full time?

[wykikitoon 20713]

6 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

Has any other club ever had a PGMOL apology statement come out within hours of full time?

No 

[Holden McGroin 6783]

1 hour ago, Kid Dynamite said:

That's tight, but Isak's shoulder is marginally ahead of the defenders foot. We get enough shit decisions without having to claim conspiracies about dubious ones 

There is no way you can be certain from that angle. The lines are bollocks. 

[Holden McGroin 6783]

1 hour ago, Dr Gloom said:

that decision is dodgy AF man. I thought it at the time and I still do. His feet are behind the Liverpool defender’s

It’s not about feet though. It’s any part of the body that can score.

 

I think the rule should be feet though. 

[PaddockLad 17643]

1 hour ago, Gemmill said:

Has any other club ever had a PGMOL apology statement come out within hours of full time?

I think it was minutes rather than hours…

[wykikitoon 20713]

16 minutes ago, Holden McGroin said:

It’s not about feet though. It’s any part of the body that can score.

 

I think the rule should be feet though. 

There was a time when it was 'clear daylight' wasn't there? 

 

Whats it like in Europe? Is it as bad as what we have? Something needs to be done. 

[Kid Dynamite 7169]

1 hour ago, Dr Gloom said:

that decision is dodgy AF man. I thought it at the time and I still do. His feet are behind the Liverpool defender’s

Howay man  Why do you think sprinters lean forward at the finish line.

 

 

[PaddockLad 17643]

5 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

There was a time when it was 'clear daylight' wasn't there? 

 

Whats it like in Europe? Is it as bad as what we have? Something needs to be done. 

Daylight was a guideline in the mid 90s, not a law. 
 

The automated systems used in the men’s & womens  WC recently were rejected by the clubs that form the premier league in favour of keeping the human element in the judgement of decisions. Wonder why?  

Edited October 1, 2023 by PaddockLad

[Alex 35571]

31 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Howay man  Why do you think sprinters lean forward at the finish line.

 

 

Because your torso crossing the line determines that you’ve finished the race. Not really relevant in this sense as this type of offside is essentially the start of a foot race as opposed to the end. However I can see the logic of the law. Because if it was a ball crossed into the box and the defender and attacker weren’t running then you could theoretically gain an ‘unfair’ advantage by having a part of your body in front of the defender when the ball was played. Even if the attacker’s feet weren’t ahead of the defender’s. I think the main point with the Isak one though is that it was offside and, within the current rules, that decision was right. The problem isn’t so much the law, it’s the (in)consistent application of it. As PL mentions, there’s technology available that would appear to remove the potential for human error. If that’s the case then why isn’t it being used? Because offside (similar to whether or not the ball has crossed the line) is not something that shouldn’t be open to interpretation. The worrying thing is VAR is no longer new, yet the issues around it seem no closer to being resolved. That was a fucking incredibly bad decision yesterday, for example. Hilarious too of course 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Alex

[Dr Gloom 22143]

23 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Howay man  Why do you think sprinters lean forward at the finish line.

 

 

it isn’t clear to me from those lines that any part of Isak’s body is ahead of the defender’s foot. I don’t see that he’s gained any advantage from those pictures. They used to talk about the benefit of the doubt going to the attackers. The Isak one is an example of VAR intervening when it isn’t a clear and obvious error. I was raging about it at the time and still think it was a shite use of the technology. 

[Renton 21983]

2 minutes ago, Alex said:

Because your torso crossing the line determines that you’ve finished the race. Not really relevant in this sense as this type of offside is essentially the start of a foot race as opposed to the end. However I can see the logic of the law because if it was a ball crossed into the box and the defender and attacker weren’t running then you could theoretically gain an ‘unfair’ advantage by having a part of you body in front of the defender when the ball the played. Even if the attacker’s feet weren’t ahead of the defender’s. I think the main point with the Isak one is though that, it was offside and, within the current rules that decision was right. The problem isn’t so much the law, it the (in)consistent application of it. As PL mentions, there’s technology available that would appear to remove the potential for human error. If that’s the case then why isn’t it being used. Because offside (like whether or not the ball has crossed the line) is not something that shooed be open to interpretation. The worrying thing is VAR is no longer nee yet the issues around it seem no closer to being resolved. That was a fucking incredibly bad decision yesterday, for example. Hilarious too of course 

Correct. Offside is an objective metric which should be decided by AI very quickly, maybe instantly. It's also by far the most frequent issue of VAR halts and controversies. Personally, I'd like to see a " clear daylight" implementation to benefit the attacking team. More goals, more entertainment. 

[Alex 35571]

12 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

it isn’t clear to me from those lines that any part of Isak’s body is ahead of the defender’s foot. I don’t see that he’s gained any advantage from those pictures. They used to talk about the benefit of the doubt going to the attackers. The Isak one is an example of VAR intervening when it isn’t a clear and obvious error. I was raging about it at the time and still think it was a shite use of the technology. 

That’s a fair point too, because the issue of someone deciding where to put the lines based on their interpretation of exactly when the ball was played is too subjective. Iirc though ‘clear and obvious error’ is not applicable for offsides as they’re either onside or off. Although that goes back to the potential for human error with the placement of the lines 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Alex