so we had a 50/50 split of bent to nonbent linesman then? given letting arsenal have a goal and taking one off us would be far more effective match rigging I expect we are quite fortunate. especially given arsneal could quite figure all our defenders do on set piece is start high and stand still so all arsenal.players end up offside.... well all the bent linesman needed to do was not raise his flag once or twice. when you think about it we were astonishingly good just to get a draw given how corrupt the refs and linesman apparently are
? There goal was rightly ruled out ours wasn't. Different linesman for both decisions. And as astro showed with the utd clip how come he never flagged that as well?
Dear editor, It is with regret and no little bemusement that I must write to you on the topic of Fabinho. It seems his performance was that bad that NOT606 Liverpool fans have chosen to cover it up by ravaging a poor incompetent official. Perhaps in the cold light of day the level of performance will be recognised without too many more hard lessons. Yours, and right again. MITO
It just strikes me as odd how arsenal knew to bribe that one official and not all of them if the result was fixed as was the contention
This is the salient point which seems to be getting lost in this stupid argument. By the current rules, Mané's goal should have stood. That's all there is to it.
which is why i said it was a var discussion all along as I don't see how a linesman can be expected to be able to view all.phases by himself and be 100% right all the time
Ref Watch: Sadio Mane goal vs Arsenal should have stood https://www.skysports.com/football/...-sadio-mane-goal-vs-arsenal-should-have-stood
Neither do I. He's a fallible human being and he got it wrong. If he got it wrong due to a misinterpretation of the ever-fluctuating rule book then he needs sorting out. If he just couldn't see properly then that's the end of it. Not being a big fan of VAR I'll take the **** when it comes. For a while I'll be pissed off and moan about it, but I'll get over it in the end. The one thing that has annoyed me is anyone saying it was offside, because under the current reading of the rule book it clearly wasn't. All independent pundits that I've read have agreed with this.
All i said is in the end its what the officials give and nothing can be done about it. It's imo not an excuse for how we played, certain players performances nor finally the goal being conceded when we did lead but sll thsts been ignored
The basic facts are that that one decision has cost us 2 points - so it's bound to be a major talking point. Our overall performance is a separate issue. I've already said I was disappointed, and have been generally so all season. We're more solid, and less likely to give away silly goals, but a slender lead is always vulnerable. We need to get the attack going again and I see no reason why anyone should think the two things are mutually exclusive. If we'd been creating more then the disallowed goal wouldn't be crucial.
That's a very very superficial view imo. How do we know what would have happened if the goal was given? A) arsenal could have responded and scored 1 or more given how we played. B) arsenal could have folded for all I know and gone in 2 down. What we do know is it was 1-0 and we conceded a poor goal so our defending cost us and arsenal goalie cost them.
I think my last sentence addresses those ifs, buts, and maybes. We can speculate forever about what might have happened - I'm discussing what did.
But it happened in the 18th minute not the 88th minute. I simply can't accept that had that been given we would have won as there was far too long to go. Why? once we scored in 2nd half we sat back and let arsensl have a go. What would we have done in 19th minute. I just don't know.
