One point if Everton got the pen late on and equalised v City, possibly 3 points if they went 1-0 up against Liverpool.
But I think you knew that.
Merseyside Derby
- Thread starter James P
- Start date
But I think you knew that.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
Plus entirely possible City go up field and score another
These hypothetical situations are just fruitless and desperate, usually used as smokescreens, deflectors of a team and/or managers shortcomings
No different to the Fergie time myth, somehow only Utd could score in the extra time, the opppnents had a forcefield preventing them from doing the same...
Getting further off topic, but how on Saturday did we get a penalty given at the Etihad after 14 seconds of the second half, wait 3 mins for it to be taken because the comms to VAR had broken, then a further delay before kick off, then half a dozen subs, two goals, and two injury delays, and only got 3 minutes added time?
i was saying the same in my seat. the kick off after the goal was at just past 50 mins. the var delay was appx 4.30 (before and after the kick). 3 mins added at least 2 and maybe 3 short
Pmalinski83
Member
Attwell doesn't manage big games very well, does he? I think he doesn't want confrontation with "bully managers". Yesterday's he didn't give an obvious penalty to Everton, he didn't stop play for Everton's injury and then practically shoved the yellow card in Everton player's face instead of calmly booking him. Back in January, he reffed Arsenal - Man City and handed the game to Man City with his decisions.
From what I saw of the game from my barstool, I thought Atwell had a decent game. Probably a PK for Everton, but blame the player for cheating earlier in the game instead. Also, no VC in the game, not by today's higher bar in the EPL. That's not Atwell's fault for anyone who may disagree, he's just doing what he's told. I thought SA was quick to react to flash points and he did quite well overall in a challenging game
Lampard was talking nonsense about only Pool getting these penalties at Anfield. Since Klopp has been there Everton have got 2 pens in games between them and Liverpool have had zero!
Anyway, I felt he stepped across Matip to initiate contact - I am not sure if we can accept it as an intentional foul but I guess in the rules that doesn't matter. Would this have been given as a freekick else where on the pitch - I'd probably say yes even though you could say it was being clever.
Anyway, I felt he stepped across Matip to initiate contact - I am not sure if we can accept it as an intentional foul but I guess in the rules that doesn't matter. Would this have been given as a freekick else where on the pitch - I'd probably say yes even though you could say it was being clever.
I might be wrong but I think referees are told if there is a potential flash point show the punishment to the offending player quickly so in theory it can calm other players down, I'm sure it's more for red cards than yellows though.
I thought it was a penalty but not sure its a clear and obvious error mind. The richarlison 'kick' could of been a red card, so petty. I just hope Attwell did not give a red because they were 2-0 down and in the 90th min.
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Yes agree, surely the 'new' drop ball policy helps us here as the side with the ball gets possession back - it wasn't as if Liverpool were steaming through on a dangerous attack, easy call to stop the game - surprised Rusty has quoted the non existent quote of head injury - as we've said many times no way can any referee in the world judge if a player is "seriously injured" from distance, whilst trying to referee a game at the same time.
Been frustrated by games being stopped for "clear" serious injuries at QPR, but in the cold light of day, who wants to be the one referee who has left a seriously injured/ill player on the floor?
I'd leave Richarlison rolling around until HT or FT before batting an eye lid
Is it that surprising? Liverpool spend most of their time attacking and with the ball spending a very short amount of time within their penalty area. Funnily enough, city are second in that list and the same argument fits them as well. It’s like when Sean Dyche moaned about getting less penalties than the top sides … of course you do, because you havent got top wingers spending a high amount of time in the opposition box.
total non story
Last edited:
If this yet again gets turned into a fan debate, i.e. such and such team has been wronged, such as such team are favoured by officials, etc, there will be consequences. We are fed up of it, and I don't just mean mods either. It is right on the brink at the moment, don't be the one to push it over.
Man United vs Southampton when it finished 9-0 has the same thing, very short injury time despite the high number of goals. I get why, the game was done, but why not play the full injury time, could’ve been a record breaking score line. Mind you, I had a junior game finish 16-6 once and I didn’t add on 30 seconds of injury time for every goal scored I’ll be honest.
On a side note, its been a while since I read the study, but the most common scoreline (based on percentages) to see 5 or more minutes of injury time is 0-1. This is despite the lack of goals than, say, a 5-2. Is this because a closer game means more strict injury time to avoid complaints. With the away side winning, does this mean the home crowd has a factor? Or, most likely does the away side do a lot of time wasting due to them leading by a singular goal?
As for the decisions, Atwell is hit and miss but I felt like this was alright. Everton should have had a pen, but was it C and O? On the flip side, Richarlison should’ve probably seen red, but again, was it C and O? There’s been worse games this season. On one final thing, some of the comments in this thread are ****ing pathetic.
RefIADad
RefChat Addict
I’m not a Liverpool fan, just trying to provide a reason for that 46 game streak. A potentially big reason for that is also that players like VVD are really, really good defensively. When you have central defenders and defensive mids who are good at what they do, they won’t foul in the area as much.
Dont know why you would do that, or think you should?
You only add time on for significant delay to a restart like a goal celebration. Juniour don't tend to go mad.
Where have you got 30 seconds a goal from?
I also thought it was for proper breaks in play and substitutions - I don't think I've ever added time for goal celebrations (unless they ran well off the pitch).
I've head pundits talk about it over the years, although no idea where they got it from.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
30 seconds a sub has certainly been bandied about. Not 30 seconds per goal. A team making a comeback is unlikely to spend time celebrating, but if a team takes 30 seconds to celebrate, add 30 seconds (or if the defending team takes a lot longer than needed to restart).