Liverpool penalty

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:01 pm

Why the feck didn’t VAR pick out that it was an obvious dive?
Cheating bustard

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:02 pm

Because VAR is never going to change a penalty decision where there’s contact and is a bit of a waste of time!

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:03 pm

It quite clearly wasn’t a dive

Loyalclaret · Post by **Loyalclaret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:07 pm

Hope the Liverpool player is ok, rolled forward and backwards from what look like the small tap on the ankle...

Winstonswhite · Post by **Winstonswhite** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:08 pm

In my book a dive is where the body reacts in an abnormal way to the contact made. Fair enough? It was definitely a dive.

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:09 pm

Dyched wrote:It quite clearly wasn’t a dive

Are you having a laugh?

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:12 pm

Not bothered really, I haven't seen it yet. I just find it funny that Leicester fans complain about it when they have Jamie 'the swan' Vardy in their side.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:13 pm

Claret wrote:Are you having a laugh?

No. The Leicester player kicked him. He went down. Penalty.

ten bellies · Post by **ten bellies** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:20 pm

Dyched wrote:No. The Leicester player kicked him. He went down. Penalty.

Dive all day long.

Marney&Mee · Post by **Marney&Mee** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:21 pm

No pen. You can bet your bottom dollar had that been on Vardy at the other end; no pen and yellow for Vardy. 100%

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:21 pm

Dyched wrote:No. The Leicester player kicked him. He went down. Penalty.

Are you a VAR referee?

theroyaldyche · Post by **theroyaldyche** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:22 pm

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:28 pm

I don’t understand why more isn’t made of this. That was blatant cheating that changed the final result. I’d hate to have that diving cheat on my side in a fight.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:28 pm

Claret wrote:Are you a VAR referee?

The Leicester kicked him instead of the football. That’s a foul. It doesn’t matter how hard he’s kicked. He went down to get the attention of the referee. Why would he stay on his feet? He was going away from goal.

Winstonswhite · Post by **Winstonswhite** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:30 pm

No it’s not. It’s a contact game you fanny.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:32 pm

Winstonswhite wrote:No it’s not. It’s a contact game you fanny.

It’s not 1974 anymore Winston

Winstonswhite · Post by **Winstonswhite** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:35 pm

It’s Winstons to you pal!

Claret · Post by **Claret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:41 pm

Dyched wrote:The Leicester kicked him instead of the football. That’s a foul. It doesn’t matter how hard he’s kicked. He went down to get the attention of the referee. Why would he stay on his feet? He was going away from goal.

I f@ckin give up

simonclaret · Post by **simonclaret** » Sat Oct 05, 2019 11:49 pm

He was touched lightly and even kicked the ball before deciding to fall over. Another VAR fail.

groove · Post by **groove** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:00 am

He didn't go down initially. It was a split second later once his brain had decided to go down. It was contrived and unnatural. Also, had it been us and say, Ashley Barnes in that situation we wouldn't have been given a penalty. VAR is indeed, in this case an absolute waste of time.

Croydon Claret · Post by **Croydon Claret** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:10 am

Blatant cheating. VAR was supposed to prevent this but never will whilst officials still think that contact equals a penalty

AlargeClaret · Post by **AlargeClaret** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:18 am

Dyched wrote:No. The Leicester player kicked him. He went down. Penalty.

He wasn’t kicked at all , there was however the most minimal contact to Mane’s boot,he felt it ( of course he waited for it but that’s no crime ) then waited a second then threw himself to the floor theatrically rolling to the left then the right clutching his leg. It was an uber soft penalty .Thoughts go out to his friends and family at this difficult time

mdd2 · Post by **mdd2** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:28 am

After 8 games of this season it must now be clear to all and sundry that VAR is NOT righting the important wrongs of refs when it comes to penalties and is calling offsides that in reality do not affect the result. Yesterday VAR helped Liverpool cheat IMO but did correct a wrong for Palace's winner. It should have had Coleman walking for the challenge on Pieters

Herts Clarets · Post by **Herts Clarets** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:30 am

Other than decisions that are absolute fact,offside and line decisions, has there been one single case of VAR disagreeing with the refs original decision?

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:31 am

No penalty for me. The slightest contact these days and it's an opportunity to fall over. Against Norwich we had a clear penalty turned down against Barnes right infront of the ref. I think the penalty yesterday was a lot to do with it being Liverpool at home.

Herts Clarets · Post by **Herts Clarets** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:34 am

Other than decisions that are absolute fact,offside and line decisions, has there been one single case of VAR disagreeing with the refs original decision?

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:55 am

Dyched wrote:The Leicester kicked him instead of the football. That’s a foul. It doesn’t matter how hard he’s kicked. He went down to get the attention of the referee. Why would he stay on his feet? He was going away from goal.

You need to watch it again - he felt contact on the back of his leg and dived. There is absolutely no way in a million years that was a natural movement or momentum. He dived 100% - but unfortunately the referee gave the same decision most referees would give.
Contact does not automatically equal a foul.
Simulation / exaggeration - all the same - it’s cheating.

Shore claret · Post by **Shore claret** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:17 am

Claret wrote:I don’t understand why more isn’t made of this. That was blatant cheating that changed the final result. I’d hate to have that diving cheat on my side in a fight.

Because its liverpool

Stproc · Post by **Stproc** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:34 am

That level of contact would not make any fit person crash to the ground outside of a game of football.

Awayfromburnley · Post by **Awayfromburnley** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:39 am

This very discussion is the reason why I would never ever ever want to be involved in football officiating.

All very subjective.

Hibsclaret · Post by **Hibsclaret** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:40 am

Yet again it’s the ‘clear and obvious error’ rubbish that is the issue. If that’s us we likely don’t get the decision so VAR can’t overturn it. The way VAR is implemented leaves it more open to big club bias because they will always get the onfield iffy decision....

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:47 am

Agree with the poster re Vardy : if we'd have had VAR in the season they won the Prem, most of his penalties - or other goals that were a result of his incessant diving - would have been overturned and they'd have been second or third.
Serves the media dahlings right.

taio · Post by **taio** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:57 am

evensteadiereddie wrote:Agree with the poster re Vardy : if we'd have had VAR in the season they won the Prem, most of his penalties - or other goals that were a result of his incessant diving - would have been overturned and they'd have been second or third.
Serves the media dahlings right.

But we didn't and they won fair and square.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:07 am

Croydon Claret wrote:Blatant cheating. VAR was supposed to prevent this but never will whilst officials still think that contact equals a penalty

I agree with that statement.

However, they only apply it to some teams.

Ashley Barnes getting a clear whack across his shin, as he is about to go past the defender and shoot, does not count, for example.

There table of penalties awarded and scored in the last 5 seasons had numbers lin the high 40s for several teams. Burnley? Probably about 4!

No one likes us.

Steve-Harpers-perm · Post by **Steve-Harpers-perm** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:09 am

mdd2 wrote:After 8 games of this season it must now be clear to all and sundry that VAR is NOT righting the important wrongs of refs when it comes to penalties and is calling offsides that in reality do not affect the result. Yesterday VAR helped Liverpool cheat IMO but did correct a wrong for Palace's winner. It should have had Coleman walking for the challenge on Pieters

Said this yesterday it’s basically just an offside checker.

Firthy · Post by **Firthy** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:13 am

Here we go again. Same old discussion and same opinions.

It was100% a dive and should never have been a penalty. If we give a penalty every time there is the slightest contact from a defender then forwards will dive and cheat even more, if that's possible.

VAR is great for offsides but a waste of time for penalty decisions because the laws of the game are ambiguous and open to interpretation.

The only way to stop this cheating is to do away with penalties and that will never happen. Penalties and diving is a scourge of the game and something we are stuck with. All I can say is, if that penalty had been given against us then I'd be fuming.

Stacky_claret · Post by **Stacky_claret** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:14 am

I'm just glad mane is ok
I thought hed been shot

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:15 am

Yet another reason to despise Liverpool and Klopp, for me.

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:20 am

It's one of the worst things about the modern game. Get a touch, throw yourself down, pretend you're hurt, get a penalty. It means that goals are being scored without the attacking team getting the better of the defence or properly creating the opportunity. It goes right against the proper spirit of the game. The one Wolves got against us was just as ridiculous. In the rule book, I think, the offence is tripping or kicking. Referees and officials should read the rule book more carefully.

Handballs the same. The one Palace got against West Ham yesterday was just as bad. Palace didn't get the better of the West Ham defence, it was just that the ball happened to hit a player's arm. The game is about one side getting the better of the other; these penalties have nothing to do with that.

Longside4evr · Post by **Longside4evr** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:36 am

This is what Dyche flags up every week all this cheating at all costs.
If your sitting pretty at the top of the league 9 times out of ten soft decisions go for you.
But what grieved me was at the end when Klopp was hugging and kissing Mane like a well done for that beautiful bit of con work.He should have been red carded in my book stamp it out

RammyClaret61 · Post by **RammyClaret61** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:46 am

It was never a penalty. Yes he was touched, but it wasn’t enough to impede him. He choose to fall on the floor, and no he did not have the right to go down. Blatant cheating and the ref bought it hook line and sinker. VAR should’ve corrected the decision. Var is a waste of time.. literally!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 11:02 am

taio wrote:But we didn't and they won fair and square.

Leicester did win fair and square taio.

Eddie is a Remoaner, he struggles accepting results.......

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 11:13 am

The law;

’ A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
....
kicks or attempts to kick
...
Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed

Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned

Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.’

Was Mane kicked? Yes. Was the kick careless, reckless or using excessive force? Clearly not.

The law is clear, there is some room for interpretation in terms of what is considered careless, reckless or excessive but in this case those terms cannot be applied to the challenge on Mane.

VAR should have overruled the referee and Mane should have been booked for diving (I presume the ref can do this once VAR has proven simulation?).

The use of VAR to ‘help’ the referees in these instances is shocking. There would be anger had the ref given the penalty in any case but it would have been more understandable had he not had the assistance of a video referee. Appalling decision.

Dark Cloud · Post by **Dark Cloud** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 11:45 am

There might have been a bit of contact and if he'd actually gone down then, immediately, maybe there would be less "debate", but he goes down well after and thus it looks like a dive to me.

claretnproud · Post by **claretnproud** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:07 pm

Having backed liverpool for the title I was delighted to see the pen given. This rule that if anyone is touched in the box and they fall over then its a pen is just sucking the life out of our game. Yes there was contact, Yes he made the most of it. NO WAY THAT SHOULD BE A PEN. Ludicrous the way the game is going.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:16 pm

A blind man on a galloping horse could see it was a dive.

Should have got an oscar.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:21 pm

Rileybobs wrote:The law;

’ A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
....
kicks or attempts to kick
...
Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed

Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned

Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.’

Was Mane kicked? Yes. Was the kick careless, reckless or using excessive force? Clearly not.

The law is clear, there is some room for interpretation in terms of what is considered careless, reckless or excessive but in this case those terms cannot be applied to the challenge on Mane.

VAR should have overruled the referee and Mane should have been booked for diving (I presume the ref can do this once VAR has proven simulation?).

The use of VAR to ‘help’ the referees in these instances is shocking. There would be anger had the ref given the penalty in any case but it would have been more understandable had he not had the assistance of a video referee. Appalling decision.

That's well explained, Rileybobs. It therefore hinges on the referee's interpretation of 'careless'. He presumably thought it was careless but I would guess that if Mane hadn't dived (I've no doubt he did) then he wouldn't have given it. That seems to be one of the big issues in today's refereeing - the influence of the behaviour of players. The trouble is Mane is a known felon in this area - I (and many others I'm sure) guessed it was a dive when I heard it reported on tv.

The problem with penalties these days is that they usually have more value (an almost certain goal) then the chance of a goal prevented by the incident. Penalties were originally introduced as a punishment for a defender handling the ball on the goal line so preventing a certain goal. That seems perfectly reasonable. These days penalties are mostly given for innocuous events like Mane's, the West Ham handball and the like. In many cases they seem to offer the possibility of creating a scoring opportunity where there wasn't one. Penalties are 'earned'. This can't be right.

It's surely (way over) time to look at the whole concept of penalties to make the punishment fit the crime.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:28 pm

Rileybobs wrote:The law;

’ A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
....
kicks or attempts to kick
...
Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed

Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned

Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.’

Was Mane kicked? Yes. Was the kick careless, reckless or using excessive force? Clearly not.

The law is clear, there is some room for interpretation in terms of what is considered careless, reckless or excessive but in this case those terms cannot be applied to the challenge on Mane.

VAR should have overruled the referee and Mane should have been booked for diving (I presume the ref can do this once VAR has proven simulation?).

The use of VAR to ‘help’ the referees in these instances is shocking. There would be anger had the ref given the penalty in any case but it would have been more understandable had he not had the assistance of a video referee. Appalling decision.

You've missed a bit out, which is why most penalties are given and contact is cited:

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
holds an opponent
impedes an opponent with contact
bites or spits at someone
throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object

The argument for the Mane penalty is that he was impeded with contact in the penalty area, not that he was kicked carelessly, recklessly or with excessive force.

LeadBelly · Post by **LeadBelly** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:30 pm

This rule that if anyone is touched in the box and they fall over then its a pen is just sucking the life out of our game.

Agreed, there generally seems to be a view that, if an attacker goes down, he's either been fouled or dived. As if there cant just be a completely legal/innocent coming together of opposing players competing for the ball.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:39 pm

LeadBelly wrote:Agreed, there generally seems to be a view that, if an attacker goes down, he's either been fouled or dived. As if there cant just be a completely legal/innocent coming together of opposing players competing for the ball.

So are you saying that an attacker would never dive if they could help it, and always try and stay on their feet and score?