Topic: The corruption fallacy - they’re all out to get us!

[Timbo's Goals]

(Even bloody Timbo has turned into a raving loony [conspiracy theorist] on this question!)

I resemble that remark   

Actually I don't. Not one bit.

But as I've said so many times now I am angry and frustrated that all the shite we've endured this season - but of course principally the the three crucial incidents I keep highlighting and to which not a solitary accuser of the likes of myself as being a conspiracy theorist has had the courtesy even to acknowledge and address but fucking hey ho on that fucking one - could potentially rob us come May of the title which, given we carry on at the same rate of knots as we have done so far we would so richly deserve, given all that has transpired for us both decision and injury wise.

But as I also said earlier Yorky the likes of yourself please do carry on denying the bleeding obvious, cherry picking points you feel comfortable in commenting upon, ignoring points you don't feel on safe ground with and effectively defending the performances of the officials as being merely incompetent as distinct from simply not wanting to rule in Liverpool's favour when any smidgeon of impartiality would have seen them doing so.

Yorky, it fucking stinks to high heaven and I find incomprehensible as a Liverpudlian - who goes back to the late '50's by the way not just the '70's - the steadfast apologist refusal of the likes of yourself to acknowledge the reality of the three abominations I keep citing as being a whole world away from simple human error and incompetence.

[Eeyore]

From Tomkins.

Newly unearthed recordings of Stuart Attwell’s VAR feed, and studio analysis by Howard Webb, Michael Owen, Mike Dean and Darren England.

This sheds serious new light on how things work at Stockley Park, and how the PGMOL deals with such issues.



Attwell (VAR): “There’s clear contact. Darwin Núñez has forced both his legs into Ederson’s boot. Núñez has injured Ederson in the process. Red card to Núñez would be my suggestion. But stay with your original decision of a penalty, it’s more than my job’s worth on this one. And I only overturn decisions for Brighton anyway.”

Webb: “Núñez was clearly coming in fast – too fast, I think. I don’t think you’re allowed to run that fast. He’s out of control, his legs are all over the place. Look at him, with that ponytail. All that hair, so needless. He gets the ball first, sure, but what does that really mean? It didn’t mean anything the week before. And Ederson kicks Núñez up into the stands, sure, but the foreigner is clearly looking for contact, isn’t he?”

Owen: “I’m not quite sure. It’s one of those, isn’t it?”

Dean: “Look mate, you can’t call him over to the monitor for that, as he’s a mate, right, mate? I think the ref’s got it right there.”



Attwell (VAR): “Checking for possible handball. Check complete, no handball.”

Webb: “This is one of those tricky ones. They’ve both gone in high, but only Peter Shilton has his hand up. Diego Maradona’s hands are by his side and his feet on the ground. We can all see that. It’s not even up for debate.”

Owen: “I’m not quite sure. It’s one of those, isn’t it?”

Dean: “I think the ref’s got it right there.”



Attwell (VAR): “So there’s clear contact on the ball by De Jong. There’s a coming together. Alonso is coming in, he turns his body. The ball is high, they both come in high. I don’t think there is enough evidence there for a free-kick. Alonso’s coming into De Jong’s space. Alonso turns his back into him. It’s a coming together.”

Webb: “The ref was particularly good in this game. Did everything right. A spectacular specimen of a human, that man. Beautiful bald adonis. But it’s interesting, isn’t it, that if you look at it with your eyes closed, you can’t see anything wrong with the challenge. If anything, Alonso is the aggressor by passively aggressively being kicked in the nipples.”

Owen: “I’m not quite sure. It’s one of those, isn’t it?”

Dean: “I think the ref’s got it right there.”

England: “Good process, Boss. You always get it right. Not even the 98% of the time we all do, but literally 100% of the time. Sometimes, you even get it 101% right.”


Attwell (VAR): “Okay, we have a coming together. Both players go for the ball. They’ve both come in high – just like me and my assistant when entering the VAR booth at kickoff.”

Webb: “It’s a tricky one, isn’t it? It’s too low to head the ball, but also too high to kick the ball, so Roy Keane’s foot doesn’t really have anywhere else to go but into, and right through, Alfie Inge Haaland’s knee.”

Owen: “I’m not quite sure. It’s one of those, isn’t it?”

Dean: “I think the ref’s got it right there.”



Webb: “Ah, but this is a nice touch, a lovely touch! – Keane goes over to Haaland to check that he’s okay. And Haaland is so touched by the gesture that … he’s crying! Tears of joy, tears of love and respect.”



Attwell: “There’s been a coming together.”

Webb: “Yes, a coming together.”

Owen: “I’m not quite sure. It’s one of those, isn’t it?”

Dean: “Remember that time we call came together?”

England: “Didn’t we say we’d never talk about that?”



Attwell (VAR): “I’ve got the still image here, but obviously in much higher definition than you guys, where I can see all the details. To be honest, I can’t see anything wrong. Stick with your original decision, mates. Check complete.”

Webb: “Well, clearly there’s been a coming together. M Kelly has obviously had an accidental collision with a knife, maybe 50-100 times, maybe more. In those accidental collisions, there’s been a removal and dispersement of all internal organs. The intestines are strewn by the right side and the spleen by the left side of the body. The face is hacked beyond recognition, in what can only be a clear case of simulation. Yellow card, for me.”

Owen: “I’m not quite sure. It’s one of those, isn’t it?”

Dean: “I think the ref’s got it right there.”

England: “Good process, guys. Right, who fancies a pint?”

[CHOPPER]

So you heard the audio of the Diaz VAR and thought it was incompetence and not deliberate deafness until the referee blew followed by stonewalling any attempt whatsoever to rectify the error ? I suppose given the fact that 35pc of the population has lost money to scams I shouldn’t be too surprised.

Seriously mate, what the fuck are you on about with deliberate deafness. That statement epitomises this thread down to the ground. If it wasn't so ridiculous, you'd need shoving in the loony bin.

[CHOPPER]

Could you ref a Utd game and be 100% fair, cos I know I couldn't. I wouldn't do anything illegal, but I'd not play advantages, wave away free kicks when Fernandes hit the deck, I'd give a stonewall pen, but anything I thought I could not give, I wouldn't.

Parents cannot referee kids games without bias, imagine being able to fuck over a team you grew up hating?

I wouldn't put myself in the position, as you cant send off an entire city ...... but funny that you mention that - the perception in here is that all refs are Brian Glover in Kes, when they ref us, its fucking hilarious 

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Seriously mate, what the fuck are you on about with deliberate deafness. That statement epitomises this thread down to the ground. If it wasn't so ridiculous, you'd need shoving in the loony bin.

Good Process, Boys.

The one good thing about all this is that when someone completely fucks something in work, 'Good Process Boys' is all over the threads.

PGMOL have probably made it into the Urban Dictionary, if not the Oxford one.

[CHOPPER]

Good Process, Boys.

The one good thing about all this is that when someone completely fucks something in work, 'Good Process Boys' is all over the threads.

PGMOL have probably made it into the Urban Dictionary, if not the Oxford one.

You absolutely quantify what I am saying - they thought they had actually done the correct thing, they thought it was good. It wasn't, it was shit, it was a shit process, adjudged shitely and delivered shitely. It doesn't say conspiracy - it screams shitness. 

[Eeyore]

Seriously mate, what the fuck are you on about with deliberate deafness. That statement epitomises this thread down to the ground. If it wasn't so ridiculous, you'd need shoving in the loony bin.

Here is the audio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1N2shu-h38&t=86s

In the small window in which the VAR and AVAR can intervene England the VAR suddenly takes massive pauses and says 'What', 'Pardon' and 'Oli'. As soon as that window has gone he suddenly answers instantly 'can't do anything'.

Whilst the others clearly want the game stopped with the ball now out of play and with a Liverpool throw-in. England constantly talks over them saying 'I can't do anything'.

Quite clearly he could. With a stoppage in play, he should have informed the referee of what happened. The referee is the final arbitrator and ultimate decision-maker.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

You absolutely quantify what I am saying - they thought they had actually done the correct thing, they thought it was good. It wasn't, it was shit, it was a shit process, adjudged shitely and delivered shitely. It doesn't say conspiracy - it screams shitness. 

Totally. If it were a one off then that would be fine. That seemed to be a complete fuck up - I'd argue the Jones sending off (Given previous and subsequent offences dealt with differently) and Jota being sent off for not touching someone and then a yellow seemed a bit odd - as did many decisions through the game - but yeah, let's go with 'loads and loads and loads of honest mistakes' - works for me.

And I'm happy to go with mistakes, but this last one is really perplexing me mate.

We can all clearly see the lad misses the ball and booted Mac Allister in the chest. We can all see it's a high boot. We can all see Mac Allisters feet are on the floor and the defenders foot is in a dangerous position and we can all see it's a penalty. Yorkie confirmed that was his view - as it is mine.

So we're all good. Just another 'mistake' by PGMOL who are shite at their jobs and unable to officiate to the standard required. We all shrug again and we all go off to live our lives and replace our tin foil back into the kitchen cupboards knowing that we were fucked out of three points again by stupid useless dickheads.

But.

No.

That hasn't happened in this instance. Despite everyone knowing it's a penalty, an 'independent' panel said that the decision was correct. A week later, the head of PGMOL went on telly and said the decision was correct. We've had at least two City players explaining at length why the decision was correct.


My stuggle and I do apologise if I'm not making myself clear here is

1. We all know it was 'mistakes' made and a penalty
2. PGMOL officially have confirmed the correct decision was reached.


Those things are mutually exclusive aren't they? How do we square that circle?

[Eeyore]

You absolutely quantify what I am saying - they thought they had actually done the correct thing, they thought it was good. It wasn't, it was shit, it was a shit process, adjudged shitely and delivered shitely. It doesn't say conspiracy - it screams shitness. 

They didn't though. The video operator and his boss instantly told them they had made a mistake. That was exactly the moment England lost the power of hearing. The VAR and AVAR then failed to inform the referee or the 4th official.

[CHOPPER]

Here is the audio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1N2shu-h38&t=86s

In the small window in which the VAR and AVAR can intervene England the VAR suddenly takes massive pauses and says 'What', 'Pardon' and 'Oli'. As soon as that window has gone he suddenly answers instantly 'can't do anything'.

Whilst the others clearly want the game stopped with the ball now out of play and with a Liverpool throw-in. England constantly talks over them saying 'I can't do anything'.

Quite clearly he could. With a stoppage in play, he should have informed the referee of what happened. The referee is the final arbitrator and ultimate decision-maker.

He couldn't do anything, they've changed the rules now, they couldn't then, they can now, due to the shitness mistake. Or, and I assume more than likely - they realise that if a conspiracy has been unearthed, they can de-conspiracy the situation, as its not a mistake, its conspiracy unearthed, so can change the decison and look for another opportunity to get, us.

[kiwiscouser]

He couldn't do anything, they've changed the rules now, they couldn't then, they can now, due to the shitness mistake. Or, and I assume more than likely - they realise that if a conspiracy has been unearthed, they can de-conspiracy the situation, as its not a mistake, its conspiracy unearthed, so can change the decison and look for another opportunity to get, us.

They gave Man U a penalty after the had blown the final whistle. The game had ended! I’m sure they could have. They tend to make most things up as they go along.

[alonsoisared]

Spurs one, once the audio was released proved how fucking shit they are, no conspiracy, just plain old being fucking shite at what they were doing.

The other two - arsenal pen? Yes, should have been a pen, though how many fans say that up and down the country ever single day, in  every single league...... though I will say this, that 5 against 1 or 2 and we didn't score, what makes you think we have scored the pen! we couldn't hit a barn door with a banjo that night.

Cant recollect the other one?

oh god, I wouldn't go down this route Chops, I got slaughtered by a couple of the nutters for suggesting we should've taken a chance or two in that second half against city the other week.

There's a split in this thread between people posting in good faith, putting their opinions forward thoughtfully (Al, I've got loads of time for your posts but I don't know where you get your stamina from to keep the argument going ) and those that go by mob rule and just get very angry that people might think differently to them. It's there in other threads too. I'm 99% confident that this is a case of a minority feeling emboldened by having eachothers back while in the real world most people disagree with them. Maybe Andy could do one of his polls about it. I reckon most people would agree the refs are shit and then a minority from basically every single club in the football league would present a raft of circumstantial evidence showing that the refs are all biased against them. Poll non Liverpool fans and ask them if they believe there's corruption against us at the hands of refs and they'd laugh their heads off.

Chelsea, Newcastle, Forest alone in the last couple of months. City before Christmas. All of them would claim, laughably but with as much conviction as some on here, that they suffered at the hands of Liverpool getting all the decisions. The refs all trying to give Klopp a big send off.

The refereeing in this country is absolutely awful. On balance we've had more bad decisions against us than for us this season but I can accept I'm heavily biased. If we miss out by a point or two I will continue to be mightily pissed off about the spurs one in particular. Is there a case that the referees all stick together? I'd say yes, there are times they've not wanted to overturn their mate's decision or send them to the monitor, and there are instances where I believe they've tried to talk down how bad a decision was after the fact in order to try and make the controversy go away. I think that is purely to protect eachother in a job where they get dogs abuse from all sides, and they behave in that manner regardless of which club profited or suffered from the particular decision. I don't see that as evidence that they are absolutely biased against Liverpool.

Is anyone arguing that there is absolutely no way that there could possibly be corruption? No. Is anyone arguing that the referees are brilliant and should be exempt from criticism? No. But there has to be a high threshold of evidence beyond the tantrums after every single game, always ignoring decisions in our favour and clutching at anything that goes against us. Or better still, quoting mark fucking goldbridge.

[Eeyore]

He couldn't do anything, they've changed the rules now, they couldn't then, they can now, due to the shitness mistake. Or, and I assume more than likely - they realise that if a conspiracy has been unearthed, they can de-conspiracy the situation, as its not a mistake, its conspiracy unearthed, so can change the decison and look for another opportunity to get, us.

There haven't been any rule changes Chops. As for England not being able to do anything. That isn't true. Even worse he was actually shouting down the people who wanted to tell the referee or the 4th official to delay the restart.

There was an obvious solution that Klopp alluded to. Soon after the incident, the ball went out of play for a Liverpool throw-in. Whilst the game was stopped the referee and 4th official should have been informed of the disastrous error. They could have easily explained what happened to the managers and then Diaz could have been allowed to score.

There has been a clear precedent for this when teams have been allowed to score an uncontested. England took that out of the equation by stopping the Ref and 4th official from being informed of the mistake.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

oh god, I wouldn't go down this route Chops, I got slaughtered by a couple of the nutters for suggesting we should've taken a chance or two in that second half against city the other week.

There's a split in this thread between people posting in good faith, putting their opinions forward thoughtfully (Al, I've got loads of time for your posts but I don't know where you get your stamina from to keep the argument going ) and those that go by mob rule and just get very angry that people might think differently to them. It's there in other threads too. I'm 99% confident that this is a case of a minority feeling emboldened by having eachothers back while in the real world most people disagree with them. Maybe Andy could do one of his polls about it. I reckon most people would agree the refs are shit and then a minority from basically every single club in the football league would present a raft of circumstantial evidence showing that the refs are all biased against them. Poll non Liverpool fans and ask them if they believe there's corruption against us at the hands of refs and they'd laugh their heads off.

Chelsea, Newcastle, Forest alone in the last couple of months. City before Christmas. All of them would claim, laughably but with as much conviction as some on here, that they suffered at the hands of Liverpool getting all the decisions. The refs all trying to give Klopp a big send off.

The refereeing in this country is absolutely awful. On balance we've had more bad decisions against us than for us this season but I can accept I'm heavily biased. If we miss out by a point or two I will continue to be mightily pissed off about the spurs one in particular. Is there a case that the referees all stick together? I'd say yes, there are times they've not wanted to overturn their mate's decision or send them to the monitor, and there are instances where I believe they've tried to talk down how bad a decision was after the fact in order to try and make the controversy go away. I think that is purely to protect eachother in a job where they get dogs abuse from all sides, and they behave in that manner regardless of which club profited or suffered from the particular decision. I don't see that as evidence that they are absolutely biased against Liverpool.

Is anyone arguing that there is absolutely no way that there could possibly be corruption? No. Is anyone arguing that the referees are brilliant and should be exempt from criticism? No. But there has to be a high threshold of evidence beyond the tantrums after every single game, always ignoring decisions in our favour and clutching at anything that goes against us. Or better still, quoting mark fucking goldbridge.

So how about you answer the question that I've been asking everyone - you know, the one they all refuse to answer?

[alonsoisared]

They should've given us a pen. They bottled the big decision. A couple of the panel agreed it was the wrong call, a few of them interpreted it differently, for reasons you'd have to ask them. I think that answers your question as much as I possibly can and it's at least as plausible as "because everyone hates us and are trying to stop us winning".

[Yorkykopite]

They should've given us a pen. They bottled the big decision. A couple of the panel agreed it was the wrong call, a few of them interpreted it differently, for reasons you'd have to ask them. I think that answers your question as much as I possibly can and it's at least as plausible as "because everyone hates us and are trying to stop us winning".

I answered the question pretty much the same way.

Sorry Andy, I wasn't aware you'd asked me this question. In fact I'm not sure what the question is.

The phrase however is completely inept, as was the original decision. It was a pen, and VAR should have asked the unsighted ref to have a look at the monitor. The way I would have phrased it - and I have addressed this before (which you might have missed) - is that both players legitimately went for a high-bouncing ball. One with a leg, obviously, the other with his chest. Mac Allister beat Doku to it fractionally and that was enough to warrant a penalty because the City player's leg impeded the Liverpool player's momentum. I don't think there was anything vicious about Doku's challenge. I think he was trying to bring the ball under control rather than blast it clear and his foot movement was actually laterally across Macca's chest rather than a full-blooded thrust towards Macca - say in the manner of de Jong's famous assault on Alonso in the World Cup Final. But Doku was surely taken by surprise by how quickly Mac Allister was on to the ball. I was too. He doesn't look to be the favourite as the ball is bouncing upwards!  (again, I've posted my thoughts on this already, but you seem to have missed them). Doku took a risk and he failed. Man City should have paid the price. They didn't. Was this corruption? No, I don't think so. It was incompetence, followed by the all-too-usual apologetics from the refereeing establishment.

I don't think he reads the answers though. So do expect the following question to come up again fairly soon:

So how about you answer the question that I've been asking everyone - you know, the one they all refuse to answer?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I answered the question pretty much the same way.

I don't think he reads the answers though. So do expect the following question to come up again fairly soon:

Right but that's not question I'm asking you.

I'm saying that you belive that it was a penalty.

I'm saying that the 'independant' panel said that it wasn't.

The PGMOL head came out and agreed that it wasn't.


It was clearly a penalty. Anyone can see that. The narrative is that it was 'just a mistake' - but both parties are saying it wasn't a mistake.


Now, again, I'm sorry if I'm not being clear - I've put it several ways, obviously badly if you can't understand what I'm asking you.



But it comes down to;

How can it be a mistake and also not be a mistake. I know what I saw. I know you saw it. I've seen the pictures. I've seen the videos. I've seen it from several angles. I've read and heard the VAR transcript.

There, very clearly, under the rules of the game should have been a penalty. We can't say it was a 'mistake' because after the event - an 'independant' comittee said it wasn't. The head of PGMOL agreed.


You can't have two mutually opposite things being true at the same time.

If we both agree it was a pen, then what's going on here?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

They should've given us a pen. They bottled the big decision. A couple of the panel agreed it was the wrong call, a few of them interpreted it differently, for reasons you'd have to ask them. I think that answers your question as much as I possibly can and it's at least as plausible as "because everyone hates us and are trying to stop us winning".

But then the head of PGMOL came out publically on the telly to tell everyone they were wrong, it wasn't a penalty and the decision was right.

It can't have been a penalty and also not be a penalty.

If the ref 'bottled it' as you suggest - which is fine - as I've said - that's a mistake - an annoying, shithouse mistake, but a genuine error.

But it wasn't a mistake. He didn't bottle it because the panel said it wasn't a pen. Just to confirm this, the PGMOL head then came out and backed the panel and also said it wasn't a pen.


So you saying 'he bottled it' cannot be true when both the panel and then the head of PMGOL both said the decision was correct.


I honestly dont' get why you don't understand what I'm asking. It seems a pretty straightforward question to me. You can't say he 'bottled it' when the official line (twice!) [Cue Pep GIF] said he didn't.


So if it makes it easier for you to understand what I'm asking. I'll rephrase it.


Q: How can a ref and VAR bottle it while, at the same time the ref and VAR didn't not bottle it.


These things appear to be mutually exclusive to me.

[Yorkykopite]

I'm sorry Andy. I'm trying so hard - in fact I'm starting to cry - but I haven't a clue what you're going on about. You'll have to settle for the answer I gave you. Sorry, I know want more - or maybe less. Or perhaps both. Or neither......

[JRed]

I'm sorry Andy. I'm trying so hard - in fact I'm starting to cry - but I haven't a clue what you're going on about. You'll have to settle for the answer I gave you. Sorry, I know want more - or maybe less. Or perhaps both. Or neither......

It’s not that hard. We’re all saying the officials made a mistake by not giving us a penalty v Abu Dhabi. However, all the officials, the head of PGMOL and the PL ‘independent’ panel have all said it wasn’t a mistake and the decision was correct.
Who is wrong? Us or them?

[Yorkykopite]

It’s not that hard. We’re all saying the officials made a mistake by not giving us a penalty v Abu Dhabi. However, all the officials, the head of PGMOL and the PL ‘independent’ panel have all said it wasn’t a mistake and the decision was correct.
Who is wrong? Us or them?

Thanks J.

They are. 

[JRed]

Thanks J.

They are.

They are? If they weren’t corrupt then surely they would just admit they were wrong?

[Eeyore]

Thanks J.

They are. 

The question is should Oliver who was paid by UAE days before the Spurs debacle have been entrusted with a Man City v Liverpool game?

Furthermore was it a mistake, incompetence, an accident or a failure of the PGMOL's anti-corruption policies?

[Redley]

It’s a cover up in plain sight…but just not proof of anything untoward. Orchestrated by a head of PGMOL and a referee who have both been paid by middle eastern entities who also own PL football clubs.

‘Its cos they’re all just rubbish’

[Andy @ Allerton!]

They are? If they weren’t corrupt then surely they would just admit they were wrong?

That is the drive of my confusion here mate.

If they had admitted it was yet another mistake that had fucked Liverpool, then yeah. Annoying as shit, but they admitted it was yet another mistake that went against us. We might be pissed off, but you have to move on. These mistakes happen to us quite a lot and this is just another 'hey ho' moment.

But they didn't say that for the most obvious penalty that you can imagine which the rules of the game are very clear on. They had all the angles, all the vids and they didn't get it right. Then then had days for an 'independant' panel to observe what was given and rule that it wasn't an error or a mistake or a penalty. They then had another week where PGMOL (it's head, no less) - obviously after speaking at length to the officials and then panel then went onto a TV show and basically lied to everyone.

There are several things that appear to be to be not truthful. For those that believe that it was a penalty to be then told that it wasn't was interesting. Is it possible that on top of all the mistakes made at Anfield, a load more mistakes could have been made by the panel and then further mistakes - over a week - were then made by PGMOL?

That's a lot of mistakes. Seems a bit far-fetched to me.

[alonsoisared]

It’s not that hard. We’re all saying the officials made a mistake by not giving us a penalty v Abu Dhabi. However, all the officials, the head of PGMOL and the PL ‘independent’ panel have all said it wasn’t a mistake and the decision was correct.
Who is wrong? Us or them?

The head of PGMOL didn't say it wasn't a foul. He said it was correct for VAR not to get involved because it wasn't clear and obvious enough. He also said if the ref gave the penalty, he'd expect VAR not to get involved and thus it would've been a penalty. It's a small difference but an important one, he can say what he said and still believe it was a penalty. Similarly, their panel (whatever the point of that is by the way) were split 3-2, so not unanimous. That's football, isn't it? There's very few that don't split opinions. We can all believe it was a foul, others will believe it wasn't. I don't get why this particular question is being treated as a smoking gun. The referee made a decision we think was wrong. Some people within PGMOL thought it was wrong too. Others thought it wasn't. Whoopee.

[Yorkykopite]

The head of PGMOL didn't say it wasn't a foul. He said it was correct for VAR not to get involved because it wasn't clear and obvious enough. He also said if the ref gave the penalty, he'd expect VAR not to get involved and overturn it. It's a small difference but an important one, he can say what he said and still believe it was a penalty. Similarly, their panel (whatever the point of that is by the way) were split 3-2, so not unanimous. That's football, isn't it? There's very few that don't split opinions. We can all believe it was a foul, others will believe it wasn't. I don't get why this particular question is being treated as a smoking gun. The referee made a decision we think was wrong. Some people within PGMOL thought it was wrong too. Others thought it wasn't. Whoopee.

That's the way understood it too.

There was a similar incident, also involving Mac Allister, the following week against Man United. It was outside the box, but that aside it involved the same sort of 'collision'. This time Mac Allister was playing the 'Doku role' and Maguire was playing the 'Macca role'. We got the free kick.

Wrong again. But taking the two incidents together two things can be seen 1) They're perhaps not as absolutely clear-cut as some are making out - and therefore VAR is unlikely to intervene to correct a referee for an obvious error 2) That referees just aren't very good. Although each incident wasn't "absolutely clear cut" there was still a correct call to be made. They made the incorrect calls both times.

But, like you say, no more of a 'smoking gun' than the audio of Darren England is.

[Redley]

The head of PGMOL didn't say it wasn't a foul. He said it was correct for VAR not to get involved because it wasn't clear and obvious enough. He also said if the ref gave the penalty, he'd expect VAR not to get involved and thus it would've been a penalty. It's a small difference but an important one, he can say what he said and still believe it was a penalty. Similarly, their panel (whatever the point of that is by the way) were split 3-2, so not unanimous. That's football, isn't it? There's very few that don't split opinions. We can all believe it was a foul, others will believe it wasn't. I don't get why this particular question is being treated as a smoking gun. The referee made a decision we think was wrong. Some people within PGMOL thought it was wrong too. Others thought it wasn't. Whoopee.

It sounds like you’ve been gaslit unfortunately

It was as ‘clear and obvious’ as you could hope to see. Not just clear and obvious, but the audio proves how keen both referee and VAR were to not give the penalty despite all evidence to the contrary. We’re not talking a 50/50 call, we’re talking someone getting studded in the chest. And not just that, but the truth not actually being communicated to the referee. And that was then covered up by Howard Webb, with the ‘not clear and obvious’ stuff that certain people are naive enough to buy.

I’m sure Andy can tell you how the conversation went as he’s posted it many, many times (it starts with they and ends with high). And instead, after over a week, of going ‘It was a mistake’, the head of PGMOL decided to double down with the classic ‘not clear and obvious, we don’t want to re-referee, etc etc’. Fair play to you for feeling comfortable with that going against ‘your team’ and labelling anyone who isn’t comfortable with it as ‘nutters’.

We’ve lost two league titles already by inches, one point twice, fine margins. Handicapped by unexplainable decisions made by officials named a lot in this thread. Again, fair play to you at the end of the season where people are going ‘what the fuck was that Rodri handball about’ and you’re going ‘that miss by Salah against Leicester really screwed us, the officials were fine’

[JRed]

The head of PGMOL didn't say it wasn't a foul. He said it was correct for VAR not to get involved because it wasn't clear and obvious enough. He also said if the ref gave the penalty, he'd expect VAR not to get involved and thus it would've been a penalty. It's a small difference but an important one, he can say what he said and still believe it was a penalty. Similarly, their panel (whatever the point of that is by the way) were split 3-2, so not unanimous. That's football, isn't it? There's very few that don't split opinions. We can all believe it was a foul, others will believe it wasn't. I don't get why this particular question is being treated as a smoking gun. The referee made a decision we think was wrong. Some people within PGMOL thought it was wrong too. Others thought it wasn't. Whoopee.

So Webb was lying without lying?


It can’t be a penalty and also not a penalty.
To be honest, I’ve had enough of people on here defending PGMOL over this. Time to vacate the thread for a while I think.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

That's the way understood it too.

There was a similar incident, also involving Mac Allister, the following week against Man United. It was outside the box, but that aside it involved the same sort of 'collision'. This time Mac Allister was playing the 'Doku role' and Maguire was playing the 'Macca role'. We got the free kick.

Wrong again. But taking the two incidents together two things can be seen 1) They're perhaps not as absolutely clear-cut as some are making out - and therefore VAR is unlikely to intervene to correct a referee for an obvious error 2) That referees just aren't very good. Although each incident wasn't "absolutely clear cut" there was still a correct call to be made. They made the incorrect calls both times.

But, like you say, no more of a 'smoking gun' than the audio of Darren England is.

Great so can finally agree. It wasn't a penalty at all.

Glad we got that sorted out.

We can all move on.

[Yorkykopite]

No, it should have been a pen. I must have said that about ten times now.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

So Webb was lying without lying?


It can’t be a penalty and also not a penalty.
To be honest, I’ve had enough of people on here defending PGMOL over this. Time to vacate the thread for a while I think.

Lying is the new truth. I think I'm going to give up as well.

As PGMOL are fond of saying "It's all so clear and obvious"


Good Process, boys.

[alonsoisared]

So Webb was lying without lying?


It can’t be a penalty and also not a penalty.

How have you understood my post in that way? You've lost me. I must be proper thick as well as gaslit, a wool, not a Liverpool fan at all, overly harsh on our players, a PGMOL apologist etc.

The point is that Webb's explanation is that VAR should only get involved when mistakes are clear and obvious. He obviously thought the penalty call was 50/50 because he says whatever the on field decision was, he felt VAR shouldn't get involved. That's not saying it can be a penalty and also not a penalty, it's the common sense approach that most fans asked for.

I disagree with him and think it was a clear and obvious error. But he didn't say it wasn't a penalty, which is what you claimed.

That's the way understood it too.

There was a similar incident, also involving Mac Allister, the following week against Man United. It was outside the box, but that aside it involved the same sort of 'collision'. This time Mac Allister was playing the 'Doku role' and Maguire was playing the 'Macca role'. We got the free kick.

Wrong again. But taking the two incidents together two things can be seen 1) They're perhaps not as absolutely clear-cut as some are making out - and therefore VAR is unlikely to intervene to correct a referee for an obvious error 2) That referees just aren't very good. Although each incident wasn't "absolutely clear cut" there was still a correct call to be made. They made the incorrect calls both times.

But, like you say, no more of a 'smoking gun' than the audio of Darren England is.

Correct again Yorky.

[alonsoisared]

Lying is the new truth. I think I'm going to give up as well.

As PGMOL are fond of saying "It's all so clear and obvious"


Good Process, boys.

You'll be back Andy. Who you trying to kid?

[Eeyore]

The head of PGMOL didn't say it wasn't a foul. He said it was correct for VAR not to get involved because it wasn't clear and obvious enough. He also said if the ref gave the penalty, he'd expect VAR not to get involved and thus it would've been a penalty. It's a small difference but an important one, he can say what he said and still believe it was a penalty. Similarly, their panel (whatever the point of that is by the way) were split 3-2, so not unanimous. That's football, isn't it? There's very few that don't split opinions. We can all believe it was a foul, others will believe it wasn't. I don't get why this particular question is being treated as a smoking gun. The referee made a decision we think was wrong. Some people within PGMOL thought it was wrong too. Others thought it wasn't. Whoopee.

The smoking gun is the video quite clearly not lining up with what the VAR and Webb said. VAR patsy Attwell says the balls high they both come in high. Quite clearly that isn't true.

Attwell then says He's definitely touched it and then MacAllister comes into his space. That is an absolute lie. Mac Allister doesn't come into Doku's space. Macca gets their first and wins the ball it then deflects onto Doku's foot as his foot ploughs into Macca's chest.

Then we get Webb saying that the ball is too low to head. Again lies. He must have entirely missed diving headers when players make contact with the ball inches from the ground. He then lies again. He says 'Mac Allister comes into him, MacAllister is not really playing the ball either'

How can MacAllister not really be playing the ball. he gets there first and chests it onto Doku's boot.

The worst aspect for me though is the single angle they chose to look at the incident from Webb talks about the VAR and Ref not having enough information to make a decision. Well why not use slow motion and freeze frames on this angle.


<a target='_blank' href='https://usefulwebtool.com/math-keyboard'>greek symbols in math[/url]


That is the best angle to show what happens. Attwell has until the ball next goes out of play to look at different angles and re-runs.

[Eeyore]

How have you understood my post in that way? You've lost me. I must be proper thick as well as gaslit, a wool, not a Liverpool fan at all, overly harsh on our players, a PGMOL apologist etc.

The point is that Webb's explanation is that VAR should only get involved when mistakes are clear and obvious. He obviously thought the penalty call was 50/50 because he says whatever the on field decision was, he felt VAR shouldn't get involved. That's not saying it can be a penalty and also not a penalty, it's the common sense approach that most fans asked for.

I disagree with him and think it was a clear and obvious error. But he didn't say it wasn't a penalty, which is what you claimed.
 Correct again Yorky.

The point is Owen asks Webb right at the very start whether he thinks it is a penalty or not. Webb refuses to answer and then falls back on whether it is clear and obvious.

[Reds r coming up the hill]

Then we get Webb saying that ….. He says 'Mac Allister comes into him,
 MacAllister is not really playing the ball either'

One of the many things that annoyed me from Webb’s  analysis (coverup) was that he saiid Macca wasn’t’t playing the ball Either.
So he is inferring that Doku was not playing the ball either …. So neither player playing the ball but Macca gets kicked in the chest … why then is that not a penalty?

He had a week to get his narrative straight and he couldn’t …

Also he never even mentions the high boot in his analysis (cover up) just that both come in high …
Why not mention the stud showing high boot?
Answer is if he admitted that Doku raised a high boot with studs showing which is what the pictures all show … he would be admitting it’s a peno. So he pretends to see both going in high as if we are f**king blind.

Finally what’s this crap about “it divides opinion” nonsense .. his analysis should be based on what the VAR should have picked up if the ref missed something not whether there is media/supporters on one side or the other of a discussion.

For Liverpool supporters to go along with this madness, that is Madness…

[Redbonnie]

Seriously mate, what the fuck are you on about with deliberate deafness. That statement epitomises this thread down to the ground. If it wasn't so ridiculous, you'd need shoving in the loony bin.

People from all walks of life are on these boards. Criminals, scammers and those who just make a living out of them. One common theme is that the general public just can’t believe how far people will go. They don’t think the same way as criminals. An example I always think of is a man in the sixties who lived in a tent for 6 weeks on the roof of a  secure section of a Royal Mail office. He was watching what time the room was empty. Once every Monday at 11.00 it turned out. That’s when he broke through the skylight…never got caught. It’s not exactly the great train robbery but it’s the same principle..

Far from being ready for a “loony bin” some on here are regularly exposed to fraudsters, criminals, scammers and opportunists, on both sides of that divide.  We hear that audio with different ears perhaps.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Wouldn't it be great though - from all sides - if PGMOL could officiate the rest of the games in the league without any absolute fucking clangers.

That's all we really want isn't it - every footy fan and every neutral.

The media, though, would hate that - imagine if everyone got along, no animosity, no disagreements - everyone talking about the football and the players and the tactics and management and enjoying the sport.

No clickbaits there or wind-ups or Banterz.

[Eeyore]

Wouldn't it be great though - from all sides - if PGMOL could officiate the rest of the games in the league without any absolute fucking clangers.

That's all we really want isn't it - every footy fan and every neutral.

The media, though, would hate that - imagine if everyone got along, no animosity, no disagreements - everyone talking about the football and the players and the tactics and management and enjoying the sport.

No clickbaits there or wind-ups or Banterz.

Two big games this weekend.

We have got Coote and Tierney.

Manchester City have got Mancthony Taylor and Gillet. Gillet is a Liverpool fan and isn't allowed to do our games.