Liverpool v Aston Villa 17.30 hrs Sky Sports 1

Skylinehead

rarnes1 wrote: »

It was a definite penalty btw. Is that even up for debate?

If it was a definite penalty it wouldn't be up for debate, so by definition it wasn't a definite penalty.

Laois_Man

RasTa wrote: »

Yeah that was odd, he tried to highlight the mud flying up too.

However I don't see Brad getting a touch on the ball so peno for me.

He doesn't have to!

Agueroooo

We must be doing something right with the tone in here

andyman

Pyjamarama wrote: »

YES! And for those who think it wasn't a peno it was. There was contact. Minimal but thats not relevant.

What Suarez did was simulation. Simple as that.

Really, really frustrates me when people bring up this "slightly touched" bollocks. Players do not go down when they are "slightly touched" at the half-way line and no foul is given, and rightly. Once it comes to the penalty area then suddenly the faintest of touches can suddenly bring you down.

It's an absolute disgrace and it has to be stopped. It's not just Suarez, it's Ashley Young and everyone else as well. Start banning players for this crap that ruins football games.

fullstop

double GG wrote: »

Only seeing this now but to be 100% fair to Suarez it was a cracking dive, arguably one of his best yet.

The fall was very realistic.

Yes the way he just let the life drain from his right leg and crumple under him even though it was the furthest one from the 'contact'.

citytillidie

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Anyone looking at that and still claiming there was contact is either blind or deliberately obtuse about it.

Can't wait for the next incident where Suarez actually does get fouled and gets nothing, the outrage will be delicious.

What like in the 1st half when he was kneed in the thigh and elbowed in the face

monkey9

listermint wrote: »

Sorry what ?


We beat you at home last season 3-1 ....

We should still be beating Villa at home. A point each was fair enough

Stargate

D'Agger wrote: »

Grand scheme of things that's a point I'll take

We were beyond poor in the first and Villa fully deserved the lead they gained on us. Rodgers needs to put his hands up and take the blame for that first half. Gerrard isn't 'quarterbacking it' in the deep lying role, he's out of his comfort zone and looks it. He's better high up the pitch where he can influence the attack and create.

Lucas being injured might force us into a purchase, but it's plain to see that we're not only light in midfield but our flanks are also poor. Coutihno, Sterling, Cissokho, Johnson were pathetic in the first half and only Sterling picked up noticibly with Coutihno correctly taken off. We badly need Enrique back & Flannagan too - that's how poor Cissokho is in my eyes. Back to midfield - we need some mettle there, M'Villa, for the love of god just spend the money on a player of his quality, it's badly needed.

D'Agger agree with most you say , i have to admit i for one was saying a few weeks ago Sterling was very poor ( never said he should not wear Liverpool red again tho ) but i think he has been very good the last few games and today i thought he was one who was really trying to make things happen . In fairness he has upped his game compared to what he was like before .

As for Cissokho , how is the name of god is he a Liverpool player ???

Coutihno is very wasteful and needs a talking to like Sterling did weeks ago.

Today's draw feels like we lost , can not drop points like that and expect to qualify for CL in my opinion .

Skylinehead

Skylinehead wrote: »

If it was a definite penalty it wouldn't be up for debate, so by definition it wasn't a definite penalty.

It was a penalty though.

andyman

rarnes1 wrote: »

It was a penalty though.

How was it a penalty?

jamaamaj

andyman wrote: »

How was it a penalty?

Because guzan came sliding out and took Suarez down

Fuhrer

andyman wrote: »

How was it a penalty?

The Referee awarded a penalty after Suarez dived

andyman

andyman wrote: »

How was it a penalty?

It was illustrated quite clearly on the post match analysis why it was a definite penalty and not even the obviously villa biased Petrov even denied it. In fact he was adamant it was a penalty.

The keepers body made contact with suarezs foot, thus entitling him to go down, at that speed though that small contact was probably enough on its own to take him down.

The biggest issue with the whole incident is why the keeper wasn't at the very least booked.

Fuhrer

Caspian Thundering Vegetarianism wrote: »

It was illustrated quite clearly on the post match analysis why it was a definite penalty and not even the obviously villa biased Petrov even denied it. In fact he was adamant it was a penalty.

The keepers body made contact with suarezs foot, thus entitling him to go down, at that speed though that small contact was probably enough on its own to take him down.

The biggest issue with the whole incident is why the keeper wasn't at the very least booked.

Going down in an involuntary action, not an entitlement. The word you're looking for is dive

jamaamaj

Fuhrer wrote: »

Going down in an involuntary action, not an entitlement. The word you're looking for is dive

The word you are looking for is hate.

hadepsx

but the keeper shouldnt even have given him the option,he was going away from goal. reckless/blood rush to the head goalkeeping

tayto lover

jamaamaj wrote: »

The word you are looking for is hate.

So if you dispute a penalty decision you hate Liverpool?

fullstop

jamaamaj wrote: »

The word you are looking for is hate.

Will you give over with this haters ****e? Blinkered.

tayto lover

hadepsx wrote: »

but the keeper shouldnt even have given him the option,he was going away from goal. reckless/blood rush to the head goalkeeping

The keeper didn't touch him.

Fuhrer

Fuhrer wrote: »

Going down in an involuntary action, not an entitlement. The word you're looking for is dive

Look, it's a blatant penalty. The keeper took him out, even if he could have staggered and stayed in his feet (which he might not have been able to too when clipped like that) why should? He is entities to the decision. The anti-Liverpool bias that's rife in this forum obviously has blindness as one of its side effects.

andyman

jamaamaj wrote: »

Because guzan came sliding out and took Suarez down

Nah, Guzan got the feintest of touches which apparantly brings a professional footballer down.

It wasn't a penalty, it was simulation. Those feint touches happen all over the pitch and players aren't brought down and thus a foul rightly isn't awarded.

Why if it happens in the box is it suddenly a foul and a penalty?

tayto lover

tayto lover wrote: »

The keeper didn't touch him.

How in the name of god can you deny he was touched. It's there in absolute clarity in a slow motion, zoomed in replay. You are just being too pig headed to admit it or maybe you are visually challenged.

hadepsx

there was def.contact doesnt have to be with your hands, body momentum is enough

tayto lover

Caspian Thundering Vegetarianism wrote: »

How in the name of god can you deny he was touched. It's there in absolute clarity in a slow motion, zoomed in replay. You are just being too pig headed to admit it or maybe you are visually challenged.

Suarez put his foot into the keeper to make it look like he was taken down. It was a clear dive.

tayto lover

tayto lover wrote: »

Suarez put his foot into the keeper to make it look like he was taken down. It was a clear dive.

Suarez was running away from the keeper, he made no motion towards him at all.

monkey9

In terms of the penalty, it's not really controversial. It happens all the time and is normal in the game. Obviously because it's Suarez here, people are looking for high horses to mount. Once we see a player running in the box and the keeper comes rushing out at him, we all know how it's going to end. The player knows it, the keeper knows it, the viewer knows it.

I think it's more important whether the keeper makes contact with the ball than the player because if he doesn't get the ball, he's leaving himself open to giving away the penalty.

For me in this instance, there's not really any difference between Guzman not making contact with Suarez or touching his leg with a finger. Suarez hasn't been brought down, he's made the decision himself to fall to the ground. Obviously, if Guzman ploughs into him and completely takes him out of it, that's different.

All Suarez did there is what most players do in the game today, he anticipated the contact. It didn't come, but so what if it did? It's still the same outcome. It just annoys me these the way it's turning into a non contact sport, almost as if once a player is touched, they can fall to the ground and expect a free kick or peno.

As I said, it's not that controversial. Guzman has rushed out at Suarez and not got the ball. The penalty was inevitable and it certainly looked like one from the referee's view.

Fuhrer

hadepsx wrote: »

but the keeper shouldnt even have given him the option,he was going away from goal. reckless/blood rush to the head goalkeeping

Getting sick of this attitude, apparently if you're near Suarez in the box and he dives, its your fault.

jamaamaj

tayto lover wrote: »

So if you dispute a penalty decision you hate Liverpool?

No.

But checks posting history.

Then.

hadepsx

any player in any league would do the same. if you're going full pelt for ball in the box and a keeper comes sliding in a full pelt, and you get to the ball first but are unbalanced, what would you all do? id go down cos chances are your shot would be skewed into touch and not the back of the net

tayto lover

jamaamaj wrote: »

No.

But checks posting history.

Then.

Point out my history of it then. Bet you can't.
Please don't make up stuff.

Dozen Wicked Words

Suarez didn't really do anything different to virtually every other player in football today, dubious or not, a penalty will normally be end result. Don't think a point against Villa was really good enough for Liverpool at home though.

RasTa

Judge it at full speed and not super slow mo with the perfect angle.

Keeper comes rushing out, misses the ball and clips the player. We have got a few penos like that

Fuhrer

Fuhrer wrote: »

Getting sick of this attitude, apparently if you're near Suarez in the box and he dives, its your fault.

Judging by some decisions over the last month or so, you can do what ever you want to suarez in the box and be immune from punishment.

jamaamaj

tayto lover wrote: »

Point out my history of it then. Bet you can't.
Please don't make up stuff.

Not your histroy.

Other poster not you.

irishmover

Caspian Thundering Vegetarianism wrote: »

Judging by some decisions over the last month or so, you can do what ever you want to suarez in the box and be immune from punishment.

Another 30 months of this and we might be on parity so.

hadepsx

pens like that have been given 95% of the time in the prem league for the past 15 odd years. why the big gallah about it. oh yeah cos suarez was involved

Fuhrer

hadepsx wrote: »

pens like that have been given 95% of the time in the prem league for the past 15 odd years. why the big gallah about it. oh yeah cos suarez was involved

I you're just making your stats up, why not say 100% of the time over the last 60 years

andyman

Look at Suarez's left leg. There is absolutely no reason for it just collapsing before placing it back on the ground.

It's not a penalty. He wouldn't go down if it was in his own half and it wouldn't be a foul, so why is it different in the penalty box?

And this "every player does it" thing that someone said is complete nonsense. If another player does it, it's a dive as well.

hadepsx

ok 100% over past 60 years. happy. you're not getting my point

Courtesy Flush

andyman wrote: »

Look at Suarez's left leg. There is absolutely no reason for it just collapsing before placing it back on the ground.

It's not a penalty. He wouldn't go down if it was in his own half and it wouldn't be a foul, so why is it different in the penalty box?

And this "every player does it" thing that someone said is complete nonsense. If another player does it, it's a dive as well.

I hope you devote as much time to other penalties as you have to that one

supersean1999

I thought Liverpool looked pretty flat tonight. They have a very good 2013 With a lot of The players playing a lot of Games. There poor squad imo will start to Tell now they wont see out The season in as good of form.i predict 6th

hadepsx

@courtesy he'll be busy tomorrow then, with the divers in both teams

gosplan

I think the kerfuffle over it is because straight away Liverpool posters were saying it wasn't a dive.

I don't care. In fact I really hope Liverpool finish in 4th so am glad of every point the get but it was a dive.

Reputation is a problem though. A point gained today but it probably did factor into the ref's thinking in the City and Chelsea games.

andyman

andyman wrote: »

Look at Suarez's left leg. There is absolutely no reason for it just collapsing before placing it back on the ground.

It's not a penalty. He wouldn't go down if it was in his own half and it wouldn't be a foul, so why is it different in the penalty box?

And this "every player does it" thing that someone said is complete nonsense. If another player does it, it's a dive as well.

The more I watch it the more certain I get that it was a penalty.

andyman

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

I hope you devote as much time to other penalties as you have to that one

Fantastic point well made.

Artur Boruc came sliding out on Eduardo, which apparantly "entitles" the striker to go down. Was the Eduardo incident a penalty too?

Agueroooo

Its a skill dont you know...

"@GaryLineker: The real skill is timing your run to firstly lure the keeper off his line, then to ensure you beat him to the ball. It's a beautiful thing!"

hadepsx

????

/unsubscribes

fullstop

Caspian Thundering Vegetarianism wrote: »

The more I watch it the more certain I get that it was a penalty.

I don't believe that for a second. At first I thought Suarez manufactured some contact, from that there's none whatsoever. Blatant cheating.

jamaamaj

:pac:

:mad:





:eek: