Topic: The Anfield Wrap

[Iska]

Yesterday's longer post-mortem was really good.  I feel like they nailed it on all the points.

I especially liked Philippa's contribution on the sending-off, putting it in slightly wider context - how the rules have created a situation where a few inches one way or the other to decide which of the tacklers gets the red card.  I wonder whether you could bear doing a longer piece on that as an issue of its own, maybe with an actual ref if you know one.  I feel like there's a few different angles might be worth exploring:

• is it the same as mandatory red for a last-man challenge?
• does it encourage a goalie/the guy who's slightly ahead to put himself in harm's way?
• would we actual want 'common sense' reffing in these marginal situations?
• is there an argument for a red each?

Maybe not do it this week though.

[JD.]

Yesterday's longer post-mortem was really good.  I feel like they nailed it on all the points.

I especially liked Philippa's contribution on the sending-off, putting it in slightly wider context - how the rules have created a situation where a few inches one way or the other to decide which of the tacklers gets the red card.  I wonder whether you could bear doing a longer piece on that as an issue of its own, maybe with an actual ref if you know one.  I feel like there's a few different angles might be worth exploring:

• is it the same as mandatory red for a last-man challenge?
• does it encourage a goalie/the guy who's slightly ahead to put himself in harm's way?
• would we actual want 'common sense' reffing in these marginal situations?
• is there an argument for a red each?

Maybe not do it this week though.

I'll be honest I thought it was just standard red tinted glasses talk from Phillipa which is usually what you get from her.

Would she be saying that if it was Aguero on Mignolet? I'll guarantee you she wouldn't.

What type of message does it send? It sends the message that if you are in a 50/50 and lose it, and the result is a karate kick to the opponents face, then you will get a red card. Pretty simple one I thought 

It's exactly the same situation and message all over the rest of the field. If two players go for a 50/50 then the one loses it will concede the foul. That's always been the case. The extra punishment on top is just about how forceful or dangerous the loser of the 50/50 was in the situation. One went with there head, another jumped up with a straight leg and studs showing. I was fuming at it at first, but having watched it back, it's clearly at least a yellow and probably a red.

As for the point of was the goalie reckless. Of course he wasn't he ran out, won the ball cleanly, with no excessive force or reckless play. Mane jumped right back up after the collision so clearly there was no excessive force on his part. It was just brilliant sweeper keeping.

[thekitkatshuffler]

I'll be honest I thought it was just standard red tinted glasses talk from Phillipa which is usually what you get from her.

Would she be saying that if it was Aguero on Mignolet? I'll guarantee you she wouldn't.

What type of message does it send? It sends the message that if you are in a 50/50 and lose it, and the result is a karate kick to the opponents face, then you will get a red card. Pretty simple one I thought 

It's exactly the same situation and message all over the rest of the field. If two players go for a 50/50 then the one loses it will concede the foul. That's always been the case. The extra punishment on top is just about how forceful or dangerous the loser of the 50/50 was in the situation. One went with there head, another jumped up with a straight leg and studs showing. I was fuming at it at first, but having watched it back, it's clearly at least a yellow and probably a red.

As for the point of was the goalie reckless. Of course he wasn't he ran out, won the ball cleanly, with no excessive force or reckless play. Mane jumped right back up after the collision so clearly there was no excessive force on his part. It was just brilliant sweeper keeping.

Of course the problem is the lack of officiating consistency, which raised its ugly head right on cue yesterday, with Matt Ritchie only getting a yellow for a very similar challenge.

[kennedy81]

Emilia Bona on AFQ

fucking hell.

[Ciara (with a capital "C")]

Emilia Bona on AFQ

fucking hell.

Cheered me up massively this morning, having listened to The Pink just before!

[J_Kopite]

Emilia Bona on AFQ

fucking hell.

Bet she's damaged beyond repair now the poor girl

[Charlie Adams fried egg]

Of course the problem is the lack of officiating consistency, which raised its ugly head right on cue yesterday, with Matt Ritchie only getting a yellow for a very similar challenge.

Spot on, not overly bothered debating whether it was a red or not, but if the justification was dangerous play then there's loads of examples of our players being done by "dangerous" challenges - not even a yellow for most of them, and of course we had yesterdays incident.

Reason for posting was this piece on the wrap

https://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2017/09/liverpool-why-criticism-of-the-reds-rearguard-was-wide-of-the-mark-at-manchester-city/

Good context on the defence as well as the usual funny take on the ref involved.

[kavah]

^ great article.

[Rush 82]

Fucking brilliant read that

[U13]

I'll be honest I thought it was just standard red tinted glasses talk from Phillipa which is usually what you get from her.

Would she be saying that if it was Aguero on Mignolet? I'll guarantee you she wouldn't.

What type of message does it send? It sends the message that if you are in a 50/50 and lose it, and the result is a karate kick to the opponents face, then you will get a red card. Pretty simple one I thought 

It's exactly the same situation and message all over the rest of the field. If two players go for a 50/50 then the one loses it will concede the foul. That's always been the case. The extra punishment on top is just about how forceful or dangerous the loser of the 50/50 was in the situation. One went with there head, another jumped up with a straight leg and studs showing. I was fuming at it at first, but having watched it back, it's clearly at least a yellow and probably a red.

As for the point of was the goalie reckless. Of course he wasn't he ran out, won the ball cleanly, with no excessive force or reckless play. Mane jumped right back up after the collision so clearly there was no excessive force on his part. It was just brilliant sweeper keeping.

I thought it was a clear red card but I understood where Philipa was coming from and it led me on to thinking about how weird the application of the excessive force and reckless play rules are.

Flip the scenario on it's head with Mane going to challenge Ederson for a high ball who comes out with both fists to punch the ball but misses it and wipes Mane out. To me that scenario demands application of the reckless play or excessive force rules in the same way Mane's challenge did but I can't remember ever seeing a keeper penalised for cleaning a player out in that fashion.

[bradders1011]

Enjoyed the Review, very cathartic and good debate on the decisions. Also looking forward to the Under the Lights that's just dropped. Best thing now, forget the freak on Saturday, straight into these Uefa Cup-stealing barber-loving bastards.

[Charlie Adams fried egg]

Agree about the review and it was good to hear lads who know more than me giving a bit more insight into things that I felt were odd at the time.
Namely the reason why Salah was hooked, which made sense when the explained the options, and also the fact that having Firmino as the 1 upfront was odd. I couldnt understand the Firmino decision and as they said, because he offered no threat in behind, it enabled the defence to push up a bit more and dictate the play.
I'd love to hear Klopps rationale for that.

[HumanRed]

Going to listen to it now whilst doing the shopping.

[LallanaInPyjamas]

Enjoyed the Review, very cathartic and good debate on the decisions. Also looking forward to the Under the Lights that's just dropped. Best thing now, forget the freak on Saturday, straight into these Uefa Cup-stealing barber-loving bastards.

Thought it was alright apart from the discussion on our lack of tackling. Our midfield was crap and there were plenty of occasions a tackle or interception could have been made. The Review show is supposed to be an objective analysis of the match but it felt like the midfield was being defended with waffle.

[The Lord Admiral]

Belter from Robbo on FSG. Well balanced but unfraid to ask a few difficult questions.

[Fitzy.]

Thought it was alright apart from the discussion on our lack of tackling. Our midfield was crap and there were plenty of occasions a tackle or interception could have been made. The Review show is supposed to be an objective analysis of the match but it felt like the midfield was being defended with waffle.

I think the idea it's entirely objective is a bit of a stretch. It's very good put it's from an LFC perspective even if it is considered and even handed.

[JackWard33]

They need to ban the word "ruthless" from their podcasts. Every. single. review show.

Just accept that its called a chance because theres a 'chance' it becomes a goal. Sometimes they go in, sometimes they don't.
Or just all agree we're not 'ruthless' (whatever that means) and move on.....

[Fitzy.]

I find Mike Nevin a bit of a nark on Twitter compared to the highly-considered contributions and insights he offers on pods. I know twitter lends itself to spitting ire and vitriol but I just feel that Nevin should be above the fray rather tan contributing to the echo chamber of moaning.

[Charlie Adams fried egg]

I think the idea it's entirely objective is a bit of a stretch. It's very good put it's from an LFC perspective even if it is considered and even handed.

And I'm glad it is. But be fair I do find the reviews pretty even handed with an emphasis on why things happened or why decisions are made.

[Jookie]

I find Mike Nevin a bit of a nark on Twitter compared to the highly-considered contributions and insights he offers on pods. I know twitter lends itself to spitting ire and vitriol but I just feel that Nevin should be above the fray rather tan contributing to the echo chamber of moaning.

Agree completely mate. I really, really like him on the pods. Find myself agreeing with him loads.

He's a typical moaning arse middle aged ST holder on Twitter though. The 2 personalities don't add up and it makes me question what his true opinion is.

On a separate note, outside some of the very regular contributors (Neil, Gareth, Rob)  I've got to say that Mo Stewart, Adam Melia and Ben Johnson are excellent contributors to TAW. Don't necessarily agree with them but they point out things you don't notice yourself.

[Alan_X]

Preview show is titled Middlesbrough not Burnley. 

[Hij]

Mo Stewart is boss.

[Wembley74]

Agree completely mate. I really, really like him on the pods. Find myself agreeing with him loads.

He's a typical moaning arse middle aged ST holder on Twitter though. The 2 personalities don't add up and it makes me question what his true opinion is.

On a separate note, outside some of the very regular contributors (Neil, Gareth, Rob)  I've got to say that Mo Stewart, Adam Melia and Ben Johnson are excellent contributors to TAW. Don't necessarily agree with them but they point out things you don't notice yourself.

Lads. Twitter is my vehicle for taking people to task.

I'm generally positive but I do find it irritating the way Klopp seems bombproof to the happy clappy brigade.

If you want a more balanced version of my views read my Friday columns where I've got more than 140 letters.

[Wembley74]

Lads. Twitter is my vehicle for taking people to task.

I'm generally positive but I do find it irritating the way Klopp seems bombproof to the happy clappy brigade.

If you want a more balanced version of my views read my Friday columns where I've got more than 140 letters.

Thanks for the comments by the way. Don't have to agree with me or anyone all the time. And please do note, I'm 50 so having the odd moan is part of the territory. Wait til you get there!

Here today's piece and you should be able to link back to any of the other stuff from there.
https://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2017/09/liverpool-what-klopp-can-learn-from-past-managers-about-attractive-football/
 
Cheers, Mike.

[Fitzy.]

Thanks for the comments by the way. Don't have to agree with me or anyone all the time. And please do note, I'm 50 so having the odd moan is part of the territory. Wait til you get there!

Here today's piece and you should be able to link back to any of the other stuff from there.
https://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2017/09/liverpool-what-klopp-can-learn-from-past-managers-about-attractive-football/
 
Cheers, Mike.

Cheers Mike. I enjoy your Friday outings...now get back inside, you're 50 for heaven's sake!

[Jookie]

Lads. Twitter is my vehicle for taking people to task.

I'm generally positive but I do find it irritating the way Klopp seems bombproof to the happy clappy brigade.

If you want a more balanced version of my views read my Friday columns where I've got more than 140 letters.

Thanks for the reply Mike. Much appreciated.

From my perspective, I was shocked over the last week some of the stuff thrown at Klopp on Twitter by so called Liverpool fans. We aren't talking critique of his tactical systems here. People were throwing personal insults (e.g. specky twat) through to saying he's clueless tactically. Obviously this wasn't you. But within Twitter you hear a lot of negative stuff. I suppose it sensitises you a little to any criticism of Klopp or the team. When you hear someone, whose opinion you respect, being negative then I suppose it gets your heckles up. Probably wrongly but it's against the backdrop of loads of supposed fans acting the c*nt on social media after every setback.

On the flip side the happy clappy fans don't do us any favours. The manager shouldn't be immune from fair criticism. And he does deserve a a proportional level of criticism for certain things.

It's the balance though. My opinion is that you defo strike the right balance on TAW (written and spoken word).

Up the Reds!

[JamesG L4]

Can we stop using fucking Twitter as any type of gauge of how Liverpool fans feel?

It is dying under the footfall of teenagers and one brain celled morons who Tweet before they think.

If I hear "On Twitter..." prefixing anything, either some bastard is about to create a strawman argument to posture in front of a "FUCKING AMAZING OPINION THAT IS ABOVE TWITTER" (tm) mirror or people are quoting some pathetic teenager who has just played COD for 16 hours straight.

Twitter should be dead by now, it is infantilising football. I'd love TAW contributors to cease to mention it - and guess what, almost everyone is shite on it. Except for HeavyKid.

[DangerScouse]

I find Mike Nevin a bit of a nark on Twitter compared to the highly-considered contributions and insights he offers on pods. I know twitter lends itself to spitting ire and vitriol but I just feel that Nevin should be above the fray rather tan contributing to the echo chamber of moaning.

Couldn't agree more mate. Probably my favourite contributor on podcasts, echoes my sentiments on Rafa entirely, and beyond, but his comments at times come across as tiresome and petty. Giving out about fans at City singing ynwa as a show of support to players. Give over ffs.

If anything, have a pop at the fans that fucked off long before that.

[Jookie]

Can we stop using fucking Twitter as any type of gauge of how Liverpool fans feel?

It is dying under the footfall of teenagers and one brain celled morons who Tweet before they think.

If I hear "On Twitter..." prefixing anything, either some bastard is about to create a strawman argument to posture in front of a "FUCKING AMAZING OPINION THAT IS ABOVE TWITTER" (tm) mirror or people are quoting some pathetic teenager who has just played COD for 16 hours straight.

Twitter should be dead by now, it is infantilising football. I'd love TAW contributors to cease to mention it - and guess what, almost everyone is shite on it.

As much as we want to discount it the opinions expressed on a platform like Twitter do represent sections of the fan base.

How much do we take notice of them?

How much do the opinions represent the wider fan base?

I don't know the answer to either of the above but the bell end voices of Twitter exists and represent part of our fan base. Your hear element at of the same rhetoric on here. You hear elements of the same opinion from family and friends.

Less extreme but following a similar thread.

It should be inconsequential but it probably isn't. The demise of Rafa should tell us that

[jillcwhomever]

As much as we want to discount it the opinions expressed on a platform like Twitter do represent sections of the fan base.

How much do we take notice of them?

How much do the opinions represent the wider fan base?

I don't know the answer to either of the above but the bell end voices of Twitter exists and represent part of our fan base. Your hear element at of the same rhetoric on here. You hear elements of the same opinion from family and friends.

Less extreme but following a similar thread.

It should be inconsequential but it probably isn't. The demise of Rafa should tell us that

It is hard to take many on social media serious and have much respect. The problem is you may get some who are sensible and have impressive views, but it mainly gets swallowed up in the vile outpouring of so many, who think one defeat entitles them to call the manager and players insulting names, and act like spoilt children. It's a media I have little time for sadly, mainly because it encourages other's to behave in the same way, rather than to persuade people to find their own views. The louder you shout the more you get listened to, the more follow you and are not encouraged to think for themselves. The louder and more persistent the outpourings the more the media seize on it, and so the pressure begins. Before you know it they represent the view of all Liverpool fans even when they don't.

Of course managers and players should expect some criticsim that is natural and understandable sometimes. But too often it gets over personal, and once that starts to build, it is very hard to stop it ending a certain way.

[Fitzy.]

Can we stop using fucking Twitter as any type of gauge of how Liverpool fans feel?

It is dying under the footfall of teenagers and one brain celled morons who Tweet before they think.

If I hear "On Twitter..." prefixing anything, either some bastard is about to create a strawman argument to posture in front of a "FUCKING AMAZING OPINION THAT IS ABOVE TWITTER" (tm) mirror or people are quoting some pathetic teenager who has just played COD for 16 hours straight.

Twitter should be dead by now, it is infantilising football. I'd love TAW contributors to cease to mention it - and guess what, almost everyone is shite on it. Except for HeavyKid.

I read on Twitter that Voltaire's a right prick...

[Dougle]

Belter from Robbo on FSG. Well balanced but unfraid to ask a few difficult questions.

Chalk it down. Really enjoyed it. Interesting to get a sense of the relationship (powerlessness ??) of american baseball (sports ?) fans to their teams. Governing and being governed by. Great show.

[[new username under construction]]

Random I know but really like Gareth Roberts on there, seem to enjoy his stuff the most Overall a good way to spend a fiver

[JamesG L4]

I read on Twitter that Voltaire's a right prick...

Ha! Well, nothing really ever changes, does it?!

[dangerpuss]

Not worth listening to when things aren't going well. The Tomkin's Times is just much more balanced and reasonable. I don't want to pay for Twitter level moaning.

[JamesG L4]

Not worth listening to when things aren't going well. The Tomkin's Times is just much more balanced and reasonable. I don't want to pay for Twitter level moaning.

Absolute garbage. TAW is perhaps even better when we are in a slump, the contributors all strive to contextualise it and dig deep to give reasoned opinions that are consistent with those given when we are playing well. Neil Atkinson is the best red out there to deconstruct a loss, spinning the problems around like a Rubik's cube - he's like therapy for a loss - plus he gets in about 140 characters every couple of seconds in an hour show. The polar opposite of Twitter, really.

In short, you probably haven't ever listened when we lose if you have that opinion.

[Fitzy.]

Not worth listening to when things aren't going well. The Tomkin's Times is just much more balanced and reasonable. I don't want to pay for Twitter level moaning.

The most inaccurate post of 2017

[The Lord Admiral]

Random I know but really like Gareth Roberts on there, seem to enjoy his stuff the most Overall a good way to spend a fiver

You can tell he's really thoughtful about TAW as a whole and about content being original. He's really honest about being a nark sometimes as well, which I really admire because I can be one as well. Means when I don't agree with him on something I can put it down to him being a arlarse (whether that's the reason or not!).

[Alan_X]

Not worth listening to when things aren't going well. The Tomkin's Times is just much more balanced and reasonable. I don't want to pay for Twitter level moaning.

I don't think that's a 'balanced and reasonable' response. I'm listening to the post-match show at the moment and it's neither all moaning nor all rose-tinted.

[Dougle]

Absolute garbage. TAW is perhaps even better when we are in a slump, the contributors all strive to contextualise it and dig deep to give reasoned opinions that are consistent with those given when we are playing well. Neil Atkinson is the best red out there to deconstruct a loss, spinning the problems around like a Rubik's cube - he's like therapy for a loss - plus he gets in about 140 characters every couple of seconds in an hour show. The polar opposite of Twitter, really.

In short, you probably haven't ever listened when we lose if you have that opinion.

Yep, the review of the 2-2 Sevilla was brilliant.