PL: Liverpool v Manchester United. 6/3/2011, KO 1330.

Melion

Just one more for the people defending Rafael for playing the ball first. Pogatetz played the ball first here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcF5xFxH7nA

Is that an ok tackle?

Frisbee

cournioni wrote: »

Cop on. Rafael got the ball.

That doesn't mean it wasn't a bad challenge. It was a shocker.

Will I Amnt

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

Last time I looked, I did not have to directly address every point in a post I was replying to.. But, just for you.

Yes you are correct, you are top of the table. Well done, for now. Jog on......

My point is, lets see if you can sustain that position with some glaring deficiencies in your team. Chelsea on the up. Arsenal might stumble to the title, but I fear that there are too few games left, and United may just struggle over the line.

If they do, and believe me in this. I will be the first to congratulate them*.






*This may not be true

Dont expect anyone to address everything just don't reply to things that aren't there,simple really

Melion

Melion wrote: »

Just one more for the people defending Rafael for playing the ball first. Pogatetz played the ball first here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcF5xFxH7nA

Is that an ok tackle?

Any United fan defending Rafael care to comment or is it best to just ignore things like this in case they damage your argument?

Grayditch

The Muppet wrote: »

Raking a players shin is thuggery, very seldom you see it in the professional game.

Rafael's tackle was noting like it.

Bahaha. Look again.

Dublin_Gunner

cournioni wrote: »

Cop on. Rafael got the ball.

Your understanding of the rules is far from extensive I see.

cournioni wrote: »

I get your point. Its Nani's fault for being too quick. Sorry for arguing.

I'd argue Lucas is quicker, as he managed to get out of the way of Rafael's extremely dangerous 2 footed ninja attack.

Nani wasn't quick enough.

Carra and Rafael should have had reds. Neither did, so we're even.

Liverpool battered ye all over the park.

Hope Nani's leg is better. Maybe he'll get a lolly and a Barbie plaster for his cut when he see's the doctor. Poor pet.

Grayditch

All this takes the attention off the embarrassing mauling Liverpool gave United yesterday. Wolves and Chelsea beat United to their credit, but that's the first pounding United have taken and not come back from in the league. I knew some team would pull United apart tactically and completely dominate them, but I feared Liverpool were not strong enough yet.

United won't be pulled apart like that again all season, and I doubt Arsenal will take them. 2-1 United and they'll lift the 19th, but Liverpool fans deserve to celebrate this win.

SlickRic

Grayditch wrote: »

All this takes the attention off the embarrassing mauling Liverpool gave United yesterday.

i enjoyed yesterday as much as anyone, but a mauling it wasn't.

Utd controlled decent periods of the game without doing much in all honesty, but we certainly didn't pull them apart.

the difference, quite simply, was Suarez and Kuyt up top, who coupled with Meireles' impressive running from midfield, made United's 'Vidic-and-Rio-less' defence look fairly ordinary.

our incisive forward play, coupled with their disorganised backline won the day. simple.

...who'd have thought we'd have said that again a few short months ago?! ...

Melion

I think i killed the Rafael/Carragher debate with my Pogatetz video

The Muppet

Melion wrote: »

I think i killed the Rafael/Carragher debate with my Pogatetz video

More likely your stupid southpark videos killed anyones desire to debate with you TBH.:p

SlickRic wrote: »

i enjoyed yesterday as much as anyone, but a mauling it wasn't.



Utd controlled decent periods of the game without doing much in all honesty, but we certainly didn't pull them apart.



the difference, quite simply, was Suarez and Kuyt up top, who coupled with Meireles' impressive running from midfield, made United's 'Vidic-and-Rio-less' defence look fairly ordinary.



our incisive forward play, coupled with their disorganised backline won the day. simple.



...who'd have thought we'd have said that again a few short months ago?! ...

Thats pretty much it though I though Meireles had a pretty poor game.

adox

it should be a given at this stage that there should have been two reds at least yesterday, one for each side.

Anyone who argues dfferently is defending the indefensible imo.

Melion

The Muppet wrote: »

More likely your stupid videos killed anyones desire to debate with you TBH.:p

Bravo sir

Cyrus

cournioni wrote: »

In the last two games:

Chelsea were given a debatable penalty.
Luiz should have been sent off, twice.
Carragher should have been sent off.
Rodriguez should have been sent off.

and in the last two games united deserved to lose and they did

bad refereeing decisions or not

It appears that at the moment they have used up all of their good luck and a few decisions are going against them

JimsAlterEgo

adox wrote: »

it should be a given at this stage that there should have been two reds at least yesterday, one for each side.

Anyone who argues dfferently is defending the indefensible imo.

actually by the letter of the law, it would be 4. Maxi and Stktrl too.

SlickRic

The Muppet wrote: »

Thats pretty much it though I though Meireles had a pretty poor game.

fair enough.

i wouldn't go as far as poor. i think he's certainly been a lot better, and i think Utd's failure to track him properly (I assume it was probably Carrick's job in the main but i obviously don't know), had a fairly big bearing on how we got at you, certainly in the first half.

some of his passing and intelligent link-up play was very impressive.

Iago

Melion wrote: »

I think i killed the Rafael/Carragher debate with my Pogatetz video

Nah, there was no real debate to start with.

Both should have seen red in line with the letter of the law, both were challenges that in the current environment are not permitted but 10 years ago would have been applauded or at least wouldn't have generated the level of outrage that they have.

Crucially it's unlikely that Rafael makes that challenge if Carragher is sent off, but it's all if's and buts at that stage....

Cyrus

The Muppet wrote: »

More likely your stupid southpark videos killed anyones desire to debate with you TBH.:p




Thats pretty much it though I though Meireles had a pretty poor game.

not sure what you were watching but his runs off the ball tore holes in unites defence and showed up scholes and carricks reluctance or inability to track runners

Iago

SlickRic wrote: »

fair enough.

i wouldn't go as far as poor. i think he's certainly been a lot better, and i think Utd's failure to track him properly (I assume it was probably Carrick's job in the main but i obviously don't know), had a fairly big bearing on how we got at you, certainly in the first half.

some of his passing and intelligent link-up play was very impressive.

Merieles ability to get into tonnes of open space is going to generate dozens of goals for Liverpool over the next few seasons.

He's certainly impressed me over the last few weeks anyway.

mike65

I think he should be nicknamed The Ghost, he certainly knows when to make a quick sprint and appear to pop up out of nowhere.

Melion

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

actually by the letter of the law, it would be 4. Maxi and Stktrl too.

What did Skrtel do?

Grayditch

Haha, I definitley posted an over the top analysis on purpose to detract from the injury/card/what could have been, sorry. We were very good, though.

JimsAlterEgo

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/james-lawton-its-a-scandal-that-carragher-will-get-away-with-his-assault-on-nani-2234282.html

At the end of a week of refereeing controversy it was that Jamie Carragher was merely given a yellow card for a tackle on Nani so sickening, so dangerous, that it rendered more farcical than ever the insistence of the football authorities that they cannot revisit extreme cases of negligence, irresponsibility or – let's not fail to explore the full range of possibilities in this case – outright failure of nerve by a match official.

Phil Dowd was close at hand, was surrounded by protesting United players and Liverpool captain Steven Gerrard – who appeared to be suggesting that his team-mate was not guilty of one of the worst fouls to disfigure any ground in recent memory – and then administered two yellow cards, one to Carragher, still protesting his innocence, and the other to Edwin van der Sar, incredulous that a tackle of such crude violence could elicit such a mild punishment.

Sometimes you have to despair of the inability of football to police itself – and of those who watch it to separate their tribal instincts from the evidence of their own eyes.

We had another example of this after an incident that followed hard on the Carragher tackle when Rafael, United's young Brazilian full-back, was yellow-carded for a tackle on Lucas, a moment after the latter's team-mate Maxi Rodriguez had come at him thigh-level.

Rafael was inflamed, no doubt, and his tackle was reckless – but his feet were low, unlike Carragher's, whose boot hit Nani's standing leg shin-high – and Lucas was unscathed. However, this did not prevent Rafael being booed relentlessly through the rest of the match.

Some will say Nani's notoriety in the play-acting department worked against his outrage and that of his team-mates – especially when he got to his feet to join in the protests before falling again – but you didn't have to be a drama critic to detect authenticity in his tears and his shock or, as United's most threatening player, his departure on a stretcher. Sometimes there really is a wolf in the grounds and yesterday his name was Carragher.

This may offend some Merseyside sensitivities – and we all know what a sterling professional Carragher has been down the years – but you had to be living on another planet not to be revolted by this piece of action. Nani wasn't tackled – he was, in effect, assaulted – and we can re-run the film a thousands times without a softening of that verdict.

Grayditch

Meireles was good yesterday, but not as good as previous games.

Johner

The Muppet wrote: »

Thats pretty much it though I though Meireles had a pretty poor game.

If you honestly thought Meireles was poor there can be no words to describe your midfield.

JimsAlterEgo

Melion wrote: »

What did Skrtel do?

Tried to take the law into his own hands and got booked for it.

Chucky the tree

Great thread. Liam O's bitterness is epic, kind of thing that makes this victory even better. A name change to Lemon O should be done.

Grayditch

If we just keep talking about Carragher, we don't have to look at the scoreline anymore!

SlickRic

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/james-lawton-its-a-scandal-that-carragher-will-get-away-with-his-assault-on-nani-2234282.html

i'm not really sure what that Utd fan is trying to say in that article.

Raf's feet were not low. they weren't as high as Carra's, but they weren't low. he went sliding on his side, and his higher leg was shin level.

Maxi, of course, could've also gone. also indefensible.

and i'm not really sure which Liverpool fans he's been talking to, because the vast majority of them will have been disgusted by Carragher's challenge, and know he should've walked.

the irony of this journalist talking about fans not trusting what's in front of their eyes, and then going on to verging on defending Rafael is ROFL-icious.

Grayditch

It's a new day and the result is in the past. I had fun yesterday, but it's probably time we all moved on, haha.

Luckycharms_74

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Some nasty tackles going on there

1. Carragher should have been sent off for this, not booked




FYP Carragher won the ball. You must have been watching the match through your "Manc" tinted glasses

Dublin_Gunner

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/james-lawton-its-a-scandal-that-carragher-will-get-away-with-his-assault-on-nani-2234282.html

Talk about sensational journalism.

Carra's tackle was a bad one. Simple. It wasn't 'sickening' didn't 'disfigure' any ground lol and Rafael's feet were far from low, unless of course you consider boll0ck height low.

Both should've gone, neither did Liverpool won. End of.

I don't see why United fan's are trying to hang onto 1 incident which didn't matter a fook to the result. Your little panzy boy will get a plaster and a hug and he'll play next week.

The fact is, Liverpool absolutely bossed midfield for the majority of the game. We had way to much movement up front for United weak defence to cope with, and United offered very little going forward.

United were nullified. SAF's tactics were all wrong, and too many of United's 'big' players were anonymous.


Sure what would a United V Liverpool game be without a bit of controversy? Doesn't change the result.

The problem is, it's not the matches against the big teams that win leagues. United are masters of the 1-0 against poorer opposition, grinding the points total.

I fully expect to see them in 1st or 2nd by the end of May.

If Liverpool could play against the likes of United & Chelsea 39 times a season, we'd walk away with every title.

parker kent

monkey9 wrote: »

Look, you's took a spanking!! Pull your pants back up and move on!!

Wow such debating excellence. I try to make a reasoned summary of the game (I have now said Liverpool deserved to win in 3 different posts), but your default "United fans are moaning" setting seemingly can't be changed.

I didn't know discussing important events in a match was against the spirit of a match thread.

Grayditch

Jesus, all us Liverpool fans wanted was a page or two about how great we were. From all of you. Is that too much to ask for? Jeeeesus.

parker kent

Pro. F wrote: »

Man that's just not true. Players play on all the time. Nani's injury could well have been so bad that he wouldn't have been able to play no matter how tough he was, but to say that you can't play on with an open wound full stop is very wrong.

I think you are not understanding what I mean. I don't mean a small cut that can be patched up easily. If he had a large gash, that could not be stitched or stapled, it is dangerous to play with it. There are obvious issues with further swelling and it is susceptible to infections etc. I don't mean a little cut on the head that can get a plaster or bandage on it, I mean an actual gash.

citytillidie wrote: »

If you want to think like that go re watch the cup game and if Webb had of done his job then Gerrard would not have been sent off. After all Rafael (notice a trend) jumped in two footed and got away with it just before Gerrard did

Think like that? There is no other way to think when you are discussing major decisions and their impact. The Rafael tackle in the cup tie should probably have been a booking and a free. It wasn't as reckless as yesterdays, so it wasn't a red. And obviously if that decision had been given, the flow of the game would have been different as Liverpool would have had a free kick, so what did actually happen could never happen. But since he won the ball and it wasn't reckless, you can see how he got away with it.

Also this is an annoying thing I continually see on here, it is should have, not should of!

K-9

Lawton is a good writer but that is biased.

parker kent

Iago wrote: »

Merieles ability to get into tonnes of open space is going to generate dozens of goals for Liverpool over the next few seasons.

He's certainly impressed me over the last few weeks anyway.

I was surprised at how little Gerrard got forward, has Kenny finally reigned him in? Or was it just his injury? They were much better with him playing a disciplined role. It really frees Meireles to play like he has been over the past few months.

parker kent

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Talk about sensational journalism.

Carra's tackle was a bad one. Simple. It wasn't 'sickening' didn't 'disfigure' any ground lol and Rafael's feet were far from low, unless of course you consider boll0ck height low.

Both should've gone, neither did Liverpool won. End of.

I don't see why United fan's are trying to hang onto 1 incident which didn't matter a fook to the result. Your little panzy boy will get a plaster and a hug and he'll play next week.

The fact is, Liverpool absolutely bossed midfield for the majority of the game. We had way to much movement up front for United weak defence to cope with, and United offered very little going forward.

United were nullified. SAF's tactics were all wrong, and too many of United's 'big' players were anonymous.


Sure what would a United V Liverpool game be without a bit of controversy? Doesn't change the result.

The problem is, it's not the matches against the big teams that win leagues. United are masters of the 1-0 against poorer opposition, grinding the points total.

I fully expect to see them in 1st or 2nd by the end of May.

If Liverpool could play against the likes of United & Chelsea 39 times a season, we'd walk away with every title.

You are talking a lot of nonsense in that post. Ignoring the "we'd walk away with every title stuff" given Liverpool have lost 2 out of 3 games against United this season, of course a red card would have influenced the result. United would have had 45 minutes against 10 men. They enjoyed a long spell of possession anyway after half time, if that had happened against 10 men, it is not crazy to suggest they may have scored. And goals changes games.

Also your use of panzy boy, are we in the playground?

Mikeyt086

Luis Suarez really did have a super game, the difference between the side imo. Dirk Kuyt, to me, is that guy in the school playground everyone hates, the goal hatcher, he'll end up with no friends is he keeps stealing goals from the likes of Suarez, and its not like he can fall back on his boyish good looks! Still, our away performances continue to give me ulcers, someone should have told our lads you actually have to play in places like Anfield to come away with anything.

But just on the Rafael/Carragher thing. Im not trying to excuse Rafael but a big point missing here from what ive read is provokation, Rafael lunged in because Maxi put a set of studs an inch into his thigh. Carragher lunged in because one of the most dangerous players in the league this season had the ball.

Dublin_Gunner

parker kent wrote: »

You are talking a lot of nonsense in that post. Ignoring the "we'd walk away with every title stuff" given Liverpool have lost 2 out of 3 games against United this season, of course a red card would have influenced the result. United would have had 45 minutes against 10 men. They enjoyed a long spell of possession anyway after half time, if that had happened against 10 men, it is not crazy to suggest they may have scored. And goals changes games.

Also your use of panzy boy, are we in the playground?

No nonsense at all. Look over the past few years, Liverpool always turn up against United & Chelsea, but we're terrible against the 'lower' teams. (and eh, talking about the 'title' would mean Cup results aren't included :rolleyes:

We've won 8, lost 4 of the last 12 meetings with United & Chelsea.

Extrapolating that to this season, would leave us with 76 points. That could win it this year I'd say.

So not talking nonsense at all.

And if both teams had a man sent off, it'd be 10 v 10. But they weren't, so it didn't influence the result.

Also, Liverpool were already 2-0 up at that stage, and coasting in fairness. United offered nothing going forward, and were well beaten on the day.

FatherTed

Going around in circles here. Carragher should have been sent off. If he goes then so should Rafael. If Rafael goes, Maxi goes. If Maxi goes....

It's over and done with. Liverpool deserved to win, none of the players will get banned, nor should they. But really, the footballing authorities have their heads in the sand if they think everything is fine and dandy with officiating nowadays.

parker kent

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

No nonsense at all. Look over the past few years, Liverpool always turn up against United & Chelsea, but we're terrible against the 'lower' teams. (and eh, talking about the 'title' would mean Cup results aren't included :rolleyes:

We've won 8, lost 4 of the last 12 meetings with United & Chelsea.

Extrapolating that to this season, would leave us with 76 points. That could win it this year I'd say.

So not talking nonsense at all.

And if both teams had a man sent off, it'd be 10 v 10. But they weren't, so it didn't influence the result.

Also, Liverpool were already 2-0 up at that stage, and coasting in fairness. United offered nothing going forward, and were well beaten on the day.

If they played each other every week, it would be completely different. Liverpool tend to get up for occasional big games, if they were playing each other every week they wouldn't be big games every week. Funny how talking about a hypothetical league with 4 or 5 teams is OK, but including a cup tie between said teams is eye roll worthy.

If Carragher had been sent off, the Rafael incident literally could not have occurred. You are aware that changing any event in the game means that what followed could not then happen? We don't know what would have happened. It is odd that such a basic fact has to be continually re-stated.

Liverpool fans should be aware that a half time lead is not necessarily a guarantee of a full time lead. If it was 10 v 11, it would have been a different game and one goal would have put Liverpool under pressure. I know if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle, but nonetheless it is a legitimate point that it would have been a difficult task to hold out.

Dublin_Gunner

parker kent wrote: »

If they played each other every week, it would be completely different. Liverpool tend to get up for occasional big games, if they were playing each other every week they wouldn't be big games every week. Funny how talking about a hypothetical league with 4 or 5 teams is OK, but including a cup tie between said teams is eye roll worthy.

If Carragher had been sent off, the Rafael incident literally could not have occurred. You are aware that changing any event in the game means that what followed could not then happen? We don't know what would have happened. It is odd that such a basic fact has to be continually re-stated.

Liverpool fans should be aware that a half time lead is not necessarily a guarantee of a full time lead. If it was 10 v 11, it would have been a different game and one goal would have put Liverpool under pressure. I know if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle, but nonetheless it is a legitimate point that it would have been a difficult task to hold out.

Last time I checked, cup tie's didn't earn you points in the league :rolleyes:

The fact of the matter is, I was alluding to the fact Liverpool always turn up against United and Chelsea, if you want to take my post literally and make out I want some league with only 3 teams in it go ahead :rolleyes: What makes it funnier is the fact I was stating United are masters of beating the lower opposition, that Liverpool fail to do regularly enough. But go ahead, take offence. lol.

You're talking hypothetical situations with the red cards. Liverpools' results against United and Chelsea aren't hypothetical, they're fact.

Keep grasping at straws. United got hammered yesterday. They were bossed around midfield, and they're defence was seriously shown up.

End of. There is nothing left to discuss.

Benimar

parker kent wrote: »

If Carragher had been sent off, the Rafael incident literally could not have occurred. You are aware that changing any event in the game means that what followed could not then happen? We don't know what would have happened. It is odd that such a basic fact has to be continually re-stated.

Why? If Carragher had been sent off the game would restart with a free to Man U, he wasn't and it restarted with a free to Man U. Why would anything that happened in the 60 seconds afterwards be changed?? Maxi would still have been on the left, Rafael would have been RB and Lucas would have been in midfield.

You actually contradict yourself in your next sentence. If we don't know what would have happened, then surely what DID happen could have still happened..no?

RasTa

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

You're talking hypothetical situations with the red cards. Liverpools' results against United and Chelsea aren't hypothetical, they're fact.

Keep grasping at straws. United got hammered yesterday. They were bossed around midfield, and they're defence was seriously shown up.

End of. There is nothing left to discuss.

Only bit I don't agree with. Defenders weren't at fault for yesterdays goals, maybe 3rd but blame goes to VDS for spilling.

parker kent

Benimar wrote: »

Why? If Carragher had been sent off the game would restart with a free to Man U, he wasn't and it restarted with a free to Man U. Why would anything that happened in the 60 seconds afterwards be changed?? Maxi would still have been on the left, Rafael would have been RB and Lucas would have been in midfield.

You actually contradict yourself in your next sentence. If we don't know what would have happened, then surely what DID happen could have still happened..no?

As I said yesterday....

parker kent wrote: »

He wouldn't have got a red card for the same offence. He may have got a red card for some other offence, who knows? But the events would not have followed the same pattern. Think about it, there would likely have been a substitution. Then Liverpool players would have had to switch around to suit whatever new formation they had. The free kick would have played out differently as Carragher would not have been there. The atmosphere in the stadium would have been different. Everything would be different so the same things literally could not happen.

For play to lead to the Rafael tackle, the same players would have had to be in the same positions and do the same things. With a change in formation and personnel, that could not happen. Ergo, the Rafael tackle we are talking about would not have happened. Maybe a different one would have happened, but we don't know.

rossie1977

parker kent wrote: »

If Carragher had been sent off, the Rafael incident literally could not have occurred.

if aurelio had not been injured then carragher would not have been playing right-back, you could play the game of what ifs all day long

away from the tackles argument

liverpool first 9 games under uncle woy
W:2 D:3 L:4 F:9 A: 14: Pts: 9

liverpool first 9 games under kenny
W:5 D:2 L:2 F:15 A:8 Pts: 17

copacetic

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/james-lawton-its-a-scandal-that-carragher-will-get-away-with-his-assault-on-nani-2234282.html

Rafael was inflamed, no doubt, and his tackle was reckless – but his feet were low, unlike Carragher's, whose boot hit Nani's standing leg shin-high – and Lucas was unscathed. However, this did not prevent Rafael being booed relentlessly through the rest of the match.

Rafaels foot was actually higher than Carraghers. Lucas just managed to get out of the way of it.

parker kent

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Last time I checked, cup tie's didn't earn you points in the league :rolleyes:

The fact of the matter is, I was alluding to the fact Liverpool always turn up against United and Chelsea, if you want to take my post literally and make out I want some league with only 3 teams in it go ahead :rolleyes: What makes it funnier is the fact I was stating United are masters of beating the lower opposition, that Liverpool fail to do regularly enough. But go ahead, take offence. lol.

You're talking hypothetical situations with the red cards. Liverpools' results against United and Chelsea aren't hypothetical, they're fact.

Keep grasping at straws. United got hammered yesterday. They were bossed around midfield, and they're defence was seriously shown up.

End of. There is nothing left to discuss.

Yes but we are talking about a fantasy competition. Talking about games between teams in a fantasy competition should not rule out cup "tie's". LOL all you want, my point was that nothing can be read into games between big teams. Form goes out the window. Results between them vary, one team goes on a run, the other team goes on a run etc. This season has proven that they can all beat each other. Liverpool's ability to turn up against the big teams over the past 2 seasons could be put down to them having one big game, whereas every game is a big game for United at this stage of the season. United have to turn up in every game to win the league. And anyway, my point about Liverpool losing 2 out of 3 games against United this season is a fact.

United did not play with their first choice defence. Brown will probably not play CB again this season. So they "showed up" a defence that will not play again.

Talk about how well Liverpool played, enjoy the win etc, but don't resort to pointless boasts.

parker kent

rossie1977 wrote: »

if aurelio had not been injured then carragher would not have been playing right-back, you could play the game of what ifs all day long

away from the tackles argument

liverpool first 9 games under uncle woy
W:2 D:3 L:4 F:9 A: 14: Pts: 9

liverpool first 9 games under kenny
W:5 D:2 L:2 F:15 A:8 Pts: 17

A player getting injured is a completely different thing. That is not a like for like. A red card is completely different. You are moving to a totally different set of what ifs. What if there was a sudden snow shower? What if aliens had landed? Saying that the game would have been different after a red card is a pretty basic statement. I'm not saying United would have even scored once against 10 men. I'm just saying it would have been a different game. It is a pretty basic point.

rossie1977

parker kent wrote: »

A player getting injured is a completely different thing. That is not a like for like. A red card is completely different. You are moving to a totally different set of what ifs. What if there was a sudden snow shower? What if aliens had landed? Saying that the game would have been different after a red card is a pretty basic statement. I'm not saying United would have even scored once against 10 men. I'm just saying it would have been a different game. It is a pretty basic point.

your what if is exactly the same as the cup game, if the utd player had been dealt with properly a minute earlier gerrard would not have made his challenge