12 Mar 2024 07:39:01
{Ed's Note - Seano_ has posted a new article entitled, Liverpool vs Manchester City: Review

1.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 08:43:05
Great review mate.

2.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 09:58:28
Good read that Seano (Are you Ed001 in disguise? )

3.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 10:35:08
Good review, Seano.

What a performance from the lads, despite the absentees. While they didn't get the 3 points, they have set the performance benchmark for the remaining fixtures.

Macca and Endo are working so well together. They are so intelligent, aware and deceivingly physical.

Kelleher and Virgil were imperious. And Quansah and Bradley delivered competent performances at the highest level again.

Special shout outs:

Lucho - he was relentlessly terrorising them. He deserved to cap that performance off with the winner. Keep this up, Lucho and it's going to be a special end to the season.

Elliott - I have been critical about his physical capacity in the past but wow, whatever he's doing in the gym is starting to pay off. He's an absolute machine now.

Gomez - while it may not have been eye-catching, he seems to be the tactical pawn in Klopp's toolbox at the moment. After the first 15-20 mins, Klopp asked him to invert and it allowed Endo and Macca to press City higher and wrestle control of the game. What is so impressive is that he just gets on with it. At the moment, the way he is playing in several positions, it's almost like rightback might be his worst position.

4.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 11:36:33
Can you do a Southampton review please Seano? ;-)

Great read mate!

5.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 11:40:40
Cheers seano, good read!

Only thing I'd disagree on is the potential Ederson red card. I think a yellow was fair given the official rules and the fact that there was no way Nunez was scoring after nicking the ball in front of Ederson. Agree with the other 2 big decisions though, looked like obstruction on Mac and a high kick in the chest is a foul regardless if he touched the ball first, he'd have been nowhere near the ball if he wasn't putting his foot up chest-high in a crowded box!

6.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 12:18:44
Some of us want Southampton to get promoted for one reason only Zed.

7.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 13:05:03
I think a lot of people are still missing the point about City’s goal. Ake was never offside but he obstructed.

And this was the reasoning in the EFL final. Endo was offside, but we all know players offside but not interfering with play isn’t being considered. Endo was called offside because his obstruction prevented the defender from defending.

So In the same measure, Ake was obstructing Alex and the goal disallowed based on their newly invented rule even if he wasn’t offside. The principle is, he obstructed and unfairly prevented the defender from defending.

Nonetheless, I note blocking runs is part of defending and never had an issue with it until the EFL final debacle. Of course that rule has never been evoked ever before or after the final. It’s in part of rant and frustration of never ending reinventing of rules as they go along.

8.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 13:18:03
Endo was not penalized for obstruction. There was no issue with him blocking off a player, this isn't something that is called, ever. It actually is an infraction to block off a player if you're not in playing distance of the ball when the ball is in play, but it's never, ever called such that it's essentially not a real rule. And that also doesn't apply to the moments before a free kick is taken. And it was not the issue in Endo's case. The issue for Endo was merely that by blocking someone off he was involved in the play.

Ake is not penalized because the blocking off a player is not what was penalized for Endo. Other people are not missing the issue here.

9.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 18:25:15
Not sure if I’m following you AP.

Especially with this statement ‘The issue for Endo was merely that by blocking someone off he was involved in the play. ’

So Endo’s offside was called because he was involved in the play. He was involved in the play because he was…?

Not trying to pick a fight with you, but I really couldn’t follow your reasoning especially since you also stated
‘There was no issue with him blocking off a player, this isn't something that is called, ever’ and having points about not a real rule etc earlier

And to give ed25 assurance. The game is over, the outcome won’t change. And such subjective decisions happen through every single game. There will be those we agree with, those that we don’t. I won’t be vexed over it as life has many other things to worry about. I’m more frustrated that we are treated to new rules or new interpretation of rules after almost every match now and this seemed to have escalated post-VAR. And it probably is happening this way because VAR was supposed to be the technology to eliminated most if not all errors (which I know it won’t be but they were certainly touting it to be such), but because it’s not happening, we are now being treated it to the spectacle of new reasoning post every match.

I did prefer it went back to what it was - error prone human beings trying their best to referee a game. Personal preferences, bias, angles, what was seen, not seen all at play and we live with the inadequacies of the game we love. There will certainly be massive consequences due to such things for the teams, calls of favourtism, corruption etc but at least we are not being given newer and newer rules or it’s interpretation each game until today whereby im not quite sure what the rules are anymore at times as their explanation is baffling at best a lot of times. Or maybe, i’m just getting old and want things as they used to be.

10.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 20:37:52
Great review, Seano. We should have won that game and by quite a lot, easily 3-1. It wasn't meant to be BUT I like the fact that Klopp chose to focus on the actual positive which was the performance as that is what is going to spur us on esp. with the guys we had out.

The big pen decision? I've said my piece about it so I'll pass on that even tho, I fully agree with a lot of what you have said about it and the disgraceful cover the refs are being given by their allies in the media/ pundit world. On to Prague on Thurs.

11.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 21:35:30
I think the point is Endo was given offside when in essence- he should have been penalise for obstructing an opponent
However- obstructing an opponent went out the window ages ago (at set pieces, letting the ball run out for a goal kick, etc. )

So if this was to be followed through correctly- the fact the Endo was offside was irrelevant as according to modern day officiating - he didn’t cause an offence because obstructing an opponent is no longer an offence.

Move on to Ake - not just preventing MacAllister moving into position but actively moving him out of the way - then by modern day interpretation that cannot result in a foul.

But you can’t have obstruction being applied in the league cup final- and then not in a PL match

I think that’s the essence

Officials applying/ not applying rules/ laws when it suits.

12.) 12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024 23:21:28
Thanks for the response.

A player who receives a pass is penalized for offside even though they have committed no other infraction because they are involved in the play.

A player who shields a keeper is penalized if they are offside even though no other infraction is committed.

Endo was penalized for offside as he was involved in the play by setting a pick. When he set the pick he was offside. The setting of the pick can be deemed completely legal and he is still penalized for offside as he is involved in the play. It doesn't matter whether it is an obstruction infraction or not. His involvement is because he picked another player while in an offside position; whether or not the pick itself is deemed legal is irrelevant to the offside offense.

13.) 13 Mar 2024
13 Mar 2024 00:38:17
I think Paisley put it very nicely what I was trying to say

I now understand your thinking better AP but it sure if I agree because how I see it was
- since blocking / obstructing is no longer deemed a foul / not enforced, Endo standing in an offside position is the equivalent of many other scenarios from set pieces or open play in the game
- which is as long as there is no interference to the play, the player standing in the offside position is not flagged
- and we see that every other week, the player could be in the line of sight of pass etc and as long as there is no touch or attempt to touch the ball, the game flows
- just as blocking from an offside position, not touching the ball in build up play while offside, all these hasn’t been called for a long long time (whether it should is a different discussion)
- regardless, in this instance, since blocking is not a foul / not enforced, him standing in an offside position that subsequently led to a obstruction shouldn’t matter as I could argue that he wasn’t interfering with play
- but if one says Endo’s offside is called, because he interfered with play via obstruction, then I would argue the same principle be applied in all settings (including on Sunday)
- in short, Endo’s offside couldn’t have interfered with play unless he was called for obstruction. Otherwise him standing in an offside position is inconsequential as he did not attempt to touch the ball nor was near it.

At the end, it boils down to the inconsistency Paisley articulated much better than I did. To add salt to injury, i haven never seen this ever being called before or after the final. While I’m not fixed in the conspiracy camp, I am frustrated with officials taking Center stage of matches a lot this season.

{Ed001's Note - there is no law about obstruction, it does not exist. Impeding is the offence and it is different, hence the change of word.}

14.) 13 Mar 2024
13 Mar 2024 07:23:09
Thanks Ed001
Impeding is the right term to use in this context
But my Qns remains about what I perceive as inconsistency in applying the laws of the game.

{Ed001's Note - there is clearly great inconsistency. VAR is supposed to be there to end that.}

15.) 13 Mar 2024
13 Mar 2024 15:56:46
Ed01, many of us thought VAR would end this discrepancy and many other things as well YET here we are arguing the same crap we were arguing when there was no VAR in place. The implementation of VAR in England will always be the prob.