Any idea when they are talking about this in parliament?
Thanks for that.I can sleep tonight knowing that's been cleared up.
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 1 minute ago
Any idea when they are talking about this in parliament?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
dunno ask the united fan who created the petition
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 5 minutes ago
Any idea when they are talking about this in parliament?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Genuine lol
Will the PM mention it in his next address to the House?
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
Will the PM mention it in his next address to the House?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably not - i don't think he is a fan of talking about anything factual to the House.
Just to check the OP, are you saying that's confirmation that it wasn't a pen? As that's known already wasn't it - that the first infringement takes precedence? Isn't the issue more that they seemingly saw that tackle and didn't think it deserved individual punishment for Pickford?
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
Will the PM mention it in his next address to the House?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably not - i don't think he is a fan of talking about anything factual to the House.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was backing the call for a ban, Liverpool fans will tell you he is t he worst keeper in the league.
Him getting a ban for 3 games or until VVD returns would improve our league performances.
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
in theory a ref is god. Refer to James being sent off for england after the game had ended. As long as he writes it in the report its fact.
However they managed to end the game recently then restart it to award a pen to over rule a ref.
so the game is full of inconsistencies.
If they wanted to punish pickford the would find a way, they clearly don't.
England players always preferential treatment, even the shiiiit ones like Pickford.
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 6 minutes ago
in theory a ref is god. Refer to James being sent off for england after the game had ended. As long as he writes it in the report its fact.
However they managed to end the game recently then restart it to award a pen to over rule a ref.
so the game is full of inconsistencies.
If they wanted to punish pickford the would find a way, they clearly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. This is nothing new. The FA will always find a way to back the ref regardless how stupid the decision or lack of decision made is. And their favourite one is we saw it but in our opinion it was deemed a good challenge
There is then no real accountability. But we all knew this so why LFC wanted an answer from them I will never know!
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
Its like if there's a bad tackle say and the ref blows the whistle, then all the players mill into each other, if a player punches another player it thiabstage, after whistle is blown, he canstill be sent off
Yeah, the player can be sent off.
It’s happened in the past. But like Son Pickford will be disturbed and impacted by what has happened. He will need support just like Son and the other Spurs lad after they did Gomes.
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“The FA determined the incident was seen at the time having consulted with the match officials, including VAR.“
And...
“As Van Dijk was being treated, the VAR noted it was checking for a 'possible penalty'.“
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They shouldn't be officiating a game of football then really.
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“The FA determined the incident was seen at the time having consulted with the match officials, including VAR.“
And...
“As Van Dijk was being treated, the VAR noted it was checking for a 'possible penalty'.“
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah ok
A few observations/thoughts:
- The published photo accompanying the tackle in question clearly shows that the ball was in play. I don't believe that Pickford intended the damage that was done.
- It is very unfortunate that Van Dijk was so seriously injured, however, he is a great and aggressive player. His aggressive play is what contributes to his value.
- Pickford has often been criticized for his erratic play, especially not properly commanding his penalty area. Did his seeing Van Ditk a few feet from the goal line influence his decision to make that tackle?
- Most importantly, we see the "off-side" rule playing a dominant role in the determination of a game! The goal did not count because it was deemed "off-side"!
The Pickford tackle has been reviewed and no further action is to be taken.
- VAR was implemented because it was thought to be superior to relying solely on the judgement of human officials. This was a split-second play and VAR, in conjunction with the human officials, seem to have gotten it right.
- Getting rid of VAR, or wanting it overhauled, is short-sighted especially when it is motivated by a decision that we don't like.
Not much talk of VAR being dispensed with.
It’s the incompetent refs that get to referee more than one match a day sat in a room of equipment they probably don’t know how to use that’s the problem.
when it is motivated by a decision that we don't like.
no need to get rid, but the decision was incorrect
Sign in if you want to comment
Confirmation about offside fouls
Page 1 of 2
posted on 19/10/20
Any idea when they are talking about this in parliament?
posted on 19/10/20
Thanks for that.I can sleep tonight knowing that's been cleared up.
posted on 19/10/20
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 1 minute ago
Any idea when they are talking about this in parliament?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
dunno ask the united fan who created the petition
posted on 19/10/20
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 5 minutes ago
Any idea when they are talking about this in parliament?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Genuine lol
posted on 19/10/20
Will the PM mention it in his next address to the House?
posted on 19/10/20
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
Will the PM mention it in his next address to the House?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably not - i don't think he is a fan of talking about anything factual to the House.
posted on 19/10/20
Just to check the OP, are you saying that's confirmation that it wasn't a pen? As that's known already wasn't it - that the first infringement takes precedence? Isn't the issue more that they seemingly saw that tackle and didn't think it deserved individual punishment for Pickford?
posted on 19/10/20
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
Will the PM mention it in his next address to the House?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably not - i don't think he is a fan of talking about anything factual to the House.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 19/10/20
posted on 19/10/20
I was backing the call for a ban, Liverpool fans will tell you he is t he worst keeper in the league.
Him getting a ban for 3 games or until VVD returns would improve our league performances.
posted on 19/10/20
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
posted on 19/10/20
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
posted on 19/10/20
in theory a ref is god. Refer to James being sent off for england after the game had ended. As long as he writes it in the report its fact.
However they managed to end the game recently then restart it to award a pen to over rule a ref.
so the game is full of inconsistencies.
If they wanted to punish pickford the would find a way, they clearly don't.
posted on 19/10/20
England players always preferential treatment, even the shiiiit ones like Pickford.
posted on 19/10/20
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
posted on 19/10/20
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 6 minutes ago
in theory a ref is god. Refer to James being sent off for england after the game had ended. As long as he writes it in the report its fact.
However they managed to end the game recently then restart it to award a pen to over rule a ref.
so the game is full of inconsistencies.
If they wanted to punish pickford the would find a way, they clearly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. This is nothing new. The FA will always find a way to back the ref regardless how stupid the decision or lack of decision made is. And their favourite one is we saw it but in our opinion it was deemed a good challenge
There is then no real accountability. But we all knew this so why LFC wanted an answer from them I will never know!
posted on 19/10/20
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
posted on 19/10/20
Its like if there's a bad tackle say and the ref blows the whistle, then all the players mill into each other, if a player punches another player it thiabstage, after whistle is blown, he canstill be sent off
posted on 19/10/20
Yeah, the player can be sent off.
It’s happened in the past. But like Son Pickford will be disturbed and impacted by what has happened. He will need support just like Son and the other Spurs lad after they did Gomes.
posted on 19/10/20
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“The FA determined the incident was seen at the time having consulted with the match officials, including VAR.“
And...
“As Van Dijk was being treated, the VAR noted it was checking for a 'possible penalty'.“
posted on 19/10/20
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They shouldn't be officiating a game of football then really.
posted on 19/10/20
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”
Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“The FA determined the incident was seen at the time having consulted with the match officials, including VAR.“
And...
“As Van Dijk was being treated, the VAR noted it was checking for a 'possible penalty'.“
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah ok
posted on 19/10/20
A few observations/thoughts:
- The published photo accompanying the tackle in question clearly shows that the ball was in play. I don't believe that Pickford intended the damage that was done.
- It is very unfortunate that Van Dijk was so seriously injured, however, he is a great and aggressive player. His aggressive play is what contributes to his value.
- Pickford has often been criticized for his erratic play, especially not properly commanding his penalty area. Did his seeing Van Ditk a few feet from the goal line influence his decision to make that tackle?
- Most importantly, we see the "off-side" rule playing a dominant role in the determination of a game! The goal did not count because it was deemed "off-side"!
The Pickford tackle has been reviewed and no further action is to be taken.
- VAR was implemented because it was thought to be superior to relying solely on the judgement of human officials. This was a split-second play and VAR, in conjunction with the human officials, seem to have gotten it right.
- Getting rid of VAR, or wanting it overhauled, is short-sighted especially when it is motivated by a decision that we don't like.
posted on 19/10/20
Not much talk of VAR being dispensed with.
It’s the incompetent refs that get to referee more than one match a day sat in a room of equipment they probably don’t know how to use that’s the problem.
posted on 19/10/20
when it is motivated by a decision that we don't like.
no need to get rid, but the decision was incorrect
Page 1 of 2