Ole at the wheel 😂

25 minutes ago, Brutos said:

Ole at the wheel 😂

From being a laughing stock to having them 3-2 up in the cup, top of the league and an easier root to a european trophy. 

United just behind city as favorites for the League and FA cup for me, and favorites for the Europa.

4 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

easier root to a european trophy. 

Never before has 'knocked out of the CL in the group stages' been phrased so positively.

7 minutes ago, Stim said:

Never before has 'knocked out of the CL in the group stages' been phrased so positively.

Lol

They won wow they are in red hot form united 

1 minute ago, Brutos said:

They won wow they are in red hot form united 

To think Spurs beat them 1-6...now look at them. 

Vintage Man Utd that - some terrible officiating.

On a more hilarious note, that is two consecutive games Liverpool have been screwed out of! 

2 minutes ago, PloKoon13 said:

Vintage Man Utd that - some terrible officiating.

On a more hilarious note, that is two consecutive games Liverpool have been screwed out of! 

Which decision screwed Liverpool? They should have been down to 10 men.

6 minutes ago, dkw said:

Which decision screwed Liverpool? They should have been down to 10 men.

For the Mané tackle? I thought a yellow was right.

I was referring to Man Utd's second and third goals.

15 minutes ago, PloKoon13 said:

Vintage Man Utd that - some terrible officiating.

On a more hilarious note, that is two consecutive games Liverpool have been screwed out of! 

I dont get why we waste money year after year on expensive players when all we need to do is buy officials and VAR techs like United do. Come on Roman use some common sense lol

28 minutes ago, PloKoon13 said:

For the Mané tackle? I thought a yellow was right.

I was referring to Man Utd's second and third goals.

That's a red thus season, following into a shin studs up.

What was wrong with the second goal?

As for the 3rd, I presume you mean the free kick? I can't see how anyone thinks that wasn't a free, he kneed right through him.

@TJ_Hewitt: There is literally no debate as to if this was a foul or not. It was. #cavani #MUNLIV #FACup https://twitter.com/ellis__reid/status/1353417939895132160/video/1

Edited January 24, 20215 yr by dkw

57 minutes ago, dkw said:

That's a red thus season, following into a shin studs up.

What was wrong with the second goal?

As for the 3rd, I presume you mean the free kick? I can't see how anyone thinks that wasn't a free, he kneed right through him.

@TJ_Hewitt: There is literally no debate as to if this was a foul or not. It was. #cavani #MUNLIV #FACup https://twitter.com/ellis__reid/status/1353417939895132160/video/1

Looked like a yellow to me, although I'd be happy to see a replay in case I'm wrong. At that point I was laughing at Mané somehow keeping that run going by sliding all over the place so it's entirely possible my attention was elsewhere...

The second goal was marginally offside.

I'm if anything more convinced that it wasn't a foul by that video - it makes it clear that the only contact between Cavani and Fabinho was at shoulder level.

 

Dislike aside, I'm glad Man Utd went through. The quarter-finals (which is the earliest we can get them) are two months away and I fully expect Liverpool to be the harder of the two teams to beat by then.

Are you missing the knee into the back of the utd players leg?

2 minutes ago, dkw said:

Are you missing the knee into the back of the utd players leg?

Apparently!

2016: 2-1 vs. West Ham, 4th round

2017: 2-1 vs. Wolves, 4th round

2018: 3-2 vs. West Brom, 4th round

2019: 2-1 vs. Wolves, 3rd round

2020: 2-0 vs. Chelsea, 5th round

2021: 3-2 vs. Man Utd, 4th round

Klopp never did well in the FA Cup but interestingly enough, the clubs that did beat Liverpool in those particular seasons never won the FA Cup anyway, we lost last year in the final for example.

12 hours ago, Gol15 said:

2016: 2-1 vs. West Ham, 4th round

2017: 2-1 vs. Wolves, 4th round

2018: 3-2 vs. West Brom, 4th round

2019: 2-1 vs. Wolves, 3rd round

2020: 2-0 vs. Chelsea, 5th round

2021: 3-2 vs. Man Utd, 4th round

Klopp never did well in the FA Cup but interestingly enough, the clubs that did beat Liverpool in those particular seasons never won the FA Cup anyway, we lost last year in the final for example.

His record in the FA Cup has been poor.

It's 15 years now since Liverpool last won the competition.

So Barcelona are in massive debt and unable to service it. UEFA`s FFP CL Rules say a club must prove they can break even or lose only £30m (I think) to be eligible for the following seasons competition. So Barcelona will be getting this punishment right....right? Theres no way UEFA will abuse the rules just because its Barcelona surely.....

 

😂

On 24/01/2021 at 10:06, dkw said:

The phases thing is a joke now too. Villa had a stupid goal given against them v City and yesterday one for them v Newcastle due to the "new phases" rule.

Basically a villa player crossed a ball in with a villa player offside, a Newcastle defender slid in and intercepted the ball causing it to go into the air and the villa player headed it in. But because the Newcastle defender touched it the villa player wasn't classed as offside, ignoring that he was from the initial cross but his presence caused the defender to attempt to block it. Its ridiculous, a striker can now Basically hang around the 6 yard line waiting for a pass/Cross to touch a defender putting him onside.

Thought the offside rule was there to stop goal hangers then they go and change the law which encourages goal hangers! 😕

2 hours ago, saintquin said:

Thought the offside rule was there to stop goal hangers then they go and change the law which encourages goal hangers! 😕

Farcical isnt it.

2 hours ago, saintquin said:

Thought the offside rule was there to stop goal hangers then they go and change the law which encourages goal hangers! 😕

The defender's touch playing the ball has to be intentional to play the striker onside, so that's another thing open to the ref's interpretation. A deflection isn't sufficient to play the man onside if he was in an offside position when the pass was made. It's always been the case that a player standing offside would not be penalised if he received the ball from an opponent e.g. playing a backpass to the keeper.

Where the law needs to be tightened up is what makes a player 'active', which is currently actually touching the ball or interfering with an opponent.

The absurdity of that Villa goal v Newcastle, when the player was offside when the cross was played, but was somehow played onside by the defender cutting out the cross, is that the defender cut out the cross because there was a player in the box. That means the player was  at the time of the cross both active and interfering with an opponent ( by distracting him). So they should have ruled out the goal, but the current definition of active means the player was not considered to be offside.

It would not take much to change things.

Remember the FA cup final the other year - the first of the two finals decided by Anthony Taylor? For the opening goal, after Sanchez blatantly handled the ball, Ramsey, who was clearly offsude, chased the ball in the box. Sanchez beat him to it, so Ramsey didn't touch it, but he was clearly active and gave the keeper another opponent to consider while positioning himself, so he was ' interfering with an opponent'. Taylor - having decided that the handball was fine - then conferred with the linesman who had flagged Ramsey offside, before overruling the flag and awarding the goal. 

 

Edited January 26, 20215 yr by Backbiter

Quote

Guidance has been added to the offside rule after controversial Bernardo Silva goal in what has been described as 'a face-saving exercise' by PGMOL. Goal, set up by an offside Rodri, would not stand from now on. https://mol.im/a/9188433 via @MailSport

They actually have no idea what the offside rule is either ha ha...absolute clowns.

22 minutes ago, dkw said:

They actually have no idea what the offside rule is either ha ha...absolute clowns.

So they could have resolved the issues surrounding what makes a player 'active', but basically left them as they are. An offside player now has to either touch the ball or physically interfere with the opponent.

The inconsistency there is that currently a player is deemed offside if he is felt to be in a keeper's line of sight when trying to save a shot. Which is fair enough, as he is blocking his view and therefore distracting him, without physically interfering with him. So why doesn't this apply to a defender? An offside player who doesn't actually touch a defender or play the ball can still distract him, and maybe induce a miskick which gives him a goal-scoring chance (as happened with the Villa goal against Newcastle). So he gains an advantage by being offside, but under current guidelines, that's perfectly OK.

Big Sam has dropped Gallagher!

West Ham are 4th  .......we are 10th.   Shouldn't it be the other way around?

33 minutes ago, CFCCAN said:

West Ham are 4th  .......we are 10th.   Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Thought we were all happy as long as we don’t get relegated.

Arsenal have also gone ahead. They were 11pts behind us at some point