1: I could be wrong but I thought the one "cleared off the line" was merely blocked by a defender doing his job same as they do about fifteen times every game, plus it was going wide. 2: Just because the goal was given offside does not mean that it actually was offside. 3: A draw probably was just about the right result but Liverpool had by far the better chances.
Most of Enrique's body is past that trailing leg. Marginal, yes, but offside none the less. Still don't see how you had the better clear cut chances? Johnson shot straight at our GK. Suarez's shot didn't even go on target. Sterling hit the bar therefore off target, Johnson had two headers..Also off target.
His standing leg is clearly keeping him onside. If in doubt you're supposed to give the advantage to the attacker!
Johnson 1 on 1 yes good save but great chance, not sure what suarez chance you mean when he missed but he and sterling also had the 2 on 1 that they messed up between them. If you only watched sky then you would think it was off but MOTD actually had something useful for once and that clearly showed that the only part of enrique that was off was his hand. PMK- there is a better angle that shows it clearer but not sure how to get it.
As I said MOTD had much clearer angle and all said it was onside. TBF when I saw it on sky I thought he was off also.
IMO Enrique was on side and the goal should have stood - thought so when I watched it at the stadium and haven't changed my mind after watching countless replays of it. The thing is though the officials don't have the luxury of watching replays of contentious incidents and have to make snap decisions! So what's the answer? Do we go down the rugby route of video replays watched by 4th or 5th officials? Later in the game Michu was clearly pulled down by an arm around his neck, a stonewall penalty, but also missed by the officials. Again, do we follow the example of the egg chasers? I hope not, football is a far more flowing game than the stop/start bore fest that rugby has become; and before you accuse me of being a rugby hater let me remind you that I am Welsh so have played rugby for most of my life - here playing rugby is compulsory and refusal to do so is punishable by death, or extradition to Cardiff which is far worse! Poor decisions are part and parcel of football and gives us all something to moan about during our post match pint, and also gives 'wingnut head' Lineker and crew something to salivate over on MotD. Going down the peanut hugger's route would slow the game down IMHO - players lambast the ref too much as it is - imagine if they thought they could get a video replay to reverse decisions that went against them! I like football the way it is, I like moaning about referees and putting any losses or dropped points down to poor decision making rather than my teams inability to be better than the other lot over 90 minutes.
The one thing that frustrates me is it is supposed to be called only if you are 100% sure it is offsides. Unfortunately, you can be 100% and still be wrong, just because you are sure of something doesn't mean it's right. While I do agree, it is bound to be called wrong and you can't do anything about it, it is still frustrating that this goal (and suarez' 90+ minute goal at Everton) were called back when they should've stood, and it would put us ahead in a game that had no goals afterwards. Granted, this one had plenty of time afterwards for Swansea to attack and possibly tie or even win, but my point still stands.
Agree Red - the benefit of the doubt should go to the attacking player - but it's a moot point - if the goal had been given it would have changed the course of the game - Swansea could have scored a couple or Liverpool may have run away with it - we'll never know! My point is that football is show business and diluting it with extra rules will only serve to detract from the spectacle. We all get worked up about decisions that don't go our way but my thoughts are 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' I love football the way it is - warts and all!
According to the chalkboards, your keeper had to save 9, yes, NINE shots on target. This alone shows we had more good attempts on goal. Besides Swansea fans, everything else I've read and seen, including newspapers and TV analysis have said Liverpool would of had a narrow win on points and would be the team most disappointed. It seems Swansea fans, not all, a few on your board arent as slanted as you and have admitted that we just shaded it, must of watched a different match. One of the pundits said that when they got better angles the only art of Jose's body offside was his arm, which doesn't count as ypu can't score a goal with your arm (the rule states that it is any part of your body you can score a goal with for offsides). TBH it don't really matter what Swansea fans think anyway so I don't know why I'm even bothering. We know we dropped 2 points and now we have get a result at Spurs to make up for this.
It was on Sky quite late after the game not long before the Chavs game. The view was straight across from next to the corner flag, looking right down the line of defense. The defender playing him on is the 3rd defender in the line closest to the camera (think its Williams but cant tell fully). Its not the defender closest to Enrique.
They had the proper angle on Sky as well just really late on after the game. Thats were BBC got the angle from. I seen it on Sky, which is how I knew it wasn't off after thinking it was off after the original replays on Sky during the game.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I totally agree. I just am frustrated that referees aren't always following their guidelines (ball goes out, not sure who it touched last, it goes to defence, or the offsides not being 100% sure, still calling it, etc...) I don't want extra rules, at all. So, I am in agreement, just venting.
I feel the need to say... What does it matter...? ...the game is over and no amount of reviewing / arguing is going to change the result. Move on the to the spuds game
