Premier Lg EPL Matchday 7 - On Optus Sport

[The Cryptkeeper]

Coming from the guy who throws his toys out the pram, gets abusive and behaves like a dickhead all because factual information upsets him.

This is pretty funny.


As I said previously now that you admitted you were wrong about the replay possibility we could all move on from it.


But you keep coming back for more and keep melting.

I have admitted nothing.

There is ZERO possibility of a replay. ZERO. NONE, NADA, F***ALL.

Get that through your rather thick scone you silly, little man.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Not even the shock of a Chelsea win and Mudryk scoring could stop this trainwreck from continuing.

Burn the matchweek.
I'm still annoyed to go out to a Luton win

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Nottingham Forest fans criticised for singing controversial chant against Liverpool

Nottingham Forest fans have been criticised after they were heard singing offensive chants towards Liverpool fans at the City Ground on Saturday.

www.joe.co.uk

Manchester United hit out at their fans' anti-Liverpool 'victim' chant | Manchester United | The Guardian

Manchester United said the club deplored an inflammatory chant aimed at Liverpool at Old Trafford

amp.theguardian.com

Chelsea fans sing vile Hillsborough chant at Liverpool after Man City incident

Chelsea supporters were heard chanting about the Hillsborough Stadium disaster during their Premier League match against Liverpool at Stamford Bridge on Tuesday night

www.mirror.co.uk

Man City issue statement in relation to chants during Liverpool game

Manchester City have issued a statement apologising for chants aimed at Liverpool supporters during the game at the Etihad.

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

This was just the first page of a google search. I’m not saying the poster meant to make a jibe about Hillsborough - I’m just pointing out the link between that specific phrase and the Hillsborough disaster.

So when pretty much nobody would have identified that as a slur you though it would be a good idea to highlight it and out a guy who almost certainly was talking only in the context of on field events?

It's an interesting approach.

 

[Frank Bunn]

FFS. The VAR protocol specifically says the referee can proceed with an invalid review and it doesn't affect the outcome of the game. It's literally in the rules you have been quoted. The VAR team absolutely could have demanded the game be stopped immediately as they were fully aware that the goal had been scored. It wouldn't have affected the game at all and is allowed under VAR protocol.

The laws of the game allow a review outside the normal guidelines without any negative consequences.

I cited IFAB rules around VAR that say -

If play has stopped and has been restarted, the referee may not undertake a review except for a case of mistaken identity, or a potential sending off offence relating to violent conduct, spitting, biting or extremely offensive and/or abusive actions.​

None of these conditions applied so play could not be called back on review after the invalid free kick was taken.

You smashed some screengrabs of laws that did not apply, such as about incapacitated VAR officials.

 

[Indie_]

So when pretty much nobody would have identified that as a slur you though it would be a good idea to highlight it and out a guy who almost certainly was talking only in the context of on field events?

It's an interesting approach.

Any Liverpool fan would immediately be able to identify that phrase and the connotations it has.

I do think it’s a good idea that when you see someone use a phrase which has such terrible connotations (especially in the context where they don’t know about said connotations) to let them know about the history of that phrase so that they don’t use it moving forward. Who knows who reads these threads and what their connections might be to Hillsborough/other similar disasters may be and how reading those words may make them feel?

No one is excoriating the poster - I’m just saying they should use different words to express their dislike of Liverpool. I don’t think that’s such a big ask personally.

 

[ADL9798]

I’m not suggesting corruption or that this was a factor in their performance in our game, but surely as a matter of principle, PL referees having a side hustle in UAE/Saudi football leagues and being on the payroll is a pretty big conflict of interest when we have state owned clubs in the PL?

Can someone explain to me why this wouldn’t be an issue?

 

[typeclub]

The entire VAR team were aware. The VAR check ongoing messaged remained while the game was restarted. They were fully aware that the goal had been scored but remained quiet when the game was restarting. As the VAR decision on offside is final and binding this has huge consequences and is outside the remit of a normal referee error where they simply make a mistake.

The referee didn't make any errors he had a flawless performance. He heard 'Check complete' and carried on his magnificent officiating. The VAR official also did a good job seeing the goal was scored and allowed it. Neither of their integrity has been breached.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Any Liverpool fan would immediately be able to identify that phrase and the connotations it has.

I do think it’s a good idea that when you see someone use a phrase which has such terrible connotations (especially in the context where they don’t know about said connotations) to let them know about the history of that phrase so that they don’t use it moving forward. Who knows who reads these threads and what their connections might be to Hillsborough/other similar disasters may be and how reading those words may make them feel?

No one is excoriating the poster - I’m just saying they should use different words to express their dislike of Liverpool. I don’t think that’s such a big ask personally.

Fair enough. I would have PM'd him myself but accept your considered response.

 

[Zidane98]

I cited IFAB rules around VAR that say -

If play has stopped and has been restarted, the referee may not undertake a review except for a case of mistaken identity, or a potential sending off offence relating to violent conduct, spitting, biting or extremely offensive and/or abusive actions.​

None of these conditions applied so play could not be called back on review after the invalid free kick was taken.

You smashed some screengrabs of laws that did not apply, such as about incapacitated VAR officials.

You are ignoring the fact that IFAB VAR protocol specifically says the referee can complete a review outside the bounds of normal guidelines without affecting the game. So while the game had been restarted and the guidelines say a review shouldn't be undertaken VAR can still call for a review without any affect on the game. It's literally written in the rules that this is allowed. Most likely for highly unusual situations like this.

In short, VAR must have intervened and informed the referee immediately a goal had been scored even when play had been restarted. As the decision to offside is solely up to VAR and is final they really had no option but to inform the referee at this point. It wouild then be up to the onfield referee on how to deal with the situation.

Infact if that happened and the referee decided to then proceed with the game that would be a decision made about the goal and the integrity of the game wouldn't have been compromised. But instead we have VAR who has the final say on a goal being scored ruling a goal had been scored doing nothing while the game was being restarted. This is simply not allowed under IFAB VAR protocol. Basic law was not followed, a goal was scored and the VAR's decision on offside is final and binding.

 

[Frank Bunn]

You are ignoring the fact that IFAB VAR protocol specifically says the referee can complete a review outside the bounds of normal guidelines without affecting the game. So while the game had been restarted and the guidelines say a review shouldn't be undertaken VAR can still call for a review without any affect on the game. It's literally written in the rules that this is allowed. Most likely for highly unusual situations like this.

In short, VAR must have intervened and informed the referee immediately a goal had been scored even when play had been restarted. As the decision to offside is solely up to VAR and is final they really had no option but to inform the referee at this point. It wouild then be up to the onfield referee on how to deal with the situation.

Infact if that happened and the referee decided to then proceed with the game that would be a decision made about the goal and the integrity of the game wouldn't have been compromised. But instead we have VAR who has the final say on a goal being scored ruling a goal had been scored doing nothing while the game was being restarted. This is simply not allowed under IFAB VAR protocol. Basic law was not followed, a goal was scored and the VAR's decision on offside is final and binding.

You smashed some screengrabs of laws that did not apply, such as about incapacitated VAR officials.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Anyway I’ve seen a couple of Chelsea games and it’s not all that bad. Obviously finishing the issue.

I’m not suggesting corruption or that this was a factor in their performance in our game, but surely as a matter of principle, PL referees having a side hustle in UAE/Saudi football leagues and being on the payroll is a pretty big conflict of interest when we have state owned clubs in the PL?

Can someone explain to me why this wouldn’t be an issue?

Ask Howard Webb …he approved refs being able to work abroad in other leagues.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Maybe we should replay the game.

If it stops Liverpool foamers from beating their wives and trashing towns then maybe that is a more palatable outcome.

These people have gone full Trump. It's bizarre but we need to protect ourselves.

 

[Zidane98]

You smashed some screengrabs of laws that did not apply, such as about incapacitated VAR officials.

As usual you're wrong. That's a completely different rule you're quoting.

Match validity​

In principle, a match is not invalidated because of:

• malfunction(s) of the VAR technology (as for goal line technology (GLT))
• wrong decision(s) involving the VAR (as the VAR is a match official)
• decision(s) not to review an incident
• review(s) of a non-reviewable situation/decision

Incapacitated VAR, AVAR or replay operator​

Law 6 – The Other Match Officials stipulates: ‘Competition rules must state clearly who replaces a match official who is unable to start or continue and any associated changes.’ In matches using VARs, this also applies to replay operators.


As special training and qualifications are needed to be a video match official (VMO)/replay operator, the following principles must be included in competition rules:

• A VAR, AVAR or replay operator who is unable to start or continue may only be replaced by someone who is qualified for that role

There it is, in writing. A review of a non reviewable decision does not affect the outcome of the game. That would be what undertaking a review after the game being restarted would fall under. The VAR has to intervene at this point and inform the refree onfield a goal has been scored to leave it up to him to resolve.


You have nowhere to go with your argument that the VAR couldnt ahve intervened.


The incapacitated rule's completely separate. But you knew that already.

 

[Zidane98]

Maybe we should replay the game.

If it stops Liverpool foamers from beating their wives and trashing towns then maybe that is a more palatable outcome.

These people have gone full Trump. It's bizarre but we need to protect ourselves.

Howard Webb literally ordered a match in the US to be replayed over a similar issue. I'm happy with whatever result the PL investigation determines is appropriate but they should make a call this week on it definitively. Because this has only happened a handful of times in the millions of games of professional football history.


Nobody's gone full Trump. Doesn't matter who the team is, I'd be saying the same if the reverse happened. You're just too tribalistic to see it objectively.

 

[glenferry23]

Chelsea fans contending with an away win, 2 goals, a clean sheet, Mudryk scoring and 3 points to lift them to 11th on the league table.

 

[Zidane98]

I know this comes down to the opinion of the VAR referee but for me this should have been sent to the onfield referee for a review. Looked pretty bad to me. Deliberate action, nothing to do with winning the ball.

 

[apollo_creed]

Zidane, ADL… the usual (biased) liverpool suspects.. thanks for the entertainment.

It’s made so much more entertaining by the fact that you two perform mental gymnastics to defend any poor decision in Liverpool’s favour… and have kept up this charade for years and years.

Replay the game? Lol. Relax Zidane.. go outside, smoke a cone and chill. Forget this thread and put all your energies into justifying all the favourable decisions Liverpool receive for the remainder of the season, as you have done for the last 10 years.

And this is a club with a victim mentality… who could forget them making their racist player and somehow their club the victims after he racially abused an opponent.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Howard Webb literally ordered a match in the US to be replayed over a similar issue. I'm happy with whatever result the PL investigation determines is appropriate but they should make a call this week on it definitively. Because this has only happened a handful of times in the millions of games of professional football history.


Nobody's gone full Trump. Doesn't matter who the team is, I'd be saying the same if the reverse happened. You're just too tribalistic to see it objectively.

So let’s say hypothetically you get your replay. Should you play with 10 men?

Or should Spurs bend over to appease you?

 

[Zidane98]

Zidane, ADL… the usual (biased) liverpool suspects.. thanks for the entertainment.

It’s made so much more entertaining by the fact that you two perform mental gymnastics to defend any poor decision in Liverpool’s favour… and have kept up this charade for years and years.

Replay the game? Lol. Relax Zidane.. go outside, smoke a cone and chill. Forget this thread and put all your energies into justifying all the favourable decisions Liverpool receive for the remainder of the season, as you have done for the last 10 years.

And this is a club with a victim mentality… who could forget them making their racist player and somehow their club the victims after he racially abused an opponent.

What utterly deluded rubbish posting. Turning it into a tribal issue instead of addressing the issue at hand.

If the same issue happened in Liverpool's favor you'd be going much, much further than me for surem. And the game didn't involve your team!

Ill also ask you to remove the victims reference politely. To post that in relation to Liverpool fans is horrendous.

This is one of your worst posts in quite some time.

 

[Zidane98]

So let’s say hypothetically you get your replay. Should you play with 10 men?

Or should Spurs bend over to appease you?

Personally going off previous replays for similar issues for me the right call would be replay the match from 1-0 with Liverpool playing with 10 men. Whilst I disagree with the red card decision it is subjective and that's the end of it.

This isn't anyone's replay it's about maintaining the integrity of the game. The decision is the same no matter what the teams involved are and is solely up to the competition organisers - in this case the PL.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Personally going off previous replays for similar issues for me the right call would be replay the match from 1-0 with Liverpool playing with 10 men. Whilst I disagree with the red card decision it is subjective and that's the end of it.

This isn't anyone's replay it's about maintaining the integrity of the game. The decision is the same no matter what the teams involved are and is solely up to the competition organisers - in this case the PL.

I would suggest maintaining the integrity of the game would be impossible for the following reasons:

1) It would have to be played in front of a full Spurs home crowd under similar weather conditions.
2) It would have to incorporate the exact same players that were on the field at the time you want the game restarted.

And that is just for starters. Even then, how can we guarantee that the players would be in the same physical condition as they were when the VAR decision was stuffed up?

In all seriousness, can you not see that there is no way the integrity of the game can be maintained no matter what approach you take?

The game cannot be replayed and will not be replayed. The best we can all hope for, and I say this in all sincerity despite our bickering in here, is that Liverpool put enough pressure on the powers that be so that we have more transparency regarding how VAR operates. For starters, every conversation between VAR and the match referee should be recorded and available to broadcasters and both teams.

I have no issue with Liverpool taking up the fight. My issue is the call for replays, the claims that Spurs are corrupt and were in on it and all of the other tin foil hat stuff doing the rounds. If the end game is that the operation of VAR changes for the better then that is the best result. But crying because you were on the end of a bad one and demanding games be played again, well man that is just reactionary nonsense. It is all swings and roundabouts. Not one Spurs fan suggested replaying the game when Son was sent off against some minnow team a few years ago, the red card rescinded immediately after the game and an apology made. We lost and we bitched about it. Magnificently so I might add. But not one person dived into the rabbit hole looking for some technicality that would facilitate a replay.

 

[Zidane98]

I would suggest maintaining the integrity of the game would be impossible for the following reasons:

1) It would have to be played in front of a full Spurs home crowd under similar weather conditions.
2) It would have to incorporate the exact same players that were on the field at the time you want the game restarted.

And that is just for starters. Even then, how can we guarantee that the players would be in the same physical condition as they were when the VAR decision was stuffed up?

In all seriousness, can you not see that there is no way the integrity of the game can be maintained no matter what approach you take?

The game cannot be replayed and will not be replayed. The best we can all hope for, and I say this in all sincerity despite our bickering in here, is that Liverpool put enough pressure on the powers that be so that we have more transparency how VAR operates. For starters, every conversation between VAR and the match referee should be recorded and available to broadcasters and both teams.

I have no issue with Liverpool taking up the fight. My issue is the call for replays, the claims that Spurs are corrupt and were in on it and all of the other tin foil hat stuff doing the rounds. If the end game is that the operation of VAR changes for the better then that is the best result. But crying because you were on the end of a bad one and demanding games be played again, well man that is just reactionary nonsense. It is all swings and roundabouts. Not one Spurs fan suggested replaying the game when Son was sent off against some minnow team a few years ago, the red card rescinded immediately after the game and an apology made. We lost and we bitched about it. Magnificently so I might add. But not one person dived into the rabbit hole looking for some technicality that would facilitate a replay.

Nobody has ever mentioned Spurs are corrupt. They're an innocent party to this mess. That's a pretty bizarre thing to say. I even want Spurs to win the title this season if we can't win it because of Ange.


Questioning the integrity of the game isn't crying, it's a legitimate concern. You're just saying that because you're being defensive and tribalistic. You don't want to believe that your first win in 6 years at home over Liverpool has been compromised, I can understand that.

The facts are that the VAR referee who has the final say on offside ruled the goal to be onside. The entire VAR team than kept quiet about a factual goal event when the match was restarting incorrectly. Not only that but VAR protocol also requires them to inform the referee of any serious missed errors. They did not do that either. I think even you would agree that a legitimate goal being scored and ruled as such by the VAR is definitely under the remit of serious missed errors.


This is not a case of a normal bad decision. They've happened countless times over the years, nobody has ever suggested a replay be looked at. You simply cannot put it down as a bad call. This is a case of a factual error and basic law not being applied to a match fixture. I'm sorry but that absolutely undermines the integrity of the game - and that's regardless of whatever team is playing. You're correct about the conditions of a possible replay not being replicated but in my opinion that's the lesser of two evils here. You might not like it but in the very few instances this has occurred in the past a replay has been ordered. I make no apologies for citing factual information on this.

As I said this is all up to the Premier League. As they've stayed silent on the issue completely I imagine those discussions are ongoing right now. I'd expect them to say something by the end of this week.

Bringing up subjective decisions like Son being sent off is totally irrelevant and undermines your argument totally. I've got a huge problem with the Jones red card but accept it as it was the final decision. Do yourself a favor and don't bring up subjective decisions again, it really doesn't suit your argument. You know full well that Kane should have been sent off in the 2-2 back in 2022 and Jota was absolutely flattened in the box with no penalty awarded. Please point me in the direction of any suggestion that match should have been replayed. But they were the decisions made on the day - and accepted - even if incorrect.

Whereas the decision made was for the Diaz goal to be allowed -by the VAR who has final say on offside - and it subsequently wasn't.


You need to forget the teams involved and look at the bigger picture here.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Nobody has ever mentioned Spurs are corrupt. They're an innocent party to this mess. That's a pretty bizarre thing to say. I even want Spurs to win the title this season if we can't win it because of Ange.


Questioning the integrity of the game isn't crying, it's a legitimate concern. You're just saying that because you're being defensive and tribalistic. You don't want to believe that your first win in 6 years at home over Liverpool has been compromised, I can understand that.

The facts are that the VAR referee who has the final say on offside ruled the goal to be onside. The entire VAR team than kept quiet about a factual goal event when the match was restarting incorrectly. Not only that but VAR protocol also requires them to inform the referee of any serious missed errors. They did not do that either. I think even you would agree that a legitimate goal being scored and ruled as such by the VAR is definitely under the remit of serious missed errors.


This is not a case of a normal bad decision. They've happened countless times over the years, nobody has ever suggested a replay be looked at. You simply cannot put it down as a bad call. This is a case of a factual error and basic law not being applied to a match fixture. I'm sorry but that absolutely undermines the integrity of the game - and that's regardless of whatever team is playing. You're correct about the conditions of a possible replay not being replicated but in my opinion that's the lesser of two evils here. You might not like it but in the very few instances this has occurred in the past a replay has been ordered. I make no apologies for citing factual information on this.

As I said this is all up to the Premier League. As they've stayed silent on the issue completely I imagine those discussions are ongoing right now. I'd expect them to say something by the end of this week.

Bringing up subjective decisions like Son being sent off is totally irrelevant and undermines your argument totally. I've got a huge problem with the Jones red card but accept it as it was the final decision. Do yourself a favor and don't bring up subjective decisions again, it really doesn't suit your argument. You know full well that Kane should have been sent off in the 2-2 back in 2022 and Jota was absolutely flattened in the box with no penalty awarded. Please point me in the direction of any suggestion that match should have been replayed. But they were the decisions made on the day - and accepted - even if incorrect.

Whereas the decision made was for the Diaz goal to be allowed -by the VAR who has final say on offside - and it subsequently wasn't.


You need to forget the teams involved and look at the bigger picture here.

FFS, you are literally impossible to reason with.

I f***ing said that I am happy Liverpool took up the fight. FFS, I'm done. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you might be able to hold an adult conversation on the matter. I thought, I'll refrain from winding you up and try to have reasonable chat but you simply are not capable of it.

The Son decision was not remotely subjective. They literally fell over themselves apologising for it.

I am now putting you onto ignore. Have a nice life.

 

[UnitedWarrior93]

 

[Zidane98]

FFS, you are literally impossible to reason with.

I f***ing said that I am happy Liverpool took up the fight. FFS, I'm done. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you might be able to hold an adult conversation on the matter. I thought, I'll refrain from winding you up and try to have reasonable chat but you simply are not capable of it.

The Son decision was not remotely subjective. They literally fell over themselves apologising for it.

I am now putting you onto ignore. Have a nice life.

For finality, the Son decision was made on the day and that was the end of it. I do notice you ignored the fact that Liverpool had a horror show from VAR back in 2022 and at no stage was there ever a suggestion of a replay.