Not if he's not interfering with play.
Jurgen Klopp Sack Watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Not if he's not interfering with play.
I guess that's the part I'm struggling with. By virtue being so close and the target of the pass, he is interfering imo.
We are going around in circles I think.
You did read ‘OR if he attempts to save it’. How is an attempted clearance in front of a player clean through on goal not an attempted save?
Wasn't Salah offfside on his first?
I can see both sides TBH, il take it all day long.
One things for sure it's clear VAR wouldn't have cleared this up.
How on earth was it not going to Kane if Lovren didn’t touch it? Where do you expect it would have gone then?
I was just wondering that. But of course, by not receiving the ball direct, his offside position is not relevant in the first instance. Play is then reset by Lovren's touch & he 's fine to be there anyway - which is a bit mad,
.But, when they redrafted the entire offside rule, they committed to having numerous players wandering about in either offside positions or not offside positions who might then accidentally obtain possession I suppose - how does the lino tell the difference?
So, I suppose it's about simplifying the decision back down to the single recipient of the ball - as in, he's back onside again if he's the benefit of deliberate (even if it's incompetent) play by the defence.
(and what a crap post that is by me)
Dier played it back.
At the start I thought it was penalty but I rewatched it like 5 times to make sure. I have to say it's not penalty.
The contact was so soft from VVD & VVD's main intention was to clear the ball away. Look at VVD's eye was on the ball only before the contact, he swing his leg to clear the ball but the moment he realised he won't get the ball, he tried to pull away his leg and ensure the less contact as possible he can do which he did the contact was so soft. Lamela's reaction was so late as well.
Klopp is obviously furious, Mourinho would have been furious as well. But we are all know Mourinho will get punished while Klopp will get away from being sarcastic about referee.
As an United fans, I'm happy with the result.
missed pen anyway, though <--- Lovren again, innit? Just needs to boot it up the park,
Yeah the result of it was irrelevant, other than Lovren being a complete wanker who gives me heart attacks. Can't stand him no matter how many 'good games' he supposedly has.
Dunno what Loserpool fans are whinging about. The "offside" peno was missed - no gain. The second peno was a peno.
You may want to read them yourself (Courtesy of FA - Laws of the game; offside offence):
A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
- interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
- interfering with an opponent by:
- preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
- challenging an opponent for the ball or
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
- gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
- rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent
- been deliberately saved by any opponent
- A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.
The crux here is if some referee body would claim that a deflection at a missed clearance on a ball through on goal should not be covered in the intention of this law, which is possible, but in my opinion, very, very stupid.
I'm not sure what you quoted from the rules is different to what I am saying, especially he first bolded part. In the first instance then Kane was in the offside position from his own teammate pass, as quoted by the rules there, there is nothing to flag him offside. After the attempt of van dyke, which by your own admission, it is a clearance, not a save, the play is resetted.
If you don't know the difference between a block and a clearance, then you just leave the rules to those that know, ok?
Kind of worked out fair, the penalty that wasnt a penalty Kane fluffed it.
2nd is a clear penalty on Lamela, yeah sure Lamela might be in consideration for an oscar for it, but what players dont go down like they are shot nowadays?
That aside some brilliance by Mo Salah, left 3 or 4 defenders in his wake and lobbed the keeper. And an absolute exxocet from Wanyama, I think Karius was still mid air diving whilst the ball was ricocheting past him back into the field of play after slamming into the back of the net.
2nd is a clear penalty on Lamela, yeah sure Lamela might be in consideration for an oscar for it, but what players dont go down like they are shot nowadays?
That aside some brilliance by Mo Salah, left 3 or 4 defenders in his wake and lobbed the keeper. And an absolute exxocet from Wanyama, I think Karius was still mid air diving whilst the ball was ricocheting past him back into the field of play after slamming into the back of the net.
For all the praise Karius is getting today, his punch for Wanyama's goal was hideous. The second penalty is bad defending, simple as. Salah has been incredible this season. It's just typical Liverpool, good goals up top. Terrible at the back, mentally weak and undisciplined/leaderless and unorganised. Always blaming it on something, VAR time, referee's or linesmen, never their fault. Victim mentality and never take responsibility for closing games out. You can't keep conceding and expect to win trophies.
Guys guys, i always thought that klopp needs to do all that dramas and stupid post match interviews hoping to deflect people from talking about how poor his side usually is.. Notice how few of this Liverpool fans mentioning the performance of second half? He is a genius and you guys are the stupid ones falling for it everytime, imo.
2nd penalty, VVD makes a couple of balls ups and boots the Spurs player in blind panic, what's to dispute?
(Apart from the £75m they paid for him, obviously!)
(Apart from the £75m they paid for him, obviously!)
Seeing it from that angle I'm not even sure he went down easily. That must have hurt.
Nice spot, even his own players think hes a clown.Minge in that gif
To be fair Liverpool was robbed there, there is no way in hell both decisions are correct. The first one was offside the second was Barcelona-esque dive by Lamela.
But to our importance of finishing 2nd, this is a great result.
For Kloppo, Boom! hahahahaha
EDIT:
Just saw that gif above. Yeap, definite penalty.
But to our importance of finishing 2nd, this is a great result.
For Kloppo, Boom! hahahahaha
EDIT:
Just saw that gif above. Yeap, definite penalty.
It's a clear penalty. Did the player get the ball? No. Did the player kick the player? Yes....I think the angle can fool people. It's very rare you see a linesman with the guts and fair play to him. The easy route would have been to turn a blind eye but he did his job. That rarely happens when it comes to these type of decisions
I think you need to read the rules again - especially the part about the attempted save - instead of trying to put in a sarcastic jibe at the end of your post.
Yeah, have to agree now. They didn't show that angle during the game. Looked like a pathetic dive at first.
3 sides bro. 3 sides for every story.
That's my opinion too. How can Kane not interfere when he was next to Lovren and pass was directed to him?
For me it was offside. Second one was clear penalty.
So you are saying that lovren have an attempted save?
Attempted save:
Keeper dived to block / save the ball
Defender dive to block / save the ball
For lovren, non of the above applies. It is not even classified as a deflection as it is a clear attempt at clearance. Are you trying very hard to make a fool out of yourself?
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...-carragher-laments-dejan-lovrens-14245550.amp
Glad to see he's moved on from "United's offside goal" to "Spurs' offside penalty". Should keep him going for another 6 months.
You have to read the one on interference as quoted in the rules above. Being close to lovren is not enough to be classed as interference. If you went through the list above, you will see that Kane had done nothing to interfere in an offside position. If you can find one that applies to Kane, please do quote it. It is pretty much black and white and not in the opinion of us.
Again with the constant crappy attempts at sarcasm. Are you incapable of having a discussion without throwing in a personal insult?So you are saying that lovren have an attempted save?
Attempted save:
Keeper dived to block / save the ball
Defender dive to block / save the ball
For lovren, non of the above applies. It is not even classified as a deflection as it is a clear attempt at clearance. Are you trying very hard to make a fool out of yourself?
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...-carragher-laments-dejan-lovrens-14245550.amp
Let me try this one more time. Kane was offside when the ball was played "towards him" by Ali. Lovren tried to intercept a ball going towards goal. He didn't get a clean contact and the ball, despite a marginal deflection, still went through to Kane who was offside. The play wasn't reset because a defender tried to make an unsuccessful clearance of a through ball. That is where the FA rules kick in about an "attempted stop for a ball moving towards goal".
How is that so difficult to understand?
He doesn't need to "interfere". He gained an advantage from an offside position. Even that's listed out. You really need to read the rules properly again before replying.
Don’t care about the first penalty. It wasn’t but rules might stupidly dictate it was. Shite rule, shite penalty. No doubt about the second, wild swing, catches him. Deserved equaliser.
And just to make sure you completely understand, I'll quote it from the above again, which is pivotal:
- A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.
A: yes, judging by his swing of the leg to attempt a clearance. I think everyone (unless issues with sight) agrees lovren tried to clear the ball. I think everyone agrees attempt to clear the ball is a deliberate attempt to play the ball (unless logic fails you)
Q: Did lovren touch the ball from his attempted clearance?
A: yes. Wherever the ball goes after is immaterial.
The rules didn't actually say anything about deliberately playing the ball means the ball has to travel in the direction of the intended target did it?
I'm not even sure why this is worth a debate. Pretty much black and white and nothing to argue about. You will be hard press to find an official or even an article to agree with klopp that it was offside.
From the bullets points above about interference, going through one by one:
- interfering with an opponent by:
- preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision - Kane did not prevent lovren being able to play the ball or obstructing lovren, agree?
- challenging an opponent for the ball - Kane did not challenge lovren, agree?
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent - Kane did not attempt to play the ball before lovren touch it, agree?
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball - Kane did not impact the ability of lovren to play the ball, agree?
- A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.
Last edited:
Ok, I'll try one as polite as I can.
Attempted clearance is not an attempted save. I sincerely hope you see the difference.
One involves trying to kick the ball, the other is just trying to put your body in between the ball and the goal and hope for a block. I hope you can see which is which.
This is obvious for me, Lovren would have never attempted to clear the ball so hastily if he knew Kane wasn't right beside him and in on goal if he didn't clear it; otherwise he could've easily let it go to Karius. I don't understand how the referee (even Gallaghar on television, though I doubt one referee would go against another on television) could deem that Lovren's actions were not influenced by Kane's positioning on goal. It's an offside decision I've seen regularly in football, be in the Premier League or Bundesliga.
His command of the English language is poor. I think he needs to slow down and think before he speaks.
Incorrect. Please see a better explanation from fellow caf here :
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/state-of-the-refs-in-this-country.421006/page-7
It's a matter of opinion I suppose as I've seen plenty of similar decisions already happen. But like I said in the same thread, it's a human trait so you can't take it out of the referee, only try to help him make better./consistent decisions with the help of technology. Even if the argument can be made that the offside shouldn't have been give, it was a clear dive by Kane in any case.