Search results

I decline your obvious invitation to walk into a trap. You didn't watch the game but have strong opinions about if MO had a good performance or not - why should I assume anything you write is in good faith?

So I'm free to continue the discussion?

This seems to fairly clearly be disagreeing with the points I've made during this thread. And the following paragraph fairly clearly threatens me with a ban if I dare explain why the bit I've bolded is wrong, misunderstanding or deliberately misrepresented my points. So which is it? Are you...

I thought I was told to drop it? So you get a right to argue with me and then threaten that if I dare to respond, I get banned?

Correct. And yes, it's awful. I've fortunately never had this situation with a red, but in one of the rare double-headers I have done, I booked someone in the first game and then when I also booked him in the second game, went as far as showing the red card before realising the first yellow...

Conversely, perhaps tell people who haven't even watched a game to stop opining as if they have? I might be a Liverpool fan, but I'm also a ref (who understands the concepts of "dives" and "foul tolerance") and I'm someone who actually watched the game. I don't need someone who didn't see the...

The drop ball solution is the correct restart....if you are incorrectly whistling in the first place - that implies a non-law-compliant reason for stopping the game. So perhaps avoid unnecessarily admitting to blowing the whistle for no particular reason when there are other options available?

Well exactly. Neither outcome is tidy or what football expects, so probably best to go with the sh*tty-looking one that actually complies with law!

I've pointed out multiple times that his decision making was all over the place all game - giving an FK for a dive that led to a goal is just the "highlight" of a generally poor performance that you're defending him for despite...not watching the game? I'm not hiding my motivation for thinking...

There's no reason to pretend like it has to be one or the other. Of course Liverpool could have defended the free kick better - most (all?) goals are preventable with good enough defence. That doesn't change the fact that the referee imagining a foul there makes it far more likely that...

There are levels of imagination going on here, and you're being unreasonable considering all these worlds as equally valid. I'm imagining a world where a referee doesn't a) fall for a dive that b) led to a free kick that c) led to a goal. It's not hard to see the clear sequence there and it's a...

I don't disagree on Bradley, but I also don't think that foul would merit a card if not for the reaction of the crowd it occurred in front of. While not exactly conclusive evidence, the "fouled" player didn't even fall over! It's just part of the pattern of MO being pretty poor and inconsistent...

I don't reeeeallly care what a KMI panel thinks, that's not going to materially affect my thoughts on what is or isn't an important decision in a game. MO buying Everton dives was a bit of a trend of the first half, this one just happens to have been both one of the most obvious and also one of...

We're going to go down the whole VAR spiral here, but I'm baffled by that stance. Did the referee see it as a push? If yes, why didn't he make the call? And if no, then he's clearly wrong, and VAR should be intervening to point out that the defender was clearly pushed. I'm not really sure what...

The added time was definitely bordering on excessive: goal was scored at 97:10 I think, in a game where +5 was announced. There was a delay for the clash of heads, but it was a pretty free-flowing added time aside from that. So I don't think anyone would have been surprised if he'd just added...

Oliver's foul tolerance was all over the place. Not giving the foul in the buildup to the last goal was consistent....with about half of his decisions, including the ridiculous decision to not give a foul on Salah that would have killed the game just before that goal. But the foul on Konate...

He absolutely has to make a decision. There isn't a neutral option here - it is his decision, so he either flags to signal a goal or doesn't flag to signal no goal. He might not be in the perfect position, but he's still better placed than any other official.

There were certainly players contesting it, can't guarentee either way if there was a touch or two. The actual likely answer is that the ref either had his back to the ball, or forgot while he was stood watching the injury be patched up

Why are we spending 3+ minutes and counting treating a standing player with a cut on his head in the middle of the pitch? Could easily have walked to the side to sort it. Edit: Plus then a drop ball to the keeper when the ball was a long way out of the PA when play stopped (I was told after the...

I mean, that's unfortunately a "you" problem. That was never the stated aim of VAR, it's unreasonable to expect a system to do something it doesn't set out to do.