General Premier League Thread 2019-20

Alonso77

Keane all over the place - seems a very confused person.

eigrod

Ardent wrote: »

Keane showing up Carragher on Sky Sports. Carragher spouting incoherent nonsense.

The other way around, no?

Ardent

When Keane & Carragher start getting into it their voices go up a few octaves lol - the dogs in the streets start to take notice.

Ardent

eigrod wrote: »

The other way around, no?

Implying Ole doesn't deserve more time and Keane countered even Guardiola needed time after his first season.

TitianGerm

Ardent wrote: »

Implying Ole doesn't deserve more time and Keane countered even Guardiola needed time after his first season.

I'm all for giving Ole more time. Let him make more of a mess over there.

Gbear

Ardent wrote: »

Implying Ole doesn't deserve more time and Keane countered even Guardiola needed time after his first season.

**** me, that's a stupid point. That someone who you're employing to talk about football could say something so braindead really doesn't speak well of Sky.

Keane's an atrocious pundit.
He comes across as someone who'll say literally anything, no matter how insane, so long as it paints him as a contrarian.

ebbsy

Ardent wrote: »

Keane showing up Carragher on Sky Sports. Carragher spouting incoherent nonsense.

He was also a terrible defender.

And I have supported them since 1978.

mightyreds

Ardent wrote: »

Implying Ole doesn't deserve more time and Keane countered even Guardiola needed time after his first season.

Guardiola managed Barca and Bayern to multiple titles and champions leagues , Ole managed Cardiff into the championship he's talking guff

ThunbergsAreGo

Alonso77 wrote: »

Keane all over the place - seems a very confused person.

He's the drunk lad in the pub people ignore

eigrod

Ardent wrote: »

Implying Ole doesn't deserve more time and Keane countered even Guardiola needed time after his first season.

Which totally ignores the pedigree of both which is the point Carra was making. Cardiff manager that got them relegate/ Molde v Guardiola’s record.

PhlegmyMoses

And you are all still watching an hour after the match finished. Sky know their onions

Ardent

mightyreds wrote: »

Guardiola managed Barca and Bayern to multiple titles and champions leagues , Ole managed Cardiff into the championship he's talking guff

Guardiola was given time to rebuild squad, investing all that money in full backs etc. A similar rebuild is required at United, it won't happen overnight irrespective of who's in charge.

Mr.Nice Guy

Just saw the clip. Love Keane but he's wrong on this. He won't stick the boot into Ole who is one of his good friends. United will wind up like Milan if they listen to the likes of Keane, Neville, Schmeichel, Ferdinand and co.

Ardent

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Just saw the clip. Love Keane but he's wrong on this. He won't stick the boot into Ole who is one of his good friends. United will wind up like Milan if they listen to the likes of Keane, Neville, Schmeichel, Ferdinand and co.

United's problems are not the making of OGS, nor of any of the managers that came before him.

ShamoBuc

Keane can come up with some good points as a pundit.
All over the place today though.
Theres alot wrong at Utd. Ole will not fix the problem. It exists elsewhere, aswell as Ole.

theoneeyedman

Didn't watch the big game today, just catching up on the highlights.
A question on the Firmino goal.... Whether it was a foul or not, United got clean possession of the ball after the clash of De Gea and Virgil. How long do they look back on for a foul. I know time wise it wasn't very long, but seemed like a different phase of play than the initial coming together.

TheCitizen

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Just saw the clip. Love Keane but he's wrong on this. He won't stick the boot into Ole who is one of his good friends. United will wind up like Milan if they listen to the likes of Keane, Neville, Schmeichel, Ferdinand and co.

He is wrong but he's hardly going to put the boot in on a former team mate unless he had a grudge against him:pac:. If it was Peter Schmeichel in charge he'd be less supportive I'd guess

super_furry

The likes of Keane, Neville and the former teammates of Solskjaer will only drag out things for United. He's getting all the public backing and defence that he can and it's going to help keep him in that job longer than it should.

Keane was hammering Mourinho 18 months ago, now he's saying that the man whose only notable achievement as a manager was to relegate Cardiff should get another two seasons.

.G.

Yeah its great isn't it. The best thing about Uniteds demise is that loads of their heroes from their best years are all actively campaigning for a fella who is way out of his depth to stay as a manager cos he's their mate. Marvellous stuff.

ShamoBuc

.G. wrote: »

Yeah its great isn't it. The best thing about Uniteds demise is that loads of their from their best years are all actively campaigning for a fella who is way out of his depth to stay as a manager cos he's their mate. Marvellous stuff.

The gift that keeps on giving.

bangkok

TitianGerm wrote: »

I'm all for giving Ole more time. Let him make more of a mess over there.

More of a mess? On a different day utd draw that game 1-1

Agent Coulson

bangkok wrote: »

More of a mess? On a different day utd draw that game 1-1

On a different day Liverpool win that by 6 or more.

bangkok

Agent Coulson wrote: »

On a different day Liverpool win that by 6 or more.

Not really, ye had 4 shots on target, utd 3 and that doesnt include periera miss

citytillidie

^^^^^^^

yourdeadwright

bangkok wrote: »

Not really, ye had 4 shots on target, utd 3 and that doesnt include periera miss

Salah and Mane had two sitter go wide that don't count in that either, Liverpool where miles better

yourdeadwright

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Didn't watch the big game today, just catching up on the highlights.
A question on the Firmino goal.... Whether it was a foul or not, United got clean possession of the ball after the clash of De Gea and Virgil. How long do they look back on for a foul. I know time wise it wasn't very long, but seemed like a different phase of play than the initial coming together.

I had that question it was a new phase so VAR shouldn't have been involved

PEACEBROTHER

Anyone what the live games on tele are midweek ?

noodler

Thought Keane was very wrong alright.

Also thought him and Souness were wrong about the VVD challenge on De Gea.

It mightn't be a foul if two outfield players completed for it but it's been a foul on a goalkeeper for years.

bangkok

noodler wrote: »

Thought Keane was very wrong alright.

Also thought him and Souness were wrong about the VVD challenge on De Gea.

It mightn't be a foul if two outfield players completed for it but it's been a foul on a goalkeeper for years.

Defo a foul. Keane knows that but he wont makes headlines if he said it was a foul

Guy:Incognito

bangkok wrote: »

Defo a foul. Keane knows that but he wont makes headlines if he said it was a foul

Neville and Souness saying it for the same reason I assume?

bangkok

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Neville and Souness saying it for the same reason I assume?

Do they know the rules? Var agreed it was a foul

BullBlackNova

PEACEBROTHER wrote: »

Anyone what the live games on tele are midweek ?

Full list on https://www.live-footballontv.com/ but PL games are:

Tuesday:
Sheffield United v Man City [7.30pm, BT Sport 2]
Chelsea v Arsenal [8.15pm, BT Sport 1]

Wednesday:
Leicester City v West Ham [7.30pm, BT Sport 2]
Man United [8.15pm, BT Sport 1]

Thursdau:
Wolves v Liverpool [8pm, BT Sport 1]

Fitz*

I don't understand why it was pulled back, surely it was a new phase of play as Lindelof had possession of the ball and a bad clearance.

That, and the fact it wasn't even a foul in the first place. The on-field ref said it was no foul.

noodler

FitzShane wrote: »

I don't understand why it was pulled back, surely it was a new phase of play as Lindelof had possession of the ball and a bad clearance.

That, and the fact it wasn't even a foul in the first place. The on-field ref said it was no foul.

Ah come on, it's a foul.

We'd have said that was a foul on Allison. You can't make contact with a keeper like that without getting the ball first.

There should be a six yard circumference around a keeper that no player can be in. Two players on the pitch that can use the most parts of their body get the most protection. A long running joke.

yourdeadwright

noodler wrote: »

Ah come on, it's a foul.

We'd have said that was a foul on Allison. You can't make contact with a keeper like that without getting the ball first.

I dont think it matters, Numerous times they have said if possession is regained its a new phase of play

Fitz*

noodler wrote: »

Ah come on, it's a foul.

We'd have said that was a foul on Allison. You can't make contact with a keeper like that without getting the ball first.

Why is it a foul? VVD had his arms down and went to contest the ball in the air.

Alisson would have came and collected it, not messed about. I would use a different phrase here, but worried about another mod warning. DDG has history with being weak on crosses, not the first time this season and won't be his last.

noodler

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I dont think it matters, Numerous times they have said if possession is regained its a new phase of play

I don't understand that.

Maybe it's the three.Moretti I had earlier, but if VAR would immediately have been looking at that incident, not just when the ball goes into the net, so the wouldn't suddenly stop looking at it just because the it's defender Ballsed up the clearance.

yourdeadwright

Factors to consider when the referee or VAR defines a phase of play, and whether a phase has been reset, include:

When the team gain possession
Whether there are multiple phases and which is the most immediate
The ability of the defence to reset
Whether the defence gain possession at all

There the rules still not sure if it was a new phase or not

noodler

FitzShane wrote: »

Why is it a foul? VVD had his arms down and went to contest the ball in the air.

Alisson would have came and collected it, not messed about. I would use a different phrase here, but worried about another mod warning. DDG has history with being weak on crosses, not the first time this season and won't be his last.

This contest thing, which Souness kept going on about as well, baffles me tbh.

Most fouls are honest to God attempts to win the ball.

Two lads going for a lose ball who both slide in etc, one gets it, the other hits his leg..it's a foul. The honest intent or honest contesting or whatever you want to say is irrelevant.

They both went up, DDG got the ball, VVD then hit DDG...so foul. Nobody is saying it's violent conduct.

Fitz*

noodler wrote: »

This contest thing, which Souness kept going on about as well, baffles me tbh.

Most fouls are honest to God attempts to win the ball.

Two lads going for a lose ball who both slide in etc, one gets it, the other hits his leg..it's a foul. The honest intent or honest contesting or whatever you want to say is irrelevant.

They both went up, DDG got the ball, VVD then hit DDG...so foul. Nobody is saying it's violent conduct.

DDG spilled it out of his hands, and straight away went down holding his back trying to save his blushes, claiming an injury. DDG then jumped up and set himself when Lindelof lost possesion and made a big dive for the shot, which went passed him, before he went sprinting into the face of the referee and magicly his back injury was cured. No different to lads blaming a bobble on the pitch for sky-ing a penalty out of the stadium.

VVD didn't have his arms up either, he purposely left them down. If VVD's arms were up head height, then I would agree and say that it could have been a foul as his arms & elbows would have been impeding DDG's and stopped him from being able to catch the ball. But they weren't.

DDG just spilled the ball and cried foul in order to save face, IMO.

Cantona's Collars

noodler wrote: »

This contest thing, which Souness kept going on about as well, baffles me tbh.

Most fouls are honest to God attempts to win the ball.

Two lads going for a lose ball who both slide in etc, one gets it, the other hits his leg..it's a foul. The honest intent or honest contesting or whatever you want to say is irrelevant.

They both went up, DDG got the ball, VVD then hit DDG...so foul. Nobody is saying it's violent conduct.

You are right, it's a foul, nothing more. The ref went to blow but when Lindelof got the ball he took the whistle away. Weak refereeing imo. Waiting on VAR to save him. Before var he'd have blown it up,free out and zero controversy.

noodler

FitzShane wrote: »

DDG spilled it out of his wands, and straight away went down holding his back trying to save his blushes, claiming an injury. DDG then jumped up and set himself when Lindelof lost possesion and made a big dive for the shot, which went passed him, before he went sprinting into the face of the referee and magicly his back injury was cured. No different to lads blaming a bobble on the pitch for sky-ing a penalty out of the stadium.

VVD didn't have his arms up either, he purposely left them down. If VVD's arms were up head height, then I would agree and say that it could have been a foul as his arms & elbows would have been impeding DDG's and stopped him from being able to catch the ball. But they weren't.

DDG just spilled the ball and cried foul in order to save face, IMO.

Alot of your post talks about the post VVD contact.

It's the important point tbh.

Fitz*

noodler wrote: »

Alot of your post talks about the post VVD contact.

It's the important point tbh.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree!

Luckily, it wasn't the defining incident during the game. Be a lot worst if it was!

noodler

FitzShane wrote: »

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree!

Luckily, it wasn't the defining incident during the game. Be a lot worst if it was!

We'll have a chance to test this next time a ball drops out of Allison's hands because of contact from an opposition player.

I don't think anyone will.be saying it's not a foul though!

yourdeadwright

noodler wrote: »

Alot of your post talks about the post VVD contact.

It's the important point tbh.

Is contact a foul?
I tyink that's the problem people have contact in the rule bol doesn't mean a foul

Shanotheslayer

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Is contact a foul?
I tyink that's the problem people have contact in the rule bol doesn't mean a foul

If there's contact and the player doesn't touch the ball it's generally a foul

eigrod

noodler wrote: »

We'll have a chance to test this next time a ball drops out of Allison's hands because of contact from an opposition player.

I don't think anyone will.be saying it's not a foul though!

Drops out of Allison’s hands ? Ah here....De Gea wasn’t even trying to catch it. He fluffed his punch and went crying to the ref. Never ever a foul. Weak goalkeeping.

Fitz*

noodler wrote: »

We'll have a chance to test this next time a ball drops out of Allison's hands because of contact from an opposition player.

I don't think anyone will.be saying it's not a foul though!

When Alisson drops a ball from his hands, and Liverpool concede from it, please quote this post.

I'll happily hang my hat on it that it won't happen too soon

ThunbergsAreGo

noodler wrote: »

I don't understand that.

Maybe it's the three.Moretti I had earlier, but if VAR would immediately have been looking at that incident, not just when the ball goes into the net, so the wouldn't suddenly stop looking at it just because the it's defender Ballsed up the clearance.

If it was offside and not a foul,it likely would have stood. I think that's the confusion