• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

***OMT: Tottenham Hotspur vs Liverpool***

Had a lot of fun winding up Pool fans today. They are such sore losers that it doesn't matter if the pens were legit or not, in fact I'm even swaying towards the latter to really rub their noses in it. Hope we get an even better result next week as I'm really enjoying this. Come on Harry, Dele et al please stick it to the goons on Saturday, think my office will explode.
 
alekaras said:
Geez, get a grip, guys. I didn't say there was no contact in this particular instance. I was just making a general argument that if one angle shows contact and the other does not, it's no contact and therefore not a foul/pen.

As for this particular one, as @glasgowspur mentioned, Lamela is caught by the toe of VvD's boot, not the whole damn foot. So it's a nick. A painful nick, no less, but still a nick. And Lamela did his best to make sure the ref knew that. I don't see what the hubbub with what I'm saying is all about, really.
Click to expand...
Mate, you’ve dug yourself a big hole as it is, don’t keep digging!

Your first sentence is frankly ridiculous! I’m sorry if that seems harsh but it just is! If you punch someone in the street and one cctv camera doesn’t see it, but the other camera clearly shows it, then.... do you know what, forget it!!!
 
alekaras said:
Geez, get a grip, guys. I didn't say there was no contact in this particular instance. I was just making a general argument that if one angle shows contact and the other does not, it's no contact and therefore not a foul/pen.

As for this particular one, as @glasgowspur mentioned, Lamela is caught by the toe of VvD's boot, not the whole damn foot. So it's a nick. A painful nick, no less, but still a nick. And Lamela did his best to make sure the ref knew that. I don't see what the hubbub with what I'm saying is all about, really.
Click to expand...
Let it go mate, it's not worth it and more importantly it may spoil your enjoyment. So much fun so many Pool fans.
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
Mate, you’ve dug yourself a big hole as it is, don’t keep digging!

Your first sentence is frankly ridiculous! I’m sorry if that seems harsh but it just is! If you punch someone in the street and one cctv camera doesn’t see it, but the other camera clearly shows it, then.... do you know what, forget it!!!
Click to expand...
I can't believe how difficult it is by some to grasp this concept. You have two camera angles: one shows what appears to be someone throwing a punch and landing one, but the other shows a complete miss. Is it possible that the punch landed when one camera clearly shows it is a miss? You don't have to be a genius to figure this one out.

@Robspur12 I live in the States. People don't follow the PL here and the ones that do are not as heavily vested in their teams. So this is really my only enjoyment. :p

P.S. I'm also trying to get this thread to 60 pages.
 
alekaras said:
I can't believe how difficult it is by some to grasp this concept. You have two camera angles: one shows what appears to be someone throwing a punch and landing one, but the other shows a complete miss. Is it possible that the punch landed when one camera clearly shows it is a miss? You don't have to be a genius to figure this one out.

@Robspur12 I live in the States. People don't follow the PL here and the ones that do are not as heavily vested in their teams. So this is really my only enjoyment. :p

P.S. I'm also trying to get this thread to 60 pages.
Click to expand...
But the first doesn’t show a miss does it, it doesn’t show anything! So the only proof is the camera that shows the connection.

I can’t quite believe I’m having this conversation!
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
But the first doesn’t show a miss does it, it doesn’t show anything! So the only proof is the camera that shows the connection.

I can’t quite believe I’m having this conversation!
Click to expand...
I am bringing up a hypothetical, not talking about the specific two angles from the game. You're stuck on the angles from the game. We're talking past each other. :confused:
 
Just a shame they’ve been forced in to the statement by all the Liverpool crying. Not sure a statement would have been given if the decision went against any other club?
 
Finney Is Back said:
Slight touch? Van Dyke took a swing at the ball and instead of connecting with it, he connected with the top of Lamela's calf/back of his knee. That would've been a pretty painful kick IMO and an absolute nailed on penalty. The only controversy was that the ref bottled giving it (probably because he had already given the other one 5 mins before).
Click to expand...

Have you ever walked up to a mate and done that knee in the back of the knee thing? that makes your leg fold up instantly. That is not even painful as its just a touch. On this occasion VVD kicks him right in the back of the knee. That would make anyone go down. Maybe not as theatrical but still anyone would go down with that.

So totally agree with you.
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
Just a shame they’ve been forced in to the statement by all the Liverpool crying. Not sure a statement would have been given if the decision went against any other club?
Click to expand...

It's all part of the cover up. Moss didn't have a clue and was just buying time before making a guess. Kane was offside, Karius never touched him despite actually admitting himself that he did.
 
glasgowspur said:
There is no way vvd has reaction times so good that he can pull out of that movement and have minimal contact, try it. The only way his foot isn't following through is catching something solid, in this case lamela leg.
Vvd reaction to lamela tells you it' a foul, it's a half hearted attempt to berate him.
As for lamela reaction, you don' have to study that vid too closely to see that he is caught be the toe of the boot, so all the force of that movement in one concenrated point.

I'm not totally convinced about Harry's, the keeper impedes his forward path so I think it's a soft one, but the 2nd one is a stick on.
Click to expand...

Agree on this. Harry trailed his leg, it caught the shoulder of the Keeper and he went down as his forward leg movement was impeded. It drew contact and then he went down. BUT. it was missed. So why are why are we still talking about it for the love of GHod.
 
We are one of the dirtiest, cynical sides in the league, sometimes we cross the line but personally I’d rather we acted in this manner than go back to being the soft, pushovers we were 10 years ago. At least teams know they’re in for a physical contest when they play us now.

Just a delight to see a tough Spurs side who are determined to win.
 
I have to say I enjoyed watching it back on MOTD - the second one is a clear penalty, in my opinion, but when the refs are debating, and Lamela is sitting there like he's really hurt, Llorente calling over to the bench for added dramatic effect, hahaha, that was kind of hilarious. :p
 
Jordinho said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/960609821010612224
Click to expand...

Utterly hilarious - and actually a bit scary. Would any other club other than Liverpool drive the amount of hysteria required to genuinely start up questions of an independent inquiry into refereeing? Unbelievable.

And what is Hackett's problem? Is he a Liverpool fan? Does he not get on with the guys that are in the PGMOL? Kane being where he was did not cause Lovren to miskick the ball...how are these people so entirely unable to look at themselves rather than blaming others? Really is quite scary.
 
alekaras said:
I am bringing up a hypothetical, not talking about the specific two angles from the game. You're stuck on the angles from the game. We're talking past each other. :confused:
Click to expand...
Sorry - I am confused.... Are we talking about a hypothetical scenario where Van Dyke tries to punch Lamela? That sounds baaaaad!.... Can we call for video evidence and get him 6 game ban? Maybe 6 games is a bit harsh seeing as how it is only a hypothetical punch.... Let's go for a 3 game ban on that basis. I'm just hoping that there is a hypothetical camera angle that caught all of this.
 
But Hackett produced a document containing guidance from football’s rulemaking body, the International Football Association Board, which states a player is offside if he “makes an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball”.

The only thing impacting Lovren’s ability to play the ball is Lovren himself.

And let’s just suspend rational thinking for a moment and imagine there is an independent enquiry, which finds that the rule was incorrectly applied/interpreted. What actually changes apart from Kane not then getting a penalty which he missed anyway?

This is getting ridiculous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back