'Berating'
Welshpool still here, prepared to say absolutely anything to avoid admitting he's wrong.
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny that Winston is berating me for responding to emojis when he has then responded to your comment which was an emoji, isn't it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just his MO.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny that Winston is berating me for responding to emojis when he has then responded to your comment which was an emoji, isn't it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just his MO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would appear so.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 39 minutes ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to lunge in here, in the box but I'm not worried as Elliott will move out of the way for me if I miss the ball. 'Bang!'
Oh.
Elliot bought that one in the same way that players fall to the ground under minimal contact.
This is what football has turned into and it is now more a case of not giving the player an opportunity to dive and not giving the ref a decision to make, because it is now an accepted part of the game. AWB was a silly boy for giving that opportunity.
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 39 minutes ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to lunge in here, in the box but I'm not worried as Elliott will move out of the way for me if I miss the ball. 'Bang!'
Oh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He didn't need to move out of the way.
If he'd carried on running, he'd have been fine.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
‘Taking out the defender’
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 34 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 39 minutes ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to lunge in here, in the box but I'm not worried as Elliott will move out of the way for me if I miss the ball. 'Bang!'
Oh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What does the 'bang' represent?
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So now if an attacker could avoid the contact by doing some kind of superman manoeuvre it’s no longer a penalty?
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So now if an attacker could avoid the contact by doing some kind of superman manoeuvre it’s no longer a penalty?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he would have lost the opportunity to score or progress forward because of Bissaka who never got anywhere bear the ball. The aim of football is to play the ball, not the man.
Both sides are right. Elliot could have very easily ridden that challenge but chose to make sure he got caught. That's common practice in the modern game. Not an obvious dive because there was plenty of contact, he made sure there was.
AWB could have stayed on his feet instead of giving an attacker the chance to go down, but he didnt. So he was asking for trouble and he got it.
In the modern game you have to accept that players make the most of every situation and if a defender sticks a leg in front of you and doesn't get the ball, expect the attacker to go over it and make little attempt to ride the challenge.
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh crap there's a defender lunging in, I better get out of the way of the lunge, otherwise I'll get a penalty.
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh crap there's a defender lunging in, I better get out of the way of the lunge, otherwise I'll get a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This isn't even close to what happened.
AWB was essentially on the floor and Elliott was due to run past him... choosing instead to leave his leg in, clip AWB and fall over.
The same stuff is being written over and over again.
As said, there really aren’t many that don’t think it’s a penalty and it’s worth checking who those people are before wasting anymore time, imo.
There's plenty of people who see that he dived, and many of those who think it was a penalty offer justification that doesn't contradict that view... they just think it's an acceptable part of the game.
You obviously want to make yourself feel better that not everyone agrees with you, so you keep repeating the same thing.
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 3 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So now if an attacker could avoid the contact by doing some kind of superman manoeuvre it’s no longer a penalty?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Superman manoeuvre? Jesus christ man. Go look at the video again and ask yourself, could Elliott have avoided his leg. We both know he could.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he would have lost the opportunity to score or progress forward because of Bissaka who never got anywhere bear the ball. The aim of football is to play the ball, not the man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AWB got neither.
Arebyou really arguing that if the leg is there, Elliott is right to take advantage by seeking contact?
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
Both sides are right. Elliot could have very easily ridden that challenge but chose to make sure he got caught. That's common practice in the modern game. Not an obvious dive because there was plenty of contact, he made sure there was.
AWB could have stayed on his feet instead of giving an attacker the chance to go down, but he didnt. So he was asking for trouble and he got it.
In the modern game you have to accept that players make the most of every situation and if a defender sticks a leg in front of you and doesn't get the ball, expect the attacker to go over it and make little attempt to ride the challenge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A slide tackle isn't a foul.
Elliott sought contact to win a pen. There is.nothing more to it. It's cheating.
Defender lunges in, fouls attacker, penalty shock. Whether the player could have stayed up or avoided contact is irrelevant. None of those things are in the laws of the game. You foul in the box, it's a penalty, whatever the attacker coulda, shoulda, woulda, done.
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 6 seconds ago
Defender lunges in, fouls attacker, penalty shock. Whether the player could have stayed up or avoided contact is irrelevant. None of those things are in the laws of the game. You foul in the box, it's a penalty, whatever the attacker coulda, shoulda, woulda, done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re completely ignoring that the challenge wouldn’t have impacted Elliott were it not for the fact that Elliott initiated the contact.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 6 seconds ago
Defender lunges in, fouls attacker, penalty shock. Whether the player could have stayed up or avoided contact is irrelevant. None of those things are in the laws of the game. You foul in the box, it's a penalty, whatever the attacker coulda, shoulda, woulda, done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re completely ignoring that the challenge wouldn’t have impacted Elliott were it not for the fact that Elliott initiated the contact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elliott didn't foul the defender though, the defender fouled Elliott.
I understand you don't like this part of the game when attackers look for penalties and go down when fouled but that doesn't take away the fact he was fouled in the box and fouls in the box will be a penalty.
I'm astounded this is even a debate.
Sign in if you want to comment
Weekend Decisions
Page 6 of 8
6 | 7 | 8
posted on 9/4/24
'Berating'
Welshpool still here, prepared to say absolutely anything to avoid admitting he's wrong.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny that Winston is berating me for responding to emojis when he has then responded to your comment which was an emoji, isn't it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just his MO.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny that Winston is berating me for responding to emojis when he has then responded to your comment which was an emoji, isn't it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just his MO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would appear so.
posted on 9/4/24
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 39 minutes ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to lunge in here, in the box but I'm not worried as Elliott will move out of the way for me if I miss the ball. 'Bang!'
Oh.
posted on 9/4/24
Elliot bought that one in the same way that players fall to the ground under minimal contact.
This is what football has turned into and it is now more a case of not giving the player an opportunity to dive and not giving the ref a decision to make, because it is now an accepted part of the game. AWB was a silly boy for giving that opportunity.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 39 minutes ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to lunge in here, in the box but I'm not worried as Elliott will move out of the way for me if I miss the ball. 'Bang!'
Oh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He didn't need to move out of the way.
If he'd carried on running, he'd have been fine.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
posted on 9/4/24
‘Taking out the defender’
posted on 9/4/24
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 34 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 39 minutes ago
There wouldn’t have been contact had Elliott not initiated, so it didn’t impede him.
=====
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to lunge in here, in the box but I'm not worried as Elliott will move out of the way for me if I miss the ball. 'Bang!'
Oh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What does the 'bang' represent?
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So now if an attacker could avoid the contact by doing some kind of superman manoeuvre it’s no longer a penalty?
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So now if an attacker could avoid the contact by doing some kind of superman manoeuvre it’s no longer a penalty?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 9/4/24
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he would have lost the opportunity to score or progress forward because of Bissaka who never got anywhere bear the ball. The aim of football is to play the ball, not the man.
posted on 9/4/24
Both sides are right. Elliot could have very easily ridden that challenge but chose to make sure he got caught. That's common practice in the modern game. Not an obvious dive because there was plenty of contact, he made sure there was.
AWB could have stayed on his feet instead of giving an attacker the chance to go down, but he didnt. So he was asking for trouble and he got it.
In the modern game you have to accept that players make the most of every situation and if a defender sticks a leg in front of you and doesn't get the ball, expect the attacker to go over it and make little attempt to ride the challenge.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh crap there's a defender lunging in, I better get out of the way of the lunge, otherwise I'll get a penalty.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh crap there's a defender lunging in, I better get out of the way of the lunge, otherwise I'll get a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This isn't even close to what happened.
AWB was essentially on the floor and Elliott was due to run past him... choosing instead to leave his leg in, clip AWB and fall over.
posted on 9/4/24
The same stuff is being written over and over again.
As said, there really aren’t many that don’t think it’s a penalty and it’s worth checking who those people are before wasting anymore time, imo.
posted on 9/4/24
There's plenty of people who see that he dived, and many of those who think it was a penalty offer justification that doesn't contradict that view... they just think it's an acceptable part of the game.
You obviously want to make yourself feel better that not everyone agrees with you, so you keep repeating the same thing.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 3 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So now if an attacker could avoid the contact by doing some kind of superman manoeuvre it’s no longer a penalty?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Superman manoeuvre? Jesus christ man. Go look at the video again and ask yourself, could Elliott have avoided his leg. We both know he could.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
comment by The Mainoo Man (U23147)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
comment by Never Mind the Defending: Here’s Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
No evidence apart from video footage, you mean.
And getting personal?
If you look above, you’ll see that’s what you did. So desperate to argue, you had to reply to a smiley.
You are, indeed, an embarrassment. And you’re intent on derailing this thread, clearly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The video footage of your clueless right back sliding in, in the penalty box, taking out the defender and getting nowhere near the ball you mean?
This isn’t even a contentious decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking.him.out? He didn't touch him and Elliott could have easily cleared.AWB, had he not wanted a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he would have lost the opportunity to score or progress forward because of Bissaka who never got anywhere bear the ball. The aim of football is to play the ball, not the man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AWB got neither.
Arebyou really arguing that if the leg is there, Elliott is right to take advantage by seeking contact?
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
Both sides are right. Elliot could have very easily ridden that challenge but chose to make sure he got caught. That's common practice in the modern game. Not an obvious dive because there was plenty of contact, he made sure there was.
AWB could have stayed on his feet instead of giving an attacker the chance to go down, but he didnt. So he was asking for trouble and he got it.
In the modern game you have to accept that players make the most of every situation and if a defender sticks a leg in front of you and doesn't get the ball, expect the attacker to go over it and make little attempt to ride the challenge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A slide tackle isn't a foul.
Elliott sought contact to win a pen. There is.nothing more to it. It's cheating.
posted on 9/4/24
Defender lunges in, fouls attacker, penalty shock. Whether the player could have stayed up or avoided contact is irrelevant. None of those things are in the laws of the game. You foul in the box, it's a penalty, whatever the attacker coulda, shoulda, woulda, done.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 6 seconds ago
Defender lunges in, fouls attacker, penalty shock. Whether the player could have stayed up or avoided contact is irrelevant. None of those things are in the laws of the game. You foul in the box, it's a penalty, whatever the attacker coulda, shoulda, woulda, done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re completely ignoring that the challenge wouldn’t have impacted Elliott were it not for the fact that Elliott initiated the contact.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 6 seconds ago
Defender lunges in, fouls attacker, penalty shock. Whether the player could have stayed up or avoided contact is irrelevant. None of those things are in the laws of the game. You foul in the box, it's a penalty, whatever the attacker coulda, shoulda, woulda, done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re completely ignoring that the challenge wouldn’t have impacted Elliott were it not for the fact that Elliott initiated the contact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elliott didn't foul the defender though, the defender fouled Elliott.
I understand you don't like this part of the game when attackers look for penalties and go down when fouled but that doesn't take away the fact he was fouled in the box and fouls in the box will be a penalty.
I'm astounded this is even a debate.
Page 6 of 8
6 | 7 | 8