SecretPro Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 What a silly thread. Yep. Bit of light heartedness is whats needed round here as of late. So bore off please Mike.
Clever Fox Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 From the start it looked like he was itching to give Liverpool a leg up. The Anti Fixing Authority should look closely at his performance today.
sdb Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 I have to pop out so can someone do mine? 427 for Schlupp please. Cheers
DennisNedry Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Why are these decisions termed as controversial instead of more simply 'wrong' or 'poor' Controversial as a word means likely to cause disagreement, not that the decision is factually incorrect.
Bamba's Babes Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 One of the only sports in existence where the result can be determined by the competency of an official. Football is a joke.
Monsell1976 Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Saw the ref get out of his car before the game, as soon as I saw him, I said to my kids he's shit and will stitch us up, didn't think he would do it twice. These refs making these decisions should be held accountable, and relegated down divisions, if repeatedly making poor decisions.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 You could argue that the two penalty decisions gave us the real drive to get back into the game.
JonnyBoy Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Baffling in this day and age 2 non professional footballers could potentially decide the outcome of our season. Referring to Spurs and today. Not good enough absolute joke. Will anything be done about it ? Absolutely not. Mike Jones is a massive tit and hope he comes onto this forum and Apologises
Lionator Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Bit ott, the first one was a shocking decision, the second one was less so. It's an impossible job and ref's especially at the highest level with the pace of the game need help.
TheUltimateWinner Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Reminder: Mike Jones comes from Chester, which is less than 30 minutes away from Liverpool.
shade Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Bit ott, the first one was a shocking decision, the second one was less so. It's an impossible job and ref's especially at the highest level with the pace of the game need help. I agree, however it doesn't change the fact that you can only give a decision if your certain what you saw, he obviously wasn't.
purpleronnie Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Do people really think ref's give those decisions because they want a particular side to win...c'mon now. Plus who knows how the game would have turned out if he hadn't given either, we might have lost 5-0. Can't we just be happy that we got a well earned point at Anfield instead of whining all the time.
jimmeh Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Look at it this way... If the two penalty decisions weren't given and we went in at half time 0-0. We might have sat back second half and gone for a 0-0. And Liverpool could have won game. It doesn't mean we would have won 2-0. Also if we took the lead in the game, Liverpool could have immediately equalised. And then went on to win 3-1. Who knows.
Harry - LCFC Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Look at it this way... If the two penalty decisions weren't given and we went in at half time 0-0. We might have sat back second half and gone for a 0-0. And Liverpool could have won game. It doesn't mean we would have won 2-0. Also if we took the lead in the game, Liverpool could have immediately equalised. And then went on to win 3-1. Who knows. We were playing well before they scored, the goal stopped us. Had it not gone in I think it's more likely that we'd have continued to control the game and stood a better chance of winning. Not sure why you're doing but it's not easy to argue that conceding a goal was a good thing for us.
LCCFox96 Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Referees have to be accountable for decisions as poor as that. It takes the piss a little bit that in the top division of English football decisions like that are allowed to affect results. A mistake of that magnitude in a normal job would have consequences for the person behind it. I think we can be happy with the point but decisions like that do leave a sour taste it must be said.
Guest ttfn Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Why are these decisions termed as controversial instead of more simply 'wrong' or 'poor' Controversial as a word means likely to cause disagreement, not that the decision is factually incorrect. Yeah nothing controversial at all about the first penalty. It was just wrong.
jimmeh Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 We were playing well before they scored, the goal stopped us. Had it not gone in I think it's more likely that we'd have continued to control the game and stood a better chance of winning. Not sure why you're doing but it's not easy to argue that conceding a goal was a good thing for us. I'm not saying that. It just winds me up how people say... If the ref hadn't given them decisions we would have won the game. Not as simple as that. The whole game changes. Also pearson at half time tells the players that they have been robbed by the ref and neither were pens. It gives them Extra determination to get back in game.
EGBFitness Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Shocking decisions! First decision should never of been given! Second decision is debatable, because of first decision feels more harsh, no way Simpson could of got out the way but shouldn't have arms up in the box, our luck of the day that it was given, another day would be different story. Games like today frustrates me that there isn't more put on refs from the FA. I know the FA need to show they support their refs but that Morgan decision is non-excusable. Refs can decide a game and even a season, they should be put under the spot light with media more like managers and players get during heat of the moment, fines and bans aswell... If they can put this on clubs, managers, players and any kind of situation/personnel they can get more money then why can't a ref pay the price for poor decisions. Can't take nothing away from the boys today though, playing against 12 men and they shown class, professionalism and desire to win! This is the Leicester we know they can be! Play like that for the rest of the season and we will certainly be surviving!
gazfox9 Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Anyone who thinks the penalty awards helped us are kidding themselves. What do you think NP would say had Stringer asked him whether giving Liverpool two penalties helped us?
mugshot Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 You could argue that the two penalty decisions gave us the real drive to get back into the game. We were controlling the game when the first one was given, in fact continued to control the game after it was scored for another 10 minutes or so.
Kitchandro Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Do people really think ref's give those decisions because they want a particular side to win...c'mon now. Plus who knows how the game would have turned out if he hadn't given either, we might have lost 5-0. Can't we just be happy that we got a well earned point at Anfield instead of whining all the time. Why not? If FIFA can be corrupt why not the FA and referees? You cant just rule things like that out. No I can't just be happy we earned a point because those 2 points we've not got could be critical. We were the better team throughout and it could easily have finished 2-0 to us had we not been robbed. They were given two unfair penalties, that's the bottom line. The evidence that we may have lost 5-0 is non-existent.
Kitchandro Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 I'm not saying that. It just winds me up how people say... If the ref hadn't given them decisions we would have won the game. Not as simple as that. The whole game changes. Also pearson at half time tells the players that they have been robbed by the ref and neither were pens. It gives them Extra determination to get back in game. Yes but that's just conjecture. What we do know is we played the better football throughout, scored two legitimate goals and neither of those penalties should have been given. Are you suggesting it wasn't more difficult to win once we went 2-0 down?
jimmeh Posted 1 January 2015 Posted 1 January 2015 Yes but that's just conjecture. What we do know is we played the better football throughout, scored two legitimate goals and neither of those penalties should have been given. Are you suggesting it wasn't more difficult to win once we went 2-0 down? There was nothing to lose. If it was 0-0 half time we would have lost. Im convinced
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.