Topic: Leicester 2-3 Liverpool (Salah 15' Cou 22' Okazaki 45+3' Henderson 66' Vardy 68)

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Absolutely. If they are physically incapable of keeping up with play then it is impacting on their ability to do their job.

100 percent agree here. A fit ref is able to get himself in the right position to make good calls. A less fit one will get stuff wrong just because he can't get to the most ideal position. Either too far from play and/or the wrong angle.

I speak of experience from being an ice hockey ref for 30 years, some of those at a very high level. Even now as I ref the lower leagues, fitness is a very important tool.

[BabuYagu]

Totally agree with you on Gini there Baba, I found watching him last season he excelled in games where things were nip and tuck in midfield, So many times he really shone against tight technical midfields. I think he could be important for us in Europe too in that respect. 
I like that from top teams, having players who are not scared to get the ball in tight areas. Having that ability is as good as it gets technically from a midfielders point of view.
Just shows you doesn't it though, in the philosophy of coaches like Klopp, Guardiola compared to Mourinho.  After their win on Saturday, Phil Jones said something that seemed to be totally missed but for me it said a lot, He said "we knew we would hurt teams physically this season".
We might have games like Saturday a little bit often for our liking, and we may look soft as shite at times, but we'll get there and with Klopp in charge, we will always we a team who play football and not try to beat teams by brute force like some

Good spot. You would hear that from a Pulis team that scraped a 1-0 against Real Sociedad in europe.

Physical teams absolutely can impose themselves on sides and come out on top. However, over the course of a tourament or a season, sides who have tactically and technically superiority will usually win. That Milan side for example with Rijkaard and Anchelotti in midfield - teams didn't have a prayer against them. The great Brazil sides. Barca, Spain and most recently Germany.

In a weird way I care more about what the team will be in 12 months time than now. I think he is still feeling out some players for suitability for his side. He hasn't put his spine in place so it's hard to judge his work. The encouraging thing is the players he is signing (and targetting) are all right for the system. Players who are tactically smart, technically gifted aligned with a good physical base which is needed more here than anywhere else. The side as a whole isn't at that level we need yet tactically and technically. Likely more players will need to be replaced to get there too. The signs are encouraging though that he is building a side to dominate rather than just compete in this league. The biggest mistake he made in Germany was when he started prioritising physical over technical or tactical when replacing key players. The likes of Immobile & Ramos instead of Lewandowski. They were neither technically or tactically at the same level of the player they were replacing.

[redmark]

Yes, I said a table isn't needed for that. We can tell who isn't fit for purpose now.

Being contrary on a forum is the point of it. If nothing gets questioned there's no debate and we just nod in agreement.

http://www.debateablekids.com/glossary-of-debate-terms.html

Refutation is not simply arguing the opposite side of the opposing team. It is the practice of specifically addressing the evidence or reasoning of an opponent, exposing weaknesses and undermining arguments. 

[CrasherKid79]

http://www.debateablekids.com/glossary-of-debate-terms.html

Refutation is not simply arguing the opposite side of the opposing team. It is the practice of specifically addressing the evidence or reasoning of an opponent, exposing weaknesses and undermining arguments. 

So I'm wrong then?

Table of refs. Top gets the biggest game. same ref every week?

[redmark]

So I'm wrong then?

Table of refs. Top gets the biggest game same ref every week

I didn't realise you'd made an argument sufficiently detailed to be right or wrong. I was just trying to provide information to improve your debating skills beyond contrariness. Because occasionally you do seem to have something to say, but it gets lost in the instinct just to piss people off.



I don't care about refs. On the whole I suppose I'm one of those people who do believe it pretty much averages out, and recognise that we get some dodgy decisions at times. On Saturday, I was certainly aware that I was shouting at the ref more than usual, so he certainly annoyed me with a lot of the little, marginal, scrappy calls.

But on reflection, I don't think he actually got many of the big ones wrong. Vardy/Matip, yes, Vardy conned the ref. I don't think he could see Okazaki holding Mignolet. I think Mignolet's was a penalty.

But I don't care about it enough to discuss refereeing decisions in detail days later.

[redmark]

I think Babu's idea of what should be done more or less is what is already done, but of course it's entirely opaque so we have little confidence in it. Didn't one of the big name refs get demoted for a few games last season after consistently missing big moments?

Edited for peaceful harmony.

[CrasherKid79]

It was information.

See edited response above on refs. And I think Babu's idea of what should be done more or less is what is already done, but of course it's entirely opaque so we have little confidence in it. Didn't one of the big name refs get demoted for a few games last season after consistently missing big moments?

That's why I deleted it. God your quick to screen grab

[redmark]

On referee's fitness, the simplest solution is about the oldest proposal - have two refs, one in each half.

[SP]

I don't think a refs table would work. Why does that make me a tedious cock?

Yes, I said a table isn't needed for that. We can tell who isn't fit for purpose now.

Being contrary on a forum is the point of it. If nothing gets questioned there's no debate and we just nod in agreement.

Highlighting the bit I was commenting on.

[slaphead]

Good spot. You would hear that from a Pulis team that scraped a 1-0 against Real Sociedad in europe.

Physical teams absolutely can impose themselves on sides and come out on top. However, over the course of a tourament or a season, sides who have tactically and technically superiority will usually win. That Milan side for example with Rijkaard and Anchelotti in midfield - teams didn't have a prayer against them. The great Brazil sides. Barca, Spain and most recently Germany.

In a weird way I care more about what the team will be in 12 months time than now. I think he is still feeling out some players for suitability for his side. He hasn't put his spine in place so it's hard to judge his work. The encouraging thing is the players he is signing (and targetting) are all right for the system. Players who are tactically smart, technically gifted aligned with a good physical base which is needed more here than anywhere else. The side as a whole isn't at that level we need yet tactically and technically. Likely more players will need to be replaced to get there too. The signs are encouraging though that he is building a side to dominate rather than just compete in this league. The biggest mistake he made in Germany was when he started prioritising physical over technical or tactical when replacing key players. The likes of Immobile & Ramos instead of Lewandowski. They were neither technically or tactically at the same level of the player they were replacing.

Have to say, this is a fascinating topic.....even if not exactly about the Leicester game 
I was surprised to hear Jones say that, I mean, we all know it, but they are never going to admit that physicality is what they are going for.
I agree on the point that technical and tactical wins the prize over a longer period of time. And long may that continue if we want football to remain entertaining.
I know everyone keeps going on about the players we didn't sign and I try not to get into that where possible, but you can see in, what limited I have seen of him, Keita, that he is technically very impressive and will never shy away from taking the ball , same for the certain centre half we didn't get.
When you think long term, can you imagine how good it would be if styles like ours, City's, even Spurs was the blueprint for success in this league? It would be class. Lets not forget, City seem to have struck the balance so far so it shows, albeit early days, that you can attack the bullox off teams, and keep them out
Not sure how Mourinho, Hodgson and Pulis  would feel about it though
Its amazing what a win does though.  You see the positives again....well until the next game at least 

[CrasherKid79]

Highlighting the bit I was commenting on.

Are you a staff member? I'm shocked

[mobydick]

This is all well and good, saying the referee had a bad game and missed some fouls or judged some fouls harshly. I just can't find anyone though, apart from Liverpool supporters saying that he made any mistakes. Hoddle on, was it BT-Sport? and Keown on MOTD both suggested that a red card for Mignolet wouldn't have been out of place. The dive from Vardy wasn't even mentioned and the same can be said about the foul on Mignolet by Okasaki. No one seems to see these decisions as flakey or even worth a mention in the press or on post match interviews, apart from Jürgen Klopp. Why is this?   

[Chakan]

This is all well and good, saying the referee had a bad game and missed some fouls or judged some fouls harshly. I just can't find anyone though, apart from Liverpool supporters saying that he made any mistakes. Hoddle on, was it BT-Sport? and Keown on MOTD both suggested that a red card for Mignolet wouldn't have been out of place. The dive from Vardy wasn't even mentioned and the same can be said about the foul on Mignolet by Okasaki. No one seems to see these decisions as flakey or even worth a mention in the press or on post match interviews, apart from Jürgen Klopp. Why is this?   

As a foil to this, most of the pundits on NBC after the game were saying Vardy "definitely got away with one" and that "Mignolet was definitely fouled leading up to the goal" I can't remember the narrative for the pen though.

[BabuYagu]

It was information.

See edited response above on refs. And I think Babu's idea of what should be done more or less is what is already done, but of course it's entirely opaque so we have little confidence in it. Didn't one of the big name refs get demoted for a few games last season after consistently missing big moments?

http://www.refereedecisions.co.uk/ref-review-201213-does-it-all-even-out-in-the-end-at-last-the-answer/

This site used to be an interesting review process of referees but it hasn't been active now in 5 years.

My problem with the current review process of referees is it is conducting internally which makes the system corruptible. Especially when you hear of things like this:-
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/mark-halsey-alex-ferguson-text-2276667

Btw I don't expect any of this process to be done publicly, just knowledge of a system being in place that would have independent review with performance being reviewed in a fair, consistent way.

[redmark]

This is all well and good, saying the referee had a bad game and missed some fouls or judged some fouls harshly. I just can't find anyone though, apart from Liverpool supporters saying that he made any mistakes. Hoddle on, was it BT-Sport? and Keown on MOTD both suggested that a red card for Mignolet wouldn't have been out of place. The dive from Vardy wasn't even mentioned and the same can be said about the foul on Mignolet by Okasaki. No one seems to see these decisions as flakey or even worth a mention in the press or on post match interviews, apart from Jürgen Klopp. Why is this?   

BT after the game explained quite clearly why Mignolet's wasn't a red card (even if you accept that it was a foul and a penalty, the law has actually been changed so that it's only a red if it's a deliberate foul preventing a goalscoring opportunity). MOTD's analysis is good at times, but too brief when they've got a full schedule and lots to talk about. They didn't even highlight Okazaki holding Mignolet on the first goal.

I don't think there's any huge bias, though. Most pundits can be quite complimentary about us at times. Perhaps more a positive bias for 'plucky Leicester'.

[mobydick]

BT after the game explained quite clearly why Mignolet's wasn't a red card (even if you accept that it was a foul and a penalty, the law has actually been changed so that it's only a red if it's a deliberate foul preventing a goalscoring opportunity). MOTD's analysis is good at times, but too brief when they've got a full schedule and lot's to talk about. They didn't even highlight Okazaki holding Mignolet on the first goal.

I don't think there's any huge bias, though. Most pundits can be quite complimentary about us at times. Perhaps more a positive bias for 'plucky Leicester'.

Aye well, I heard the double jeopardy comment but that doesn't apply if it is judged as dangerous play. To be honest I still don't think it was a penalty, he got to the ball, which was his intent and his contact with Vardy, which Yardy didn't shy away from was purely down to the the often used "he went for the ball" If the ball had been low or on the ground and he had dived and got his fingertips to it and the striker fell over him afterwards there would be no discussion. I fail to see the difference. As for MOTD I think you are probably right, when they have a full schedule but never the less, I think these incidents deserved more coverage.

[BabuYagu]

As a foil to this, most of the pundits on NBC after the game were saying Vardy "definitely got away with one" and that "Mignolet was definitely fouled leading up to the goal" I can't remember the narrative for the pen though.

Was that Lee Dixon?

He said the same. Called the non-foul before the first goal a "Vardy special" even before the replay. Pointed out the Salah blatent pull back before the penalty too. Said of Okazaki that it was a foul/obstruction but the keeper needs to do something about it. Either deal with Okazaki or make a meal of it so the ref has to make a decision, basically.

[Zimagic]

This is all well and good, saying the referee had a bad game and missed some fouls or judged some fouls harshly. I just can't find anyone though, apart from Liverpool supporters saying that he made any mistakes. Hoddle on, was it BT-Sport? and Keown on MOTD both suggested that a red card for Mignolet wouldn't have been out of place. The dive from Vardy wasn't even mentioned and the same can be said about the foul on Mignolet by Okasaki. No one seems to see these decisions as flakey or even worth a mention in the press or on post match interviews, apart from Jürgen Klopp. Why is this?   

Guardian match report:

The goalkeeper also bore some blame for earlier goals by Vardy and Shinji Okazaki, even if he was not helped on those occasions by questionable refereeing.
[snip]
First Matip was booked when Vardy went to ground, then Mahrez swung over a corner, which Mignolet came for and missed after interference by Okazaki. Joe Gomez, jostled by Harry Maguire, was unable to prevent Wilfred Ndidi’s header from bouncing off him and towards the net.

For the Guardian, that's pretty much the equivalent of screaming it out.

Disappointed that MotD didn't say much of anything about the Lovren foul (didn't show it), their first goal no replays and no comment), or the clear foul on Salah leading up to the penalty.

[Chakan]

Was that Lee Dixon?

He said the same. Called the non-foul before the first goal a "Vardy special" even before the replay. Pointed out the Salah blatent pull back before the penalty too. Said of Okazaki that it was a foul/obstruction but the keeper needs to do something about it. Either deal with Okazaki or make a meal of it so the ref has to make a decision, basically.

Yeah Lee Dixon was on comms at the time.

I think it was Robbie Earl in the studio with Kyle Martino, in the post match analysis. They did point out the fouls, but weren't too complimentary of our defense (then again, no one is these days, with reason of course)

[BabuYagu]

100 percent agree here. A fit ref is able to get himself in the right position to make good calls. A less fit one will get stuff wrong just because he can't get to the most ideal position. Either too far from play and/or the wrong angle.

I speak of experience from being an ice hockey ref for 30 years, some of those at a very high level. Even now as I ref the lower leagues, fitness is a very important tool.

Massive respect sir. That is the fastest sport in the world! Used to watch quite a lot years back when I was a teen.

[redmark]

Aye well, I heard the double jeopardy comment but that doesn't apply if it is judged as dangerous play. To be honest I still don't think it was a penalty, he got to the ball, which was his intent and his contact with Vardy, which Yardy didn't shy away from was purely down to the the often used "he went for the ball" If the ball had been low or on the ground and he had dived and got his fingertips to it and the striker fell over him afterwards there would be no discussion. I fail to see the difference. As for MOTD I think you are probably right, when they have a full schedule but never the less, I think these incidents deserved more coverage.

Was anyone arguing it was dangerous play, though? In my view, it was a penalty because while he touched the ball, he didn't fundamentally change it's direction; it was deflected only towards goal and (if he hadn't collided with Vardy), Vardy would have been favourite to get to it (though would have had to run round Mignolet). If he'd got a more solid touch and knocked the ball forwards, it would/should have been a foul by Vardy. The touch on the ball isn't the be all and end all - where the ball is going still makes a difference.

(This is the reason I basically don't like the idea of VAR; you could argue about such decisions for days. Let the ref make a decision and accept that some will be wrong, in retrospect).

[Chakan]

Massive respect sir. That is the fastest sport in the world! Used to watch quite a lot years back when I was a teen.

I watched Ice Hockey when I lived in PA, you only know where the puck is because that's where everyone is! Always great when a fight broke out though, like 90% of the games.

[redmark]

Was that Lee Dixon?

He said the same. Called the non-foul before the first goal a "Vardy special" even before the replay. Pointed out the Salah blatent pull back before the penalty too. Said of Okazaki that it was a foul/obstruction but the keeper needs to do something about it. Either deal with Okazaki or make a meal of it so the ref has to make a decision, basically.

Agree with that. Go down screaming for a foul and make sure you pull Okazaki down with you so there's no doubt as to what you're claiming.

[northern Monkey]

I watched Ice Hockey when I lived in PA, you only know where the puck is because that's where everyone is! Always great when a fight broke out though, like 90% of the games.

I watch a fair bit and while at first it's like this, you start to see things much clearer after sustained exposure to the game.  Took me a while but I can follow the puck and even have chance to glance and see the pattern of play to degree.  In a big fan, crazy fast sport. 

It's really a good way to highlight what can be expected of officials at the highest level.  NHL officials are fit, agile and great skaters in their own right.  Keeping out of the way of the madness takes some doing.

Big difference though is technology.  It's been said a million times but it's time Football joined the current century and embraced it rather than dabble at arms length. 

I really think the refs need that help.  They make a call to award something.  Can be reviewed quickly.  Any debate at all from the ref and the call on the field stands.  Doesnt need to be long-winded and could seriously reduce the play acting bollocks we have to put up with as players would be more likely to be found out.

[BabuYagu]

Yeah Lee Dixon was on comms at the time.

I think it was Robbie Earl in the studio with Kyle Martino, in the post match analysis. They did point out the fouls, but weren't too complimentary of our defense (then again, no one is these days, with reason of course)

Indeed

The quality of pundits and analysis is higher there than on MOTD from the little I have seen.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

No but we could have easily won the game but for the poor refereeing. It was one of those matches when refereeing decisions almost cost us.

The Vardy dive
Okazaki pulling Mignolet for the goal.
The ball coming off Maguire's hand for the same goal.
Missing Lovren being hauled back in their area.
Salah being pulled off the ball in the lead-up to their penalty.
Simon beating Vardy to the ball for their penalty

We played well but several bad refereeing decisions made the game much closer than it could have been.

Klopp called them in the post match interview..........Vardy wasn't fouled, Simon was pulled back and it wasn't a penalty.

The penalty was missed so we won but those decisions above were all poor. The only one that went our way was Can's handball.

You can add the ridiculous 1st half injury time to that list.

[Chakan]

Indeed

The quality of pundits and analysis is higher there than on MOTD from the little I have seen.

Yeah they’re the best of the bad bunch really. They do make some good points, and they love watching us play

[vicar]

Agree with that. Go down screaming for a foul and make sure you pull Okazaki down with you so there's no doubt as to what you're claiming.

Yep, we don't seem to have the gamesmanship, not that I really want it. But if he had gone down shouting as you say the ref would have had to give a foul.

[Titi Camara]

Given we have a game in less than 24 hours I'm going to call time on this one.

Cheers Jon