Liverpool - Chelsea Before/During/After Thread

LizardKing

Yeah its not too important but would be nice to have proof of it either way , yay or nay ... It's just dawning on me , hearing fans around the grounds singing " Champions League, your havin' a laugh!!" @ the Liverpool fans ...Well Pool fans are havin the last laugh ,let's just hope we're still laughin on 25th after the game .. mu ha ha ha

galwaydude

exactly. Liverpool are in the final end of storey .I wonder what arsenal or Utd fans would say if it was their team in the final not liverpool.

BaZmO*

galwaydude wrote:

exactly. Liverpool are in the final end of storey .I wonder what arsenal or Utd fans would say if it was their team in the final not liverpool.

I'm a Utd. supporter!

B.

wheres me jumpa

i heard on sky news yesterday that they were going to create a 3d reconstruction of the goal. has anyone see yet? or have a link? the sky news reporter said it would be very conclusive when complete.

wheres me jumpa

http://skysports.planetfootball.com/list.asp?hlid=274317&lid=2&cpid=5&title=A+different+picture&channel=Football_Home

just found it!!

funnily enough on the sky sports website

uberwolf

it's in one of the other threads. But for my money the image linked on the previous page is incompatible with their virtual replay as gallas body position all over the place

galwaydude

if it was a goal or not.If it wasnt scored their goalie would have been sent off and we would have had a penalty.
Liverpool are in the final get over it.

LizardKing

The sun have some better pic's from Skys computer simulation ...

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2002390000-2005202076,00.html

galwaydude

no surprise andy gray lambasting liverpool again.Hes a ponce!!!!
If it wasnt a goal so what, it happens, look at what happened spurs against Utd.
People forget what happened before the goal, chelsea would have been down to 10 men and a penalty.

Q_Ball

If you look at the comp simulation and the photo of gallas you can see the the simulation isnt entirely correct.

carvalho is positioned completely wrong but anyway...

Gallas' left foot is practically on the line in the photo, its nowhere near it in the simulation

From watching the replays and from that photo gallas' foot was definately behind the line, its on the line in the simulation (i know his foot behind the line != goal but i'm giving my opinion on why the simulation is wrong). Both carvalho and gallas seem to be out of position in the simulation.

gallas is bald isnt he?

I was hoping for a liverpool win. I just wanted rafa to feed moaninho some humble pie and smack some humility into that smug arrogant ego.

Gotta say too that when i saw moaninho shaking hands with the pool players i thought there was a bit of playing up being done, that was there was something sly about the way he congratulated everyone. Would he have said the best team lost if he'd actually meant any of it?

I'm probably being too critical.

Also where'd 6 minutes come from? reckon the ref felt a pang of guilt over the goal?

BaZmO*

Q_Ball wrote:

Also where'd 6 minutes come from?

6 subsitutions and 2 pitch invasions perhaps?

B.

TheMonster

Also where'd 6 minutes come from? reckon the ref felt a pang of guilt over the goal

EH - try the 2 pitch incursions and the 6 subs(6x 30 secs) :rolleyes:

uberwolf

TheMonster - any response to my post re: Milan subsequent to last nights game?

Take it

Liverpool are in the final, of course i would like to know if it was a goal or not but it dont matter Liverpool are there and chelsea needed to score to go through anyway, even if it wasn't a goal

So to settle this agruemnet of Liverpool being in the final we need a bit of maturity and say to all those united, arsenal and chelsea fans

NAH NAH NAH NAH NAAAAAAAAAH

yop

uberwolf wrote:

it's in one of the other threads. But for my money the image linked on the previous page is incompatible with their virtual replay as gallas body position all over the place

This proves why it was a goal

The Muppet

yop wrote:

This proves why it was a goal

LOL.

Congratulations to Liverpool on reaching the final. I don't think it was a goal but who knows how the game would have panned out if the officials decisions surrounding the goal had been different. Chelsea had plenty of time to score and go through but they couldn't. so well done liverpool. Carragher was a rock.

redspider

A few more items on the Liverpool win over Chelsea.

In terms of the goal, according to an article in the Sunday Times, the goal was analysed by Hawk-Eye computer software. This showed that the ball was 17.7cm over the line, with 4.3cm not over the line, so that’s 80.5% over the line. The article doesn’t give the accuracy of the calculation, but the expert quoted stated that with more analysis it could be brought down to an accuracy of 0.5cm. This calculation seems about right, and shows that it was more of a goal than not, and goals that are “less” than this are usually given. I don’t think Chelsea fans can gripe too much.

Also, the ref has broken his silence:

<i>THE REFEREE in charge of the controversial Champions League semi-final between Liverpool and Chelsea sensationally broke his silence last night. Slovakian Lobos Michel, in an exclusive SP interview, reckons Chelsea were LUCKY to concede the winning goal to Luis Garcia at Anfield on Tuesday night. He explained: "I believe Chelsea would have preferred the goal to count rather than face a penalty with just ten men for the rest of the game. "If my assistant referee had not signalled a goal, I would have given a penalty and sent off goalkeeper Petr Cech."</i>

However, that raises the question of whether he should have sent Cech off anyway. The rules clearly state that a referee can play advantage, but any punishment can be meted out in retrospect. You see many examples of this with yellow cards. And although there is talk that for a red card the game must be stopped, this does not seem to be in the spirit of the law as the team fouled would lose an advantage. The correct decision in this case should have been allow the goal, given that the linesman awarded it, and then send the goalie off.

Finally, you may have seen some glum faces on Terry and Lampard as they led out the team on Sat. They had perked up by the time the cup was awarded however. Their loss in the CL though is obviously hurting them, as that must have been the target that Jose set out for them.

<I>John Terry: Sunday, May 08 2005 1:31
Chelsea skipper John Terry has set his sights on next season's Champions League after his side's
semi-final heartbreak against Liverpool. The Blues were dumped out by Liverpool in the semi-finals, losing 1-0 on aggregate, which saw them exit the competition at the semi-final stage for the second consecutive year. And while Chelsea yesterday lifted their first top flight league title for 50 years, some of the shine was taken of that achievement by their failure to make the Champions League final, and Terry is eager to put that right next season.</i>

Redspider

p.pete

redspider wrote:

In terms of the goal, according to an article in the Sunday Times, the goal was analysed by Hawk-Eye computer software. This showed that the ball was 17.7cm over the line, with 4.3cm not over the line, so that’s 80.5% over the line. The article doesn’t give the accuracy of the calculation, but the expert quoted stated that with more analysis it could be brought down to an accuracy of 0.5cm. This calculation seems about right, and shows that it was more of a goal than not, and goals that are “less” than this are usually given. I don’t think Chelsea fans can gripe too much.

Shouldn't the whole ball be over the line? I mean if they're going to get technical and bring it down to mms then 80% of the ball isn't good enough - if we're going on the ref and linesman to make a decision then yes it was a goal.

I totally a agree that Cech should have been sent of regardless of advantage or whether it was actually a goal...

The Muppet

redspider wrote:

A few more items on the Liverpool win over Chelsea.

In terms of the goal, according to an article in the Sunday Times, the goal was analysed by Hawk-Eye computer software. This showed that the ball was 17.7cm over the line, with 4.3cm not over the line, so that’s 80.5% over the line. The article doesn’t give the accuracy of the calculation, but the expert quoted stated that with more analysis it could be brought down to an accuracy of 0.5cm. This calculation seems about right, and shows that it was more of a goal than not, and goals that are “less” than this are usually given. I don’t think Chelsea fans can gripe too much.


Redspider

LOL

Under the rules of the game the Whole of the Ball must be over the whole of the line for a goal to be awarded. If the software is as accurate as suggested it proves that Chelsea fans have evey right to gripe. The rules are quite clear there can be no ambiguity such as "more or less of a goal". This just proves it's time to start using the technology available at least on the goalline.

redspider

p.pete wrote:

Shouldn't the whole ball be over the line? I mean if they're going to get technical and bring it down to mms then 80% of the ball isn't good enough

Yes, as I said in previous postings, it is necessary that 100% of the ball should be over the line for a proper goal, and in all likelihood by my own observations, by some of my own calculations and by calculations such as that from Hawk-Eye, the Liverpool goal wasnt 100% over the line.

However, having said that, it is common practice for linesmen and referee's to award goals when the ball is not 100% over the line, ie: when it is 50% over the line and in many cases much less, even as low as 10% over the line. Goals have been given when the ball has been barely across the line, and a well-known case was the 1966 goal for England in the World Cup. So in that sense, although this Liverpool goal was only 80% over the line, Chelsea can have no quibbles as this is more often than not given.

I am an advocate of bringing in technology to solve this once and for all, take it out of the hands of the refs and the linesmen. Not camera/replay technology but that proposed by Adidas which has positional sensors.

Redspider

redspider

The Muppet wrote:

... anything ...

LOL

The Muppet

redspider wrote:

LOL

I think you'll find I,m right on this one.

growler

referees and linesmen very rarely face a situation like this , unless you're at old trafford it's usually pretty clear whether the ball is in or not.


anyway as a chelsea fan I'm not moaning about it , Cech could easily have been sent off for the challenge , then again he could have been given a free kick for a high challenge on the keeper.

Chelsea should have done ye over the two legs, if we had Robben and Duff we would have done a similar job as Arsenal yesterday, unfortunate but sht happens.

p.pete

growler wrote:

Chelsea should have done ye over the two legs, if we had Robben and Duff we would have done a similar job as Arsenal yesterday, unfortunate but sht happens.

We can all moan about missing players I think, unfortunately yesterday was an away league match - for some reason we don't do away league games

opr

Another Omen one more has risen with the news Liverpool will wear their home strip, with AC Milan sporting their white away kit.

On each of the four previous occasions when Liverpool have won the European Cup they have worn red and beaten a side playing in white.

PHB

Milan choose to wear their white kit because they beat Juve in it.

zokrez

Another Omen then ! :rolleyes:

zokrez

Ah the memories - this time last year, I was belting out YNWA in Anfield................good luck Arsenal.

Cormic

When Jens saved the penalty I had the same feeling as I did when Dudek saved the two shots from Shevchenko near the end of the final.