Posted April 22, 200817 yr They showed the build-up tonight on ITV so I paused it at the moment when Cech supposedly committed the foul that would have earned him a red card and L'pool a pen even if the linesman hadn't given the goal. If that's not a dangerous challenge by Baros that makes everything else that happened afterwards irrelevant I don't know what is. I know it's ancient history but the whole episode -a nd the way the media still ignore the Baros challenge - still riles me.
April 22, 200817 yr it was a massive load of horsesh**t from most of their fans, and the moron ref claiming he wouldve given a penalty if it wasnt a goal didnt help either. Thats not the way things should ever EVER be officiated. Even up calls? If it was a foul and you WOULD have called it if it was a goal, then why not call it before its a goal? Because the proper sequence of events would have gone Foul ------> play is stopped ------> penalty given -------> made or saved None of the steps here are contingent upon the next. That is just not how officiating works.
April 23, 200817 yr In light of last nights events - poetic justice? no- we made our own luck with a great cross from kalou, whereas the referee and linesman made their luck.
April 23, 200817 yr Author I think I'll send the photo into this git from the Guardian who wrote a couple of weeks ago: even though Liverpool took a richly deserved 0-0 draw from the away leg, the newly crowned champions Chelsea remained favourites. That was before they walked into an atmosphere that, by any standards, was absolutely unbelievable. When Luis Garcia's early goal (has there ever been a more overrated controversy? If the goal isn't given they get a penalty and Petr Cech walks. Next) went in, the ground morphed into a bouncy castle, and the ITV camera could not stay even remotely still. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008 ... t.comment3 Well. "Next". You get a ref ignoring a dangerous foul, a linesman seeing something that didn't happen and you get a UEFA ref saying he would have sent off a keeper for something he didn't do. Three mistakes in one incident. "Has there ever been a more overrated controversy?" What a tw@t.
April 23, 200817 yr They showed the build-up tonight on ITV so I paused it at the moment when Cech supposedly committed the foul that would have earned him a red card and L'pool a pen even if the linesman hadn't given the goal. If that's not a dangerous challenge by Baros that makes everything else that happened afterwards irrelevant I don't know what is. I know it's ancient history but the whole episode -a nd the way the media still ignore the Baros challenge - still riles me. And it was a similar challenge to the one Drogba was sent off for against Barca that season when we were leading 1-0.
April 23, 200817 yr I must not understand the whole advantage rule because no one ever seems to think the same as me in this incident. The way I see it is... The referee didn't call for a penalty because he played advantage. The advantage was that Garcia was running in on goal and an empty net. So when Garcia kicks the ball towards the net is that not the advantage gone? Regardless whether or not the defender gets back to clear? He got an advantage and never took it so therfore there can not be a penalty if it didn't cross the line. I saw somewhere in Europe that a player was running through on the goalkeeper and was knocked to the ground by the goalkeeper but another player was running through and the referee played advantage, but the player hit the post and was cleared and the game went on. Why did the referee say he would have gave a penalty if the ball hadn't (Which it has been proven, it didn't) of crossed the line? He has played the advantage rule and Garcia has been given an advantage. End of story. So are we not right to feel aggrieved the we were unfairly denied a chance to go through to the Champions League final for the first time ever when it is a fact the ball didn't cross the line? Of Course we are.
