Referees and LFC

[Zoob]

So, I know some people think it's small-time, but what's happened to us this season, and what tends to happen to us, compared the Mancs (and to a lesser extent Chelsea) is obviously something that Kenny Dalglish has also picked up on. I don't think it's smalltime to highlight the raft of awful decisions going against us, and I'm glad Dalgish feels the same.

 

How this is reported in the press is important because we know how many people - probably referees included - are influenced by the press.

 

 

The Mail, Mirror and Telegraph reports all quote what Dalgish said, but don't comment on it one way or another (i.e. there is no analysis on why he said it, whether it is a fair comment or not...).

 

The problem is that we have headlines such as "Kenny Dalglish seeing red over referees' 'contentious decisions'" (Guardian) with the report ending with "The Scot appears to have a case regarding the penalty Liverpool should have had for Upson's handball, but the one scored by Jonathan Walters after he had been hauled down by Jamie Carragher appeared fair. Dalglish's claim that his team have had "contentious decisions" in each of their fixtures this season also appears misplaced." Here

 

The Indy reports of Dalglish: "More specifically, though rather ludicrously, he alluded to an apparent conspiracy against Liverpool by match officials this season and intends to speak to the club's owner, John W Henry, about the matter.

 

 

What exactly did Dalglish say?

"The first four league games have all had contentious decisions and every one of them has gone against us"

 

He's absolutely spot on.

 

Vs. Sunderland: Last defender takes out Suarez in the box and only gets booked. Anyone thinks we wouldn't have won playing 80 minutes against 10 men?

Vs. Sunderland: Carrol goal disallowed for imaginary push.

 

Vs. Arsenal: Frimpong should have been booked for late / wild foul on Agger at start of the game - could / should have been sent off earlier.

 

Vs. Bolton: Knight fouled Suarez in the box twice in a few seconds - no pen given.

Vs. Bolton: Clear a back pass to Bolton keeper is inexplicably not given.

 

Vs. Stoke: Stoke get awarded a soft penalty.

Vs. Stoke - We have 2 very good shouts for handball, with neither given. - Dalglish, as we do, knows that if it were the Mancs, they would have been given.

 

 

 

The only decision I can think that has gone in our favour is that highlights showed Skrtel doing some serious shirt pulling at a Stoke corner, but I think this is another one where you'd have a dozen pens if this was given every time it was done in a game.

 

We could easily have 3+ points more than we currently do, and yet rather than actually explaining what decisions Dalglish is referring to, most press reports will just make out like he's whining because we lost rather than because there's an actual issue that needs to be looked at.

[Jim D]

So, I know some people think it's small-time, but what's happened to us this season, and what tends to happen to us, compared the Mancs (and to a lesser extent Chelsea) is obviously something that Kenny Dalglish has also picked up on. I don't think it's smalltime to highlight the raft of awful decisions going against us, and I'm glad Dalgish feels the same.

 

How this is reported in the press is important because we know how many people - probably referees included - are influenced by the press.

 

 

The Mail, Mirror and Telegraph reports all quote what Dalgish said, but don't comment on it one way or another (i.e. there is no analysis on why he said it, whether it is a fair comment or not...).

 

The problem is that we have headlines such as "Kenny Dalglish seeing red over referees' 'contentious decisions'" (Guardian) with the report ending with "The Scot appears to have a case regarding the penalty Liverpool should have had for Upson's handball, but the one scored by Jonathan Walters after he had been hauled down by Jamie Carragher appeared fair. Dalglish's claim that his team have had "contentious decisions" in each of their fixtures this season also appears misplaced." Here

 

The Indy reports of Dalglish: "More specifically, though rather ludicrously, he alluded to an apparent conspiracy against Liverpool by match officials this season and intends to speak to the club's owner, John W Henry, about the matter.

 

 

What exactly did Dalglish say?

"The first four league games have all had contentious decisions and every one of them has gone against us"

 

He's absolutely spot on.

 

Vs. Sunderland: Last defender takes out Suarez in the box and only gets booked. Anyone thinks we wouldn't have won playing 80 minutes against 10 men?

Vs. Sunderland: Carrol goal disallowed for imaginary push.

 

Vs. Arsenal: Frimpong should have been booked for late / wild foul on Agger at start of the game - could / should have been sent off earlier.

 

Vs. Bolton: Knight fouled Suarez in the box twice in a few seconds - no pen given.

Vs. Bolton: Clear a back pass to Bolton keeper is inexplicably not given.

 

Vs. Stoke: Stoke get awarded a soft penalty.

Vs. Stoke - We have 2 very good shouts for handball, with neither given. - Dalglish, as we do, knows that if it were the Mancs, they would have been given.

 

 

 

The only decision I can think that has gone in our favour is that highlights showed Skrtel doing some serious shirt pulling at a Stoke corner, but I think this is another one where you'd have a dozen pens if this was given every time it was done in a game.

 

We could easily have 3+ points more than we currently do, and yet rather than actually explaining what decisions Dalglish is referring to, most press reports will just make out like he's whining because we lost rather than because there's an actual issue that needs to be looked at.

 

As far as the press are concerned they can say what they like but some of them are so up the Tramp's a*** you aren't going to get much headway there. If the Tramp said exactly the same thing as Kenny did today after coming out of a game losing 1-0 under the same circumstances the press would be grovelling to the ****.

 

Kenny just needs to keep kicking up a fuss when decisions go against us, ignore what the press say and over time we'll start to see refs giving us controversial decisions for a change.

[JonShar]

All true except the part about today's pen being soft. It wasn't, it was a pen, and I'd have been livid if it hadn't been given for us in similar circumstances.

[anfield11]

All true except the part about today's pen being soft. It wasn't, it was a pen, and I'd have been livid if it hadn't been given for us in similar circumstances.

 

 

But that's the point, it likely wouldn't have been given for us, in fact, the hand ball in the box (not the only instance either) near the end wasn't given. If it had, a Stoke fan may have claimed it was soft.

 

You are also ignoring Walters barging Carra before the pen. But I guess that's Carra's fault for not softly going in a heap?

 

I read a stat that in our last 16 competitive games we've conceded 13 and 7 were pens...54%.

[JonShar]

But that's the point, it likely wouldn't have been given for us, in fact, the hand ball in the box (not the only instance either) near the end wasn't given. If it had, a Stoke fan may have claimed it was soft.

 

You are also ignoring Walters barging Carra before the pen. But I guess that's Carra's fault for not softly going in a heap?

 

I read a stat that in our last 16 competitive games we've conceded 13 and 7 were pens...54%.

 

No, it's not the point. It wasn't a soft pen. As I said in the match thread, I wouldn't expect it to be given for us, but it wasn't a soft pen.

 

And no, I'm not ignoring Walters barging Carra before the pen, but that's a separate issue entirely. Doesn't change the fact that it wasn't a soft pen.

[Zoob]

But that's the point, it likely wouldn't have been given for us, in fact, the hand ball in the box (not the only instance either) near the end wasn't given. If it had, a Stoke fan may have claimed it was soft.

 

You are also ignoring Walters barging Carra before the pen. But I guess that's Carra's fault for not softly going in a heap?

 

I read a stat that in our last 16 competitive games we've conceded 13 and 7 were pens...54%.

 

Ah - I'd forgotten about the Exeter game. 2 Very similar incidents in the box (defenders being a bit rash, hanging legs out, and there being contact between attackers and the defenders leg) 1 results in a booking for a Liverpool player for simulation, the other results in a penalty.

 

 

And lets look to see how many times defenders do to our players what Carragher did today, and see how many penalties we get (putting aside the fact that the shove on Carragher lead to what happened anyway).

[JonShar]

Ah - I'd forgotten about the Exeter game. 2 Very similar incidents in the box (defenders being a bit rash, hanging legs out, and there being contact between attackers and the defenders leg) 1 results in a booking for a Liverpool player for simulation, the other results in a penalty.

 

 

And lets look to see how many times defenders do to our players what Carragher did today, and see how many penalties we get (putting aside the fact that the shove on Carragher lead to what happened anyway).

 

It still doesn't change that it wasn't a soft pen! I've already said we probably wouldn't be on the end of a decision like that if it happened to us, but Carra dragged him down, end of.

 

To confirm: I AGREE WE GET A s*** RAP FROM REFS, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT WASN'T A PENALTY TODAY!

[Zoob]

It still doesn't change that it wasn't a soft pen! I've already said we probably wouldn't be on the end of a decision like that if it happened to us, but Carra dragged him down, end of.

 

To confirm: I AGREE WE GET A s*** RAP FROM REFS, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT WASN'T A PENALTY TODAY!

 

Noted

 

Mancs play away to Stoke in 2 weeks. I already remember them getting some pretty useful decisions in their favour there the last few seasons, so will be interesting to see that match.... odds on a United Pen / Stoke player getting sent off?

[Bailo]

It was not a penalty today. Not in a million years.

[JonShar]

It was not a penalty today. Not in a million years.

 

Except it was.

[Bailo]

Except it was.

If someone pulls you backwards, you don't fall forwards. He wasnt even near to having a shot on goal.

[Zoob]

If someone pulls you backwards, you don't fall forwards. He wasnt even near to having a shot on goal.

 

Don't think it matters whether or not he was near to having a shot on goal, but your first point is a very good one. I guess it was a penalty because a penalty was awarded, but there really would be an awful lot of penalties awarded if one was given every time a defender put their arm round a player in the box, hence why most see it as a soft penalty. And what Walters did to Carragher immediately before, was far more of a foul (as in you're far more likely to see a foul given for it).

[JonShar]

If someone pulls you backwards, you don't fall forwards. He wasnt even near to having a shot on goal.

 

I'm not saying Walters didn't make a meal out of it, etc. But when you put your arm around someone in the box you're giving the ref a decision to make. Yes, I know 95% of the time nothing is given. Doesn't change the fact that Carra shouldn't have had his arm around him, period. It was a foul.

[Nebraska Red]

I'd just like to say

 

these things even themselves out over a season

 

i will then run for cover as I don't even believe that myself.

 

if linesmen are only there for throw ins, corners and offsides, let the players know. so many times you see linesmen chicken out of making a potentially game changing decision

[JonShar]

I'd just like to say

 

these things even themselves out over a season

 

i will then run for cover as I don't even believe that myself.

 

if linesmen are only there for throw ins, corners and offsides, let the players know. so many times you see linesmen chicken out of making a potentially game changing decision

 

To be completely fair to linesmen, they do have their eyes in a few different places at once sometimes.

[Snoeker]

Interesting to see how Crouch is being refereed now compared to when he played for us. Seems to be getting more fouls in his favour

[Nerik]

It was a penalty by Carra. Walters barged into him, something done often. Sometimes a foul is given, sometimes ref allows play to carry on. Carra kept on playing, maybe had he fallen we'd have won a foul. Carra then put his arm clearly around Walters as he fell to the ground and Walters went down easily. Ref was always going to give a penalty for that and what Walters did is what most of our players would have done and we too would have rightly expected a penalty in our favour.

[NeilR]

All true except the part about today's pen being soft. It wasn't, it was a pen, and I'd have been livid if it hadn't been given for us in similar circumstances.

 

to be honest it was a penalty against us. what really gets us is we had 2 hand balls & skertl taken late after he blazed the ball over and not 1 given. this on top of all the other incidents especially several penalties not given shows the refereeing standard hasn't been good enough. this is supposed 2 be one of the top leagues in the world in all aspects afterall.

 

if the skertl incident yesterday happened while he wad hoofing a ball out of defence, the foul would have been given 100% of the time. refs need to grow a set and improve their standards

[Epic Swindle]

Kenny's full of s*** says the hacks on Sky. There's no conspiracy.

[Benzo-13]

Also the one where Carroll was dragged to the ground by Shawcross which resulted in a re-take of a corner!

[jimbolala]

Conspiracy sounds a bit much. There is no way the refs have a game plan to victimise LFC. If you really think thats the case, its time to stop watching football. Yes we have been on the wrong end of some strange decisions, but to make a leap to conspiracy theories is crazy.

Why pay good money to "enjoy" a sport when you know its fixed then. There are always decisions going against teams, yes even man utd. We seem to be saying we cant win unless we get a pen or an opposition player sent of.

This sets us up badly and only feeds the craziness.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its football. Sometimes you win. Sometimes it goes against you. Its meant to be a beautiful thing to follow, not another cause of sorrow and mistrust. It is correct for Kenny to mention it, but he is just playing the game. Dont start believing the

Edited September 11, 2011 by jimbolala

[Leo No.8]

Decisions have certainly gone against us for some time now.

 

I agree with Kenny making a point about it in the media, because its only by doing that you increase the pressure on the referees to give you something next time. Its a sad state of affairs but thats the way it is, everyone else does it so we have to. We are too respectful and get punished for it.

 

However, all that said the biggest concern is how many chances we missed yesterday. I looked at the stats and we had more possession, more shots on and off target and more corners than United yesterday (and there were plenty of clean cut chances in there) - they won 5-0 and we lost 1-0. Referee aside we absolutely must be more clinical.

 

Suarez has missed a fair few sitters this season, but its hard to criticise him as he is creating them all! If he could improve his finishing he'd be up there with the best players in the world, I've never seen a player wth movement like his - that part of his game is incredible so he'll make loads of chances for himself. He just needs to keep it simple.

 

Missing good chances has a detrimental effect on a side mentally, you have to score when you are on top. I think the performance yesterday was actually very good - we've got the potential to be right up there this season and nothing yesterday convinced me otherwise, but we must do a better job of taking the chances we create.

 

I wonder whether a poacher wouldn't be ideal for this side rather than a big lad like Carroll, someone to just stick it in the net? Not a big fan of that type of player in general, but with Suarez creating havoc with his movement there would be a chance for someone to goalhang and just profit from the chaos he causes.

Edited September 11, 2011 by Leo No.8

[brunswick2010]

I was watching Soccer Saturday yesterday afternoon with my brother in law (a Chelsea supporter) and I was complaining about not being awarded a penalty for the handball, when I got the usual "it all evens itself over the course of the season" response followed up with the "well you guys scored a goal that 'never was' against Chelsea in 2005".

[CarraLegend]

Very interesting to see Kenny say he'll talk to the owners, sounds like we could be ready to make an offer, every other clubs seems to be doing it so we might aswell join.

[Stew F]

However, all that said the biggest concern is how many chances we missed yesterday. I looked at the stats and we had more possession, more shots on and off target and more corners than United yesterday (and there were plenty of clean cut chances in there) - they won 5-0 and we lost 1-0. Referee aside we absolutely must be more clinical.

 

Agree in general, but you arent giving any credit for the Stoke defence. they were superb. Keeper and 2/3 central defenders (Shawcross, Upson, Huth) did brilliantly.

 

Wigans defence were probably cack.