Topic: League Cup / Premier League Fixtures 09 - 14 January

[DarkOfTheManatee]

Urgh, a draw is the best result for Everton, right?

Don't like Kompany, but would rather Burnley have won just because I think Luton will continue to pick up points elsewhere, so Burnley staying in touch of 17th keeps the pressure on.

[AllyouneedisRush]

Just call me Mr VAR....

[smicer07]

Urgh, a draw is the best result for Everton, right?

Don't like Kompany, but would rather Burnley have won just because I think Luton will continue to pick up points elsewhere, so Burnley staying in touch of 17th keeps the pressure on.

It's irrelevant as Everton won't go down anyway

[AllyouneedisRush]

It's irrelevant as Everton won't go down anyway

Agreed, 3 very poor sides blow them

[gazzalfc]

Pgmol got their statement out quick

'its just a coming together of the keeper and player'

[Boaty McBoatface]

Not a foul for me, definitely not a clear and obvious error. The space didn't belong to either of them and the attacker was just stronger. Although I expected it to be ruled out.

[smicer07]

Not a foul for me, definitely not a clear and obvious error. The space didn't belong to either of them and the attacker was just stronger. Although I expected it to be ruled out.

I thought it was a shocking decision. Imagine Alisson not getting a free kick next week for that.

[Gili Gulu]

PGMOL: "It was just a coming together"
 

[thaddeus]

Not a foul for me.  Adebayo took the space first as he was entitled to, Trafford then ran into him.

Luton should have done it a bit earlier as they were letting Trafford come a long way and claim lots of crosses throughout the game.

It felt like watching a Championship game and I'd be amazed if either side stays up (without a further points deduction for Everton).

[smicer07]

Pgmol got their statement out quick

'its just a coming together of the keeper and player'

Which blatantly isn't true.

[Boaty McBoatface]

I thought it was a shocking decision. Imagine Alisson not getting a free kick next week for that.

I'm sure that's happened before.

Edit: And I'm pretty sure it was Burnley, so fuck em.

[thaddeus]

I thought it was a shocking decision. Imagine Alisson not getting a free kick next week for that.

I genuinely think Alisson is wise to that sort of thing now.  It's why he doesn't come a long way for crosses and why he frequently punches when he could potentially catch the ball.

Trafford doesn't look very strong so it's extra risky to come so far for crosses in a crowded area.

[Barneylfc∗]

Can't believe they allowed that to stand 

[Barneylfc∗]

Burnley, so fuck em.

Pretty much.

Fuck them and their Beluga headed manager

[Pistolero]

Keeper ran into him there...and then went down like a sack of shite. Goal all day.

[spartan2785]

Anyone that is saying that they would not be out of their god damn minds if that happen to Allison are kidding themselves.  It's not that the keeper isn't strong enough, it's a case of he's being barged into deliberately with a full on hip check that a hockey player would be proud of by an offensive player without any intention of playing the ball, you can't do that even if it's to an outfield player. 

[zamagiure]

That is a foul. Luton player did not stand his ground, he moved towards the keeper and blocks him.

[smicer07]

Wish opposition managers would be more honest. Edwards will be moaning next week about a decision going against him

[tonysleft]

Wish opposition managers would be more honest. Edwards will be moaning next week about a decision going against him

I can see why he's not tbf. If I was him all I'd be thinking is "if I call a spade a spade here and say that's a foul and we got lucky, refs will feel they have carte blanche to give 50/50 decisions against us for weeks". At that level there's no room for sportsmanship!

[RedDeadRejection]

Good this VAR innit.

[Boaty McBoatface]

Anyone that is saying that they would not be out of their god damn minds if that happen to Allison are kidding themselves.  It's not that the keeper isn't strong enough, it's a case of he's being barged into deliberately with a full on hip check that a hockey player would be proud of by an offensive player without any intention of playing the ball, you can't do that even if it's to an outfield player.

Oh I'd definitely be screaming for it, but I also think keepers are overprotected. No one would be screaming penalty the other way round. I think it was smart play. He saw where the keeper was going and got there first (at worst, at the same time). The keeper was far too soft/naive. It's contact, but not a foul for me. The issue I have, is the inconsistency with how contact is interpreted by the refs.

[smicer07]

Oh I'd definitely be screaming for it, but I also think keepers are overprotected. No one would be screaming penalty the other way round. I think it was smart play. He saw where the keeper was going and got there first (at worst, at the same time). The keeper was far too soft/naive. It's contact, but not a foul for me. The issue I have, is the inconsistency with how contact is interpreted by the refs.

He got there first and deliberately fouled the keeper, didn't even look at the ball . It's a terrible decision.

[Boaty McBoatface]

Looking isn't against the rules.

[smicer07]

Looking isn't against the rules.

No but combine that with backing in to the keeper and obstructing him from getting near the ball and you've got a clear foul.

[Boaty McBoatface]

He got there first and deliberately fouled the keeper, didn't even look at the ball . It's a terrible decision.

That's the important bit for me. The space was his. He doesn't have to go anywhere after that.

[spartan2785]

Looking isn't against the rules.

I know that intent is such a nebulous thing to consider, but the fact that he takes a look to see where the keeper is then doesn't even really look for the ball, and then turns his hip into the keeper doesn't that make it a deliberate block without any intent to play the ball, it's just like if a player played a pass and then was blocked off by a defender who then moves into the player. 

Trafford has in general been really poor at crosses and has been extremely weak overall, but on this one I don't really see how he can be stronger.  It's not like the offensive player is just standing there, he throws his hip and body into Trafford who has no way to get through him unless he straight up bulldozes through the player like Onana did against Wolves.

In general I totally agree that keepers are overprotected, but this one I think was one where it absolutely should be a foul.

[marios_moustache]

I know that intent is such a nebulous thing to consider, but the fact that he takes a look to see where the keeper is then doesn't even really look for the ball, and then turns his hip into the keeper doesn't that make it a deliberate block without any intent to play the ball, it's just like if a player played a pass and then was blocked off by a defender who then moves into the player. 

Trafford has in general been really poor at crosses and has been extremely weak overall, but on this one I don't really see how he can be stronger.  It's not like the offensive player is just standing there, he throws his hip and body into Trafford who has no way to get through him unless he straight up bulldozes through the player like Onana did against Wolves.

In general I totally agree that keepers are overprotected, but this one I think was one where it absolutely should be a foul.

In real time not a foul but watching replays it probably was. Think back to Ruben Dias on Ali.......didn't look like a foul in real time and I don't think the replays proved it was a foul either.

How would you compare those 2?

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

That's the important bit for me. The space was his. He doesn't have to go anywhere after that.

That's literally the definition of obstruction. The keeper is going for the ball and the attacker moves into his way to make sure he can't get it.

It's an incredible decision. What the fuck is the goalkeeper meant to do in that situation?

[Boaty McBoatface]

I know that intent is such a nebulous thing to consider, but the fact that he takes a look to see where the keeper is then doesn't even really look for the ball, and then turns his hip into the keeper doesn't that make it a deliberate block without any intent to play the ball, it's just like if a player played a pass and then was blocked off by a defender who then moves into the player. 

Trafford has in general been really poor at crosses and has been extremely weak overall, but on this one I don't really see how he can be stronger.  It's not like the offensive player is just standing there, he throws his hip and body into Trafford who has no way to get through him unless he straight up bulldozes through the player like Onana did against Wolves.

In general I totally agree that keepers are overprotected, but this one I think was one where it absolutely should be a foul.

I totally see your point. And like I said earlier, I expected VAR to overrule it. But the ball is just one factor. The attacker has no requirement to move out of the way or change his body shape to make it easier for the keeper. He just reads the situation better in my eyes. He sees the keeper coming and steps across him.

Let me ask you this. If the attacker stepped across and went down like a sack of spuds, do you think it's a penalty?

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

He sees the keeper coming and steps across him.

That's a foul, then?

[spartan2785]

I totally see your point. And like I said earlier, I expected VAR to overrule it. But the ball is just one factor. The attacker has no requirement to move out of the way or change his body shape to make it easier for the keeper. He just reads the situation better in my eyes. He sees the keeper coming and steps across him.

Let me ask you this. If the attacker stepped across and went down like a sack of spuds, do you think it's a penalty?

I guess where I disagree is that I don't think he went down easily, I thought the amount of contact meant that the keeper wasn't play acting. 

If the keeper went down easily by being slightly touched than yes I would say the goal should stand, but I saw a significant amount of contact that meant the keeper had no way of getting to the ball, it's not like he was brushed and was looking for the foul.

[marios_moustache]

That's a foul, then?

It should be a foul, but so should everytime a defender doing that across an attacker to see the ball out for a goal kick?!?!

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

It should be a foul, but so should everytime a defender doing that across an attacker to see the ball out for a goal kick?!?!

Not disputing that. But if you're not giving fouls based on other fouls not being given then no foul can ever be given 

[Boaty McBoatface]

That's a foul, then?

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. I don't think the contact warranted a foul on this occasion, but totally understand that you, and most others, do.

[marios_moustache]

Not disputing that. But if you're not giving fouls based on other fouls not being given then no foul can ever be given 

I was playing devil's advocate.......

But no fouls being given because of previous fouls and no fouls ever being given........ Matrix!!!

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. I don't think the contact warranted a foul on this occasion, but totally understand that you, and most others, do.

https://twitter.com/FrankMSinclair/status/1745938440112238913?t=6CiN1Rkn1aAaa_hXo7UHpg&s=19

Genuinely don't see how it's not a foul. The goalkeeper is going for the ball, and a player not going for the ball just moves into him. Look at Adebayo's leg - what is the goalkeeper meant to do in this situation?

[Boaty McBoatface]

If a defender stopped an attacker from heading the ball like that, do you think it's a penalty?

[Boaty McBoatface]

https://youtube.com/shorts/xQuhOZb0a-U?si=mTyw7Ik4MoKo4gmG

Was this an obstruction/foul on Palhinha? Mac ran right across him. Difference is Palhina didn't collapse like a house of cards.

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

If a defender stopped an attacker from heading the ball like that, do you think it's a penalty?

Probably should be yes. Likely wouldn't be given, but that's a whole different issue. A foul on the goalkeeper like that is just known to be a foul.

The one on Alisson against City was much, much softer, but the universal opinion on here was that it was a foul (and I also think it was).

[Nick110581]

Not sure that’s a foul.

Trafford goes down pretty easily.