comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 24 seconds ago
TOOR admitting he's would up
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
Mr Chelsea
The keeper admitted to clipping Kane
Careful analysis of the first penalty by sky sports has ruled that it was definitely a penalty as Lovren played the ball deliberately even if it was badly. The ref even consulted the 4th official I believe who has a screen at the side of the pitch.
Some people are never happy VAR would have given the same ruling as what we got without it so what the hell is the big deal?
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 19 minutes ago
"You don't get it, the Fa's own rules state that if the ball deflects off a player into the path of an offside player then it's offside. It's different if the player plays the ball to the opposition. Regardless of that, Kane then dives for a penalty and the keeper saves it.
**************
This is as ignorant and incorrect a comment as I have seen on this game today- and poorly written too, showing the writer's idiocy.
Read the relevant section of the off-side rule posted elsewhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I could accept your opinion on a comment being poorly written if you didn't fire in incorrect uses of the hyphen in your own.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buy yourself a copy of the OED
Tbf I think it was a dive and a pen for the first, they aren't mutually exclusive like some people think
As for Kane throwing himself to the ground I can tell you for sure he never does that when there is a chance to score.
Look at the first goal against pool at Wembley Kane kept his feet despite a clear foul and managed to sneak the ball home. Had he have been a diver he would have gone down there check it out
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 1 minute ago
Mr Chelsea
The keeper admitted to clipping Kane
Careful analysis of the first penalty by sky sports has ruled that it was definitely a penalty as Lovren played the ball deliberately even if it was badly. The ref even consulted the 4th official I believe who has a screen at the side of the pitch.
Some people are never happy VAR would have given the same ruling as what we got without it so what the hell is the big deal?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Grandspurs
I wasn't disputing the offside call. If Lovren did touch the ball then fair enough. No offside should be called. I was only going by the replay I saw of the goalie and Kane. I couldn't see any touch but that was off one replay. That's why I asked
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 58 seconds ago
Mr Chelsea
The keeper admitted to clipping Kane
Careful analysis of the first penalty by sky sports has ruled that it was definitely a penalty as Lovren played the ball deliberately even if it was badly. The ref even consulted the 4th official I believe who has a screen at the side of the pitch.
Some people are never happy VAR would have given the same ruling as what we got without it so what the hell is the big deal?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely, the refs (all of them) called both penalties correctly.
To commit an offside offense, a player must "gain an advantage" from being in an offside position. The relevant section of the offside rule states:
"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage."
Anyway how can you be calling for VAR after that?
The only difference between all the cameras after the game and VAR is the time scale.
All the cameras have proved that all the big decisions were correct for gods sake, the fact that they proved it 10 minutes after the game makes no difference at all.
Work it out CORRECT = CORRECT its not rocket science
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
I’m anti-VAR would rather introduce a second referee and do it similar to how they do it in basketball
No contact does not equal a penalty.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tripping or attempting to trip.
Notice the ATTEMPTING so no contact can easily equal a penalty.
If you are going to argue online you really should know what you are on about otherwise you really do look totally stupid
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 5 minutes ago
Anyway how can you be calling for VAR after that?
The only difference between all the cameras after the game and VAR is the time scale.
All the cameras have proved that all the big decisions were correct for gods sake, the fact that they proved it 10 minutes after the game makes no difference at all.
Work it out CORRECT = CORRECT its not rocket science
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can call for it when the player who dives for a penalty is offside, which unlike the Kane incident, I Lamela's case required no interpretation.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if your attempting to get the Ball, miss and get the player instead
Like I say 8 odd experts of the game call it a pen I’m inclined to go with them
Hi dimwit check out these rules
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
charges
jumps at
kicks or attempts to kick
pushes
strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
tackles or challenges
trips or attempts to trip
3 offences of ATTEMPTING there none of them mean contact is made but every one is a penalty (doh)
It’s pretty hilarious the meltdown some Liverpool fans have had.
You’d think they’d be happy still being above us
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if your attempting to get the Ball, miss and get the player instead
Like I say 8 odd experts of the game call it a pen I’m inclined to go with them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 29 seconds ago
It’s pretty hilarious the meltdown some Liverpool fans have had.
You’d think they’d be happy still being above us
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why we we be happy being above Spurs? We're trying to catch second place not worrying about fifth.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 33 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if your attempting to get the Ball, miss and get the player instead
Like I say 8 odd experts of the game call it a pen I’m inclined to go with them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. I’m leaving it here with you. Although the next pen you get I’ll mske sure to study it and look again on this thread
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a different set of laws of the game up north or something?
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 29 seconds ago
It’s pretty hilarious the meltdown some Liverpool fans have had.
You’d think they’d be happy still being above us
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why we we be happy being above Spurs? We're trying to catch second place not worrying about fifth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool second
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight hypothetical situation.
The ball is in our penalty area and you are on the attack big time, but Kane is in your penalty area and your keeper punches him in the head.
Its not a penalty because it does not put Kane at a disadvantage cos the ball is 100 yards away?
Really?
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight hypothetical situation.
The ball is in our penalty area and you are on the attack big time, but Kane is in your penalty area and your keeper punches him in the head.
Its not a penalty because it does not put Kane at a disadvantage cos the ball is 100 yards away?
Really?
OR
Same situation but Kane ducks so that the punch misses so no penalty because there was no contact and no disadvantage to the player.
Get real sunshine
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 13 minutes ago
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight hypothetical situation.
The ball is in our penalty area and you are on the attack big time, but Kane is in your penalty area and your keeper punches him in the head.
Its not a penalty because it does not put Kane at a disadvantage cos the ball is 100 yards away?
Really?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now you're just being stupid. That falls under violent conduct.
There are rules for these things.
Football is a contact sport and therefore making contact doesn't mean its a foul. What the referee has to determine is whether the contact made put the player at a disadvantage. Karius barely touched Kane, who knowing that threw himself to the ground, in order to make it look like he was at a disavantage. Otherwise why would he dive?
Sign in if you want to comment
VAR unstoppable
Page 4 of 6
6
posted on 4/2/18
comment by Bake 'em away toys (U7303)
posted 24 seconds ago
TOOR admitting he's would up
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct.
posted on 4/2/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
posted on 4/2/18
Mr Chelsea
The keeper admitted to clipping Kane
Careful analysis of the first penalty by sky sports has ruled that it was definitely a penalty as Lovren played the ball deliberately even if it was badly. The ref even consulted the 4th official I believe who has a screen at the side of the pitch.
Some people are never happy VAR would have given the same ruling as what we got without it so what the hell is the big deal?
posted on 4/2/18
posted on 4/2/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 19 minutes ago
"You don't get it, the Fa's own rules state that if the ball deflects off a player into the path of an offside player then it's offside. It's different if the player plays the ball to the opposition. Regardless of that, Kane then dives for a penalty and the keeper saves it.
**************
This is as ignorant and incorrect a comment as I have seen on this game today- and poorly written too, showing the writer's idiocy.
Read the relevant section of the off-side rule posted elsewhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I could accept your opinion on a comment being poorly written if you didn't fire in incorrect uses of the hyphen in your own.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buy yourself a copy of the OED
posted on 4/2/18
Tbf I think it was a dive and a pen for the first, they aren't mutually exclusive like some people think
posted on 4/2/18
As for Kane throwing himself to the ground I can tell you for sure he never does that when there is a chance to score.
Look at the first goal against pool at Wembley Kane kept his feet despite a clear foul and managed to sneak the ball home. Had he have been a diver he would have gone down there check it out
posted on 4/2/18
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 1 minute ago
Mr Chelsea
The keeper admitted to clipping Kane
Careful analysis of the first penalty by sky sports has ruled that it was definitely a penalty as Lovren played the ball deliberately even if it was badly. The ref even consulted the 4th official I believe who has a screen at the side of the pitch.
Some people are never happy VAR would have given the same ruling as what we got without it so what the hell is the big deal?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Grandspurs
I wasn't disputing the offside call. If Lovren did touch the ball then fair enough. No offside should be called. I was only going by the replay I saw of the goalie and Kane. I couldn't see any touch but that was off one replay. That's why I asked
posted on 4/2/18
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 58 seconds ago
Mr Chelsea
The keeper admitted to clipping Kane
Careful analysis of the first penalty by sky sports has ruled that it was definitely a penalty as Lovren played the ball deliberately even if it was badly. The ref even consulted the 4th official I believe who has a screen at the side of the pitch.
Some people are never happy VAR would have given the same ruling as what we got without it so what the hell is the big deal?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely, the refs (all of them) called both penalties correctly.
To commit an offside offense, a player must "gain an advantage" from being in an offside position. The relevant section of the offside rule states:
"A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage."
posted on 4/2/18
Anyway how can you be calling for VAR after that?
The only difference between all the cameras after the game and VAR is the time scale.
All the cameras have proved that all the big decisions were correct for gods sake, the fact that they proved it 10 minutes after the game makes no difference at all.
Work it out CORRECT = CORRECT its not rocket science
posted on 4/2/18
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
posted on 4/2/18
I’m anti-VAR would rather introduce a second referee and do it similar to how they do it in basketball
posted on 4/2/18
No contact does not equal a penalty.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tripping or attempting to trip.
Notice the ATTEMPTING so no contact can easily equal a penalty.
If you are going to argue online you really should know what you are on about otherwise you really do look totally stupid
posted on 4/2/18
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 5 minutes ago
Anyway how can you be calling for VAR after that?
The only difference between all the cameras after the game and VAR is the time scale.
All the cameras have proved that all the big decisions were correct for gods sake, the fact that they proved it 10 minutes after the game makes no difference at all.
Work it out CORRECT = CORRECT its not rocket science
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can call for it when the player who dives for a penalty is offside, which unlike the Kane incident, I Lamela's case required no interpretation.
posted on 4/2/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if your attempting to get the Ball, miss and get the player instead
Like I say 8 odd experts of the game call it a pen I’m inclined to go with them
posted on 4/2/18
Hi dimwit check out these rules
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
charges
jumps at
kicks or attempts to kick
pushes
strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
tackles or challenges
trips or attempts to trip
3 offences of ATTEMPTING there none of them mean contact is made but every one is a penalty (doh)
posted on 4/2/18
It’s pretty hilarious the meltdown some Liverpool fans have had.
You’d think they’d be happy still being above us
posted on 4/2/18
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if your attempting to get the Ball, miss and get the player instead
Like I say 8 odd experts of the game call it a pen I’m inclined to go with them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
posted on 4/2/18
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 29 seconds ago
It’s pretty hilarious the meltdown some Liverpool fans have had.
You’d think they’d be happy still being above us
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why we we be happy being above Spurs? We're trying to catch second place not worrying about fifth.
posted on 4/2/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 33 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 23 seconds ago
By the way, does anyone know why the referee after the game on Sky said the first Harry Kane pen was definitely a pen? I didn't see any contact between the goalie and Kane but happy to be proved wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Liverpool goalie said Kane foot hit his arm in his interview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but not enough to impact his run. There was no disadvantage until he threw himself to the ground.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made Kane go down
Personally would’ve been better to stay on his feet though and tap into empty net.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact made him go down? Now you're just winding me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact = pen
Funny how ref and linesman agreed, both commentators, 3 pundits ( all ex Liverpool players ) and ex professional referee but we are suppose to take you seriously because you watch it on a stream
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No contact does not equal a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if your attempting to get the Ball, miss and get the player instead
Like I say 8 odd experts of the game call it a pen I’m inclined to go with them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. I’m leaving it here with you. Although the next pen you get I’ll mske sure to study it and look again on this thread
posted on 4/2/18
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have a different set of laws of the game up north or something?
posted on 4/2/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by ツ Hєиgу+ (U9129)
posted 29 seconds ago
It’s pretty hilarious the meltdown some Liverpool fans have had.
You’d think they’d be happy still being above us
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why we we be happy being above Spurs? We're trying to catch second place not worrying about fifth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool second
posted on 4/2/18
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight hypothetical situation.
The ball is in our penalty area and you are on the attack big time, but Kane is in your penalty area and your keeper punches him in the head.
Its not a penalty because it does not put Kane at a disadvantage cos the ball is 100 yards away?
Really?
posted on 4/2/18
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight hypothetical situation.
The ball is in our penalty area and you are on the attack big time, but Kane is in your penalty area and your keeper punches him in the head.
Its not a penalty because it does not put Kane at a disadvantage cos the ball is 100 yards away?
Really?
OR
Same situation but Kane ducks so that the punch misses so no penalty because there was no contact and no disadvantage to the player.
Get real sunshine
posted on 4/2/18
comment by grandspurs (U3810)
posted 13 minutes ago
No it doesn't. It's only a foul of it puts the player at a disadvantage. It didn't but Kane diving made it look like it did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight hypothetical situation.
The ball is in our penalty area and you are on the attack big time, but Kane is in your penalty area and your keeper punches him in the head.
Its not a penalty because it does not put Kane at a disadvantage cos the ball is 100 yards away?
Really?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now you're just being stupid. That falls under violent conduct.
There are rules for these things.
Football is a contact sport and therefore making contact doesn't mean its a foul. What the referee has to determine is whether the contact made put the player at a disadvantage. Karius barely touched Kane, who knowing that threw himself to the ground, in order to make it look like he was at a disavantage. Otherwise why would he dive?
Page 4 of 6
6