Virgil van Dijk | Performances

Honestly, there should be lengthy bans for this type of challenge. In a fair world, Pickford should not be allowed to play until VVD comes back. Sure, there are always injuries involved, but this type of challenge was beyond reckless.
 
Revan said:
Honestly, there should be lengthy bans for this type of challenge. In a fair world, Pickford should not be allowed to play until VVD comes back. Sure, there are always injuries involved, but this type of challenge was beyond reckless.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, it would often be hugely unfair that the extent of an injury would determine the length of punishment.

In an ideal world there shouldn't be a need for retrospective bans anymore since VAR would take over that role for whichever incidents the referees have missed. In that case Pickford is just very lucky and the VAR that missed this horrible tackle should be banned from refereeing for a few weeks (and maybe even fined although that would obviously not go down well with the referees so would be impossible to implement).
 
AltiUn said:
Annoyingly I can see Liverpool now spending over the odds for Upamecano in January instead of waiting for the summer release clause and have a view to have him be VVD's long term partner.
Click to expand...
They have no money to do that. Gonna be Matic, Gomes and Fabinho playing there (which means that they will be weaker in midfield without Fabinho).
 
I cannot understand why a Goal keeper would go with legs when they are allowed to use their hands.
 
RobinLFC said:
On the contrary, it would often be hugely unfair that the extent of an injury would determine the length of punishment.

In an ideal world there shouldn't be a need for retrospective bans anymore since VAR would take over that role for whichever incidents the referees have missed. In that case Pickford is just very lucky and the VAR that missed this horrible tackle should be banned from refereeing for a few weeks (and maybe even fined although that would obviously not go down well with the referees so would be impossible to implement).
Click to expand...

I agree with this, otherwise where do you stop?

VAR had a look at it and got the decision wrong. This is where they need to look at VAR and how it can be improved.
 
RobinLFC said:
On the contrary, it would often be hugely unfair that the extent of an injury would determine the length of punishment.

In an ideal world there shouldn't be a need for retrospective bans anymore since VAR would take over that role for whichever incidents the referees have missed. In that case Pickford is just very lucky and the VAR that missed this horrible tackle should be banned from refereeing for a few weeks (and maybe even fined although that would obviously not go down well with the referees so would be impossible to implement).
Click to expand...
I really do not agree. People would think twice before they make these potentially career-ending challenges if they would know that they can be in trouble too. As it is, you can try and injure someone and get away with 3 matches suspension (or if you are lucky like Pickford, without even a yellow card).

Agree about the VAR referee. IMO, he should get a very lengthy ban too.
 
Revan said:
Honestly, there should be lengthy bans for this type of challenge. In a fair world, Pickford should not be allowed to play until VVD comes back. Sure, there are always injuries involved, but this type of challenge was beyond reckless.
Click to expand...

This is such an illogical demand. A genuinely malicious tackle could see a young, fit player out for 5 or 6 games with a badly sprained ankle while a clumsy challenge on an older less robust player could see them out for 18 month with a broken ankle and a complicated and frustrating road to recovery.

The resulting injury is absolutely no reflection of the intent and malice of a challenge and should never be considered as a factor when deciding a punishment.
 
Revan said:
Honestly, there should be lengthy bans for this type of challenge. In a fair world, Pickford should not be allowed to play until VVD comes back. Sure, there are always injuries involved, but this type of challenge was beyond reckless.
Click to expand...
That's not fair at all. Imagine two chaps getting a 1 game ban and the other an 8 month for identical challenges merely due to difference in injury to the recipient thereof. It would be completely illogical.

Also, dangerous tackles are a part of a contact sport. I'd give ones like this one a ban of 5 games or so, AND a financial penalty, to act as a deterrent. But it's not like this is unique. Every now and then a player oversteps the mark and this is just one such incident.
 
Pexbo said:
This is such an illogical demand. A genuinely malicious tackle could see a young, fit player out for 5 or 6 games with a badly sprained ankle while a clumsy challenge on an older less robust player could see them out for 18 month with a broken ankle and a complicated and frustrating road to recovery.

The resulting injury is absolutely no reflection of the intent and malice of a challenge and should never be considered as a factor when deciding a punishment.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And if we’re punishing based on malice rather than outcome, Luke Shaw should be banned for much longer than Pickford.
 
Revan said:
I really do not agree. People would think twice before they make these potentially career-ending challenges if they would know that they can be in trouble too. As it is, you can try and injure someone and get away with 3 matches suspension (or if you are lucky like Pickford, without even a yellow card).

Agree about the VAR referee. IMO, he should get a very lengthy ban too.
Click to expand...
But I could put in a career-ending challenge which you miraculously escape and get off the hook because you're not injured, yet I could step on your toe at the next corner which you then break and I'd be banned for 6 weeks? Doesn't make sense at all, we should make abstraction of the outcome and just look at the challenge to determine punishment. If Van Dijk continues playing, there would still be calls for a retrospective ban imo but it wouldn't have gotten that much attention.
 
romufc said:
I cannot understand why a Goal keeper would go with legs when they are allowed to use their hands.
Click to expand...

Yes, they can. However, if they do that they are essentially putting their face in the way of a knee from the attacking player.
 
Dave Smith said:
Yes, they can. However, if they do that they are essentially putting their face in the way of a knee from the attacking player.
Click to expand...

Yes, I get that but in this instance, there was no need to go with legs.
 
ColoRed said:
Becker and van Dijk out means they have to score at least three goals to win
Click to expand...
Next two PL games are against Sheffield and West Ham at home, we should be fine and Alisson might even be back for them, and will definitely be back for City in the beginning of November.

It's not all doom & gloom - easy to forget in the grand scheme of things but we should've easily won Saturday against one of the (up until now) strongest looking teams in the league in a derby. Of course it didn't happen but we looked much improved and more hungry already than against Villa. Hopefully VVD's injury will get everyone even more fired up to put in a shift and prove themselves.
 
ColoRed said:
Becker and van Dijk out means they have to score at least three goals to win
Click to expand...
Clean sheets seem impossible, given how Adrian will let through a high percentage of any moderate quality shot at him. And be likely to gift the opposition high quality chances out of nowhere. He's so clearly lost his head as well. Simply not fit to be playing right now. He's definitely the weakest part of our squad.
 
Matip apparently injured again again again.

We're boned.
 
Who's Kissing Cameras? said:
No injuries for 3 years straight and then boom an ACL. Feel sorry for him but will be interesting to see how Liverpool cope without him. I don’t think they will well.
Click to expand...
So it has been confirmed. Without him the title race is blown wide open. Liverpool will still be there at the end but they won’t run away with it now. The confidence VVD gave that Liverpool team was immense.
 
B20 said:
Clean sheets seem impossible, given how Adrian will let through a high percentage of any moderate quality shot at him. And be likely to gift the opposition high quality chances out of nowhere. He's so clearly lost his head as well. Simply not fit to be playing right now. He's definitely the weakest part of our squad.
Click to expand...

How long is Alisson out for?
 
Revan said:
Honestly, there should be lengthy bans for this type of challenge. In a fair world, Pickford should not be allowed to play until VVD comes back. Sure, there are always injuries involved, but this type of challenge was beyond reckless.
Click to expand...
You can't start banning players for the duration of an injury. Players can get injured in the most innocuous of challenges.
 
RobinLFC said:
On the contrary, it would often be hugely unfair that the extent of an injury would determine the length of punishment.

In an ideal world there shouldn't be a need for retrospective bans anymore since VAR would take over that role for whichever incidents the referees have missed. In that case Pickford is just very lucky and the VAR that missed this horrible tackle should be banned from refereeing for a few weeks (and maybe even fined although that would obviously not go down well with the referees so would be impossible to implement).
Click to expand...
This. Absolutely.
 
Santos J said:
How long is Alisson out for?
Click to expand...
Initial comments were "4 weeks possible, 6 weeks likely" in the beginning of October, but Klopp was very positive about his recovery before the Everton game. I think he'll be back against City (Nov 7).
 
I can't help but feel people saying Pickford should be banned for as long as VVD is injured have never stepped onto a pitch at any level, it's just weird irrational thinking.
 
Revan said:
Honestly, there should be lengthy bans for this type of challenge. In a fair world, Pickford should not be allowed to play until VVD comes back. Sure, there are always injuries involved, but this type of challenge was beyond reckless.
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure that rewarding Everton is the answer here
 
They'll be ok, still a very very strong team even without VVD. Alisson will be back soon, they have the best full backs in the world, Salah is on top form right now, mane is incredible plus thiago is great in midfield.
 
YAMS49 said:
You can't start banning players for the duration of an injury. Players can get injured in the most innocuous of challenges.
Click to expand...
Imagine making a standard poorly timed tackle on someone with a gammy leg, ending their career, and also your own!
 
One thing that I reckon is absolutely certain is that however Liverpool get on in his absence will be what defines his legacy.
 
shaky said:
Imagine making a standard poorly timed tackle on someone with a gammy leg, ending their career, and also your own!
Click to expand...
I know. It's a nuts suggestion and one that only rears it head when this kind of perceived injustice occurs. The same happened when Shawcross injured Ramsey & Taylor injured Eduardo. It's very unfortunate/amusing dependent on your prerogative but part of the game. Get over it.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
He needs a therapist. He always plays like that. The fella isn’t right in the head.
Click to expand...
Yup, always said it, he’ll be in the Championship within a few seasons, not before he’s ruined someone’s career though...

He plays like the chavvy kid overdosed on Red Bull on the school playground who thinks he’s the best but is just a lunatic diving in at people.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
He needs a therapist. He always plays like that. The fella isn’t right in the head.
Click to expand...
Yeah. He may not have consciously intended to hurt VVD but that part of the brain that should be telling him "this could be seriously dangerous" just doesn't seem to switch on. Doesn't seem to have any impulse consideration, let alone impulse control.
 
Last edited:
B20 said:
Matip apparently injured again again again.

We're boned.
Click to expand...
That's bad news. But to be fair, this is actually the normal. We seem to have an injury crisis at least once if not more times per season, possibly with the exception of last season under Ole.
 
Pow said:
Van dijk has seldom missed a game since he signed. Shall we see what the defensive record was like prior to that ? (even moreso with allisson still out )
Click to expand...
I think their midfield is miles better so on paper it should leave them less vulnerable having Fabinho, Thiago and Henderson to control games and expose the defence less than the pre VVD days.
 
The reactions to this by some pundits are hilarious. Acting like he's died or something. He's done his ACL. Shit happens in football. We dont need to make a special case for him. He'll be back eventually. Football today is just cringy as feck.
 
I don't think even Neuer got so much shit for his knee smash on Higuain in the world cup final.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
I think their midfield is miles better so on paper it should leave them less vulnerable having Fabinho, Thiago and Henderson to control games and expose the defence less than the pre VVD days.
Click to expand...
True but will they play that incredibly high line without VVD? Will they be able to without his range forcing the opposition deep? I’m not convinced Fabinho has his range or consistency as good a passer as he is.
 
Depending on his recovery date, it might not mean as much. City in November will be their first difficult match, on paper at least. Arguably Ajax. In between the CL matches they have easy fixtures.
 
I dont get the outpouring of sympathy.

No sane human would wish harm on another.. but also, your wish makes no difference to what happens in reality.. its irrelevant.

He is out for the season. Liverpool are going to be severely weakened.. If I could control things, I would have him miss a drugs test by a day and get suspended for 8 months instead. but again.. I dont have any say in what happens..

The result is Liverpool will be without their best player for the season. I don't think I can pretend to be sad about this.
 
Do people really think that the GK's challenge was malicious? Just struck me as careless.

I remember United (when we were the best, as Liverpool are now) struggling a lot when Rio Ferdinand had the 8 month ban. I can see Liverpool missing VVD in the same way.

Also, not the worst age to pick up that injury, but not the best age either. He'll come back in his 30's and take a while to catch up to pace again.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
That's bad news. But to be fair, this is actually the normal. We seem to have an injury crisis at least once if not more times per season, possibly with the exception of last season under Ole.
Click to expand...
No it's not. You guys having an inferior medical staff (or just really bad luck with injuries for several consecutive years, whichever way you wanna look at it) does not mean that having one or multiple injury crisis (per year) is "the normal".

For us the normal is having 3 out of our back 4 fit and playing someone who's fit alongside VVD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.