Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Another example of a ref that clearly didn't want to disallow goal but felt forced too. 

 

Real tough choice between shit like the other night or VAR. Really think I'd rather just be annoyed something goes against you sometimes. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Neville and Carragher are so thick. The goal wasn't disallowed for the block. It was disallowed because Endo was offside while doing it.

It was hardly a block 

  • Haha 1
Posted

Confused as to how people don't understand that Endo is offside and interfering with play. It's one of the most clear and easy to disallow goals you'll ever see.

 

The block wasn't a foul, but he's very clearly interfering with play in an offside position.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

 

It ruins games if you are going to re-litigate every goal and look for techical infringements.

 

What happened to "Clear and obvious"?

 

 

Edited by Vacamion
Spello
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Vacamion said:

 

It ruins games if you are going to re-litigate every goal and look for techical infringements.

 

What happened to "Clear and obvious"?

 

 

Not sure you can get much more clear and obvious than that one to be fair. It was obvious on one replay that he had interfered with play and was clearly offside.

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Not sure you can get much more clear and obvious than that one to be fair. It was obvious on one replay that he had interfered with play and was clearly offside.

 

Interested to know how he interfered?  Is it thought the defender Endo blocked would have got anywhere near VVD?  I just can't see it.

 

 

Edited by Vacamion
Posted
3 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Confused as to how people don't understand that Endo is offside and interfering with play. It's one of the most clear and easy to disallow goals you'll ever see.

 

The block wasn't a foul, but he's very clearly interfering with play in an offside position.

Correct.

 

But why is blocking not a foul? Is it not obstruction?  Interestingly, the laws state:

 

IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.


All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

 

Did Endo not deliberately block Colwell?

Posted

No-brainer to rule than goal out.

 

Since when can you just stand inside the last defender before and as the kick is taken, to seal off his path to the ball?  

 

Posted (edited)

The key thing about that VAR decision that must be taken into account, is that it went against Liverpool. That makes it very, very funny, so it's ok in my book.

Edited by orangecity23
  • Like 2
Posted

Aren’t you lot watching this, worried you might need counselling due to the emotional overload  arising from the knowledge that this could be Klopp’s last appearance in a final in England ?

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Plastik Man said:

Correct.

 

But why is blocking not a foul? Is it not obstruction?  Interestingly, the laws state:

 

IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.


All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

 

Did Endo not deliberately block Colwell?

Because Endo didn't really move so therefore he has the right to that position. It was more what the Americans would call a 'pick' or 'screen' in Basketball, both of which are legal as long as you're not moving. The only problem here is that Endo was offside.

Edited by SouthStandUpperTier
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, surrifox said:

Liverpool have a seemingly endless supply of youthful scrotes all presumably poached from other clubs’ academies 

 

1 minute ago, Super_horns said:

Maybe at a younger age ?

Not really. Most of them just from their academy. Obviously not counting Elliott in that as he was playing for Fulham.

  • Like 1
Posted

Gallagher toting up a season's worth of xG in 10 minutes, and not managing to score.

 

Hopefully he'll have to take the deciding pen  lol

Posted
1 minute ago, Fox92 said:

 

Not really. Most of them just from their academy. Obviously not counting Elliott in that as he was playing for Fulham.

Nyoni poached from us as well

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...