Premier League Festive Season (Gameweek 18-20)

Klopper76 said:
Not really convinced we can win it. We look pretty vulnerable whenever a team plays through our press, like we can concede at any moment in a match. 34 shots and 15 on target is a good effort though. No Salah for a while will hurt.

Feels like City will win it on 85 points or thereabouts. Nice that there are a few teams close together at the midway point though.
Click to expand...

You’ll need someone to step up for Salah as it feels like he’s carrying you at the moment.

Thoughts on the pen?
 
Anustart89 said:
He plants the left foot in the ground and then the leg gives way in a way that obviously shows that it's not the contact that's taken him down, but rather his own decision. That is specifically what refs are supposed to look for.

https://www.sportbible.com/football...out-fewer-soft-penalties-next-season-20210803
Click to expand...
I imagine myself in the Jota scenario and I definitely think that's enough to take me out of balance and ruin my shot. You don't give up a guaranteed goal for no reason like that. Neville has never ran as fast or turned as fast as Jota in his life and he doesn't know what it's like to dribble past a goalkeeper so he's just assuming malice and doing the typical commentator thing of sticking with the first thought that comes into your head.
 
Blood Mage said:
I'd like to think Liverpool will disappear into the abyss after Salah declines but knowing Klopp he'll find some other brilliant bastard to replace him with eventually.
Click to expand...
A lot said he was wrong to give him a new contract, should’ve kept Mane instead. Seems like he picked right there :lol:
 
Blood Mage said:
I'd like to think Liverpool will disappear into the abyss after Salah declines but knowing Klopp he'll find some other brilliant bastard to replace him with eventually.
Click to expand...
They'll get £200m+ from Saudi to replace him.
 
Skills said:
Salah was always much better than Mane. It was never even close.
Click to expand...
Of course, but that didn’t stop people saying they should cut him loose and maintain the wage cap. He’s 31, it could’ve backfired pretty badly.
 
Snow said:
I imagine myself in the Jota scenario and I definitely think that's enough to take me out of balance and ruin my shot. You don't give up a guaranteed goal for no reason like that. Neville has never ran as fast or turned as fast as Jota in his life and he doesn't know what it's like to dribble past a goalkeeper so he's just assuming malice and doing the typical commentator thing of sticking with the first thought that comes into your head.
Click to expand...

That's what I think, you can see the contact grounds Jota for a split second and makes him loose momentum. So he decides to make the contact obvious to the ref by diving. It shouldn't be this way but that's the way it works.
 
TheReligion said:
You’ll need someone to step up for Salah as it feels like he’s carrying you at the moment.

Thoughts on the pen?
Click to expand...
I think we might shove Diaz or Elliott out there. I’d be tempted to put TAA there but Gomez is busy playing LB so we probably can’t do that.

I saw most of the game but conveniently missed that incident I’m afraid.
 
kaku06 said:
That’s not cut and dried. You can still get a pen and red card if it’s blatant and a definite goal. The reason dubravka didn’t get a red card was one, Jota going away from goal and two, there were 2 Newcastle defenders rushing in towards the goal line.
Click to expand...

Was it not because he made a genuine attempt to play the ball?

EDIT: I see that's been covered
 
Snow said:
I imagine myself in the Jota scenario and I definitely think that's enough to take me out of balance and ruin my shot. You don't give up a guaranteed goal for no reason like that. Neville has never ran as fast or turned as fast as Jota in his life and he doesn't know what it's like to dribble past a goalkeeper so he's just assuming malice and doing the typical commentator thing of sticking with the first thought that comes into your head.
Click to expand...
If he'd gone down instantly then I'd say "alright he's running at pace and he's nudged so I can understand VAR not overturning it".

But just look at the fall. He takes another step, plants the foot that was tackled, and then his knee suddenly gives way in a manner that is not a consequence of the contact as he's already shown that his balance is fine after the contact. That indicates that rather than being taken down, the player has chosen to go down making it a dive. As for why he's chosen to do that with an open goal, you'd have to ask him but I can just assume it's an instinctive brainfart, just like Darwin ignoring to score a goal against us to appeal for a penalty was.
 
Klopper76 said:
Not really convinced we can win it. We look pretty vulnerable whenever a team plays through our press, like we can concede at any moment in a match. 34 shots and 15 on target is a good effort though. No Salah for a while will hurt.

Feels like City will win it on 85 points or thereabouts. Nice that there are a few teams close together at the midway point though.
Click to expand...

Klopp is the only one who can do it.
 
Oly Francis said:
That's what I think, you can see the contact grounds Jota for a split second and makes him loose momentum. So he decides to make the contact obvious to the ref by diving. It shouldn't be this way but that's the way it works.
Click to expand...

As said not every contact is a foul. It’s a contact sport.
 
Anustart89 said:
If he'd gone down instantly then I'd say "alright he's running at pace and he's nudged so I can understand VAR not overturning it".

But just look at the fall. He takes another step, plants the foot that was tackled, and then his knee suddenly gives way in a manner that is not a consequence of the contact as he's already shown that his balance is fine after the contact. That indicates that rather than being taken down, the player has chosen to go down making it a dive.
Click to expand...
He does help himself down but I'm saying he does that because the foul took him off balance so he couldn't get off the shot with his left. His legs and hips weren't in sync after the contact which means you're off balance.

If the contact is made with the right leg I don't think Jota goes down there.
 
Snow said:
I imagine myself in the Jota scenario and I definitely think that's enough to take me out of balance and ruin my shot. You don't give up a guaranteed goal for no reason like that. Neville has never ran as fast or turned as fast as Jota in his life and he doesn't know what it's like to dribble past a goalkeeper so he's just assuming malice and doing the typical commentator thing of sticking with the first thought that comes into your head.
Click to expand...
I’d agree with that. Have been in the same position and it doesn’t take much to lose your balance.
 
Snow said:
I imagine myself in the Jota scenario and I definitely think that's enough to take me out of balance and ruin my shot. You don't give up a guaranteed goal for no reason like that. Neville has never ran as fast or turned as fast as Jota in his life and he doesn't know what it's like to dribble past a goalkeeper so he's just assuming malice and doing the typical commentator thing of sticking with the first thought that comes into your head.
Click to expand...
Berbaclass said:
Click to expand...


Really?
 
Anustart89 said:
If he'd gone down instantly then I'd say "alright he's running at pace and he's nudged so I can understand VAR not overturning it".

But just look at the fall. He takes another step, plants the foot that was tackled, and then his knee suddenly gives way in a manner that is not a consequence of the contact as he's already shown that his balance is fine after the contact. That indicates that rather than being taken down, the player has chosen to go down making it a dive. As for why he's chosen to do that with an open goal, you'd have to ask him but I can just assume it's an instinctive brainfart, just like Darwin ignoring to score a goal against us to appeal for a penalty was.
Click to expand...

He obviously falls on purpose but that doesn't mean that his balance is fine after the contact. I actually think that he falls after an extra step because he realized his balance isn't fine.
 
Snow said:
He does help himself down but I'm saying he does that because the foul took him off balance so he couldn't get off the shot with his left. His legs and hips weren't in sync after the contact which means you're off balance.

If the contact is made with the right leg I don't think Jota goes down there.
Click to expand...

Looks so little contact though..I need to see more

 
KirkDuyt said:
I think the rule is that it's a yellow if there is an attempt to play the ball. If you purely stop the man without going for the ball, it's still a red.

In this case however, it's a yellow for the olympic diver.
Click to expand...
Anustart89 said:
No that's not true. If you deny an obvious goalscoring opportunity and it's inside the box then it's yellow if it's a genuine attempt to play the ball. Covering defenders had nothing to do with it, had that happened just outside the box then he would've been sent off.
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s correct.
 
TheReligion said:
Really?
Click to expand...
Yes absolutely. Look at the left leg. He's expecting to go past the keeper and slot it in with his left. Dubravka hits the left leg which takes the momentum away and him off balance. His left leg doesn't even make it to take the shot.

It's a bit like stumpling when walking on a sidewalk when there's a sudden bump that you don't see. Your normal walk is broken by bump which causes you to stumble but not really fall. Stumbling and not really falling in that scenario is enough to deny the goal scoring opportunity.
 
TheReligion said:
As said not every contact is a foul. It’s a contact sport.
Click to expand...

As said, if the contact has consequences, it's a foul. So if said contact threw Jota slightly off balance or out of sync, it's a pen, with or without the dive.
 
Snow said:
Yes absolutely. Look at the left leg. He's expecting to go past the keeper and slot it in with his left. Dubravka hits the left leg which takes the momentum away and him off balance. His left leg doesn't even make it to take the shot.

It's a bit like stumpling when walking on a sidewalk when there's a sudden bump that you don't see. Your normal walk is broken by bump which causes you to stumble but not really fall. Stumbling and not really falling in that scenario is enough to deny the goal scoring opportunity.
Click to expand...

Sorry I think you’re seeing something that isn’t there. The contact is minimal and not enough for a foul. I mentioned in the VAR thread Webb went into detail about this when discussing one that wrongly went against Wolves (think it was Silva V Sheff United).

He accepted that it is a contact sport and not every contact is a foul. It’s got to be deemed enough force.

He should have been sent to look at that again
 
Oly Francis said:
As said, if the contact has consequences, it's a foul. So if said contact threw Jota slightly off balance or out of sync, it's a pen, with or without the dive.
Click to expand...

The contact isn’t enough in terms of force to cause the outcome

He should have been sent to look at it again
 
mav_9me said:
Looks so little contact though..I need to see more

Click to expand...

If I'd break into your home and raise a door threshold by 1mm it would be enough to trip you over. That's how our brain work. We have entire self defense disciplines that teach us how little force is needed to upend a person. It really doesn't take much to trip a player who's on the run and turning. Slight clip on the heel, a nudge on the studs. All of that can knock you off balance.

The argument here is if taking a person off balance constitutes as a foul. I can agree within those parameters that taking someone slightly off balance isn't a foul and therefor this isn't a penalty. I don't believe those are the parameters that football operates in and therefor it's a penalty. I'd love to have the bar for fouls raised in general.
 
Withnail said:
That's absolutely not the criteria used
Click to expand...

I was refeering to an article posted 2 pages ago. But maybe Mike Riley doesn't know what he's talking about.

After feedback from players and coaches earlier this year, referee chief Mike Riley has told officials that contact won't be enough and they'll have to decide if it has consequence and whether or not players are simply using the excuse of contact to go down.
"It's not sufficient just to say 'yes, there was contact,' Riley said.
"Contact on its own is only part of what referees should look for. If you've got clear contact that has a consequence, then that's what you have got to penalise.
Click to expand...
 
Snow said:
If I'd break into your home and raise a door threshold by 1mm it would be enough to trip you over. That's how our brain work. We have entire self defense disciplines that teach us how little force is needed to upend a person. It really doesn't take much to trip a player who's on the run and turning. Slight clip on the heel, a nudge on the studs. All of that can knock you off balance.

The argument here is if taking a person off balance constitutes as a foul. I can agree within those parameters that taking someone slightly off balance isn't a foul and therefor this isn't a penalty. I don't believe those are the parameters that football operates in and therefor it's a penalty. I'd love to have the bar for fouls raised in general.
Click to expand...

I actually feel that if a defender/ GK is diving in/rushing, the onus should not be on the attacker to jump and keep his balance... my personal opinion is a rash challenge without contract can also thrown someone off balance and that should be a pen.

I need to see a replay in real time to decide.
 
Newcastle have just lost their 8th game in 9 giving up a record Xg of 7.5 in one game. The sky interview with Howe had the interviewer herself listing all the things going against Newcastle at the moment - including the fecking weather tonight apparently. Carragher states once they get players back they’ll be brilliant and you can’t possibly expect any more from them. Interesting comparison in narratives.
 
TheReligion said:
Sorry I think you’re seeing something that isn’t there. The contact is minimal and not enough for a foul. I mentioned in the VAR thread Webb went into detail about this when discussing one that wrongly went against Wolves (think it was Silva V Sheff United).

He accepted that it is a contact sport and not every contact is a foul. It’s got to be deemed enough force.

He should have been sent to look at that again
Click to expand...
No I'm seeing the same thing as you. We both see the contact and Jota losing balance and Jota deciding to go down because he felt he lost enough balance to finish the chance. I don't disagree that Taylor should see it again but I think he'll come to the same conclusion because the refs in the VAR booth thought he made the correct call.

I do prefer the ref making the call on the pitch and that was an improvement from Taylor this match. He didn't make VAR do the decisions for him.
 
mav_9me said:
I actually feel that if a defender/ GK is diving in/rushing, the onus should not be on the attacker to jump and keep his balance... my personal opinion is a rash challenge without contract can also thrown someone off balance and that should be a pen.

I need to see a replay in real time to decide.
Click to expand...
Yeah basically. So easy to round a person rushing at you as well. Players should relish a keeper coming at them like that.
 
Snow said:
No I'm seeing the same thing as you. We both see the contact and Jota losing balance and Jota deciding to go down because he felt he lost enough balance to finish the chance. I don't disagree that Taylor should see it again but I think he'll come to the same conclusion because the refs in the VAR booth thought he made the correct call.

I do prefer the ref making the call on the pitch and that was an improvement from Taylor this match. He didn't make VAR do the decisions for him.
Click to expand...

Which is not a penalty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.