You just agreed it was a penalty
make your mind upGreenlizard0 Premier League Football Thread ** spoilers ** [30/31 Dec 23 1/2 Jan 24]
- Thread starter explicit4u
- Start date
- Status
make your mind upAt no point did I agree the second penalty should have been a penaltyYou just agreed it was a penalty
Soldato
Disappointing to concede 2 goals last night. We should be winning more comfortably against mid table sides. Nunez needs to step it up.
Klopp ****** up with him last night, if you want turn Nunez into prime Suarez against us, you need to bring him off the bench at 75mins
Post 690
Where, I think you need your eyes checked
Last edited:
When someone says 'this^^^' when quoting a post that means they are in agreement with it, the post in question said penalty (soft or not is irrelevant) at point of contact..
All that gravy is messing with your memory
Last edited:
I was agreeing with the part about being played off the pitch(read the whole ******* post), hence why I mentioned that I wrote on this forum at 1-1 “if newcastle get a 2-1 loss out of this, there has still been a robbery”
I think those red blinkers that are permanently attached to your head are playing with your eyes
Last edited:
Haven't got anyone on ignore, even klincky who chats some rubbish
Normal people edit posts when quoting if they don't agree with an element of it.
Wow, so the whole post that was about being played off the pitch and Liverpool given a penalty that wasn‘t a penalty and you manage to deduct out of that, that I agreed with the penalty. Wow talk about only thinking what you want to think. Maybe try reading whats written next time eh.Haven't got anyone on ignore, even klincky who chats some rubbish
Normal people edit posts when quoting if they don't agree with an element of it.
Last edited:
read my whole post, are you being that deliberately obtuse? At no point have I wrote “There was minimal contact but if he'd gone down at the point of contact it would have been a pen, a soft pen but a pen.”
Last edited by a moderator:
Why does the reaction of the forward change whether something is a foul or not? Whether a player goes down, stays up, does a double backflip or has their leg broken, the only thing that determines whether something is a foul is the action of the defender. Jota was tripped, he was impeded (how much, only he knows) and it was a foul.
looked to me that you were agreeing with klinck's ascertain that because jota took another stride that negated the foul. Which is ******. The only action that would have made the foul redundant is if jota had scored. A foul is still a foul.
Last edited by a moderator:
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 819
No-one in this thread knows if the contact.. (and there definitely was contact)... was enough to effect Jota ..
But the fact is.. if he had NOT gone down.. and attempted to score.. and then missed.. (i.e. the contact was enough to change the outcome).. a penalty would NOT have been given..
Until that changes, 95% of strikers that feel contact in the box are going to go down, whether they are quick enough to do it just after contact or 3 steps later is another matter..
-------------------------
On the softness of it... Unfortunately the only person who really knows if it was enough contact for a penalty is Jota.. and therein lies the issue..
But the fact is.. if he had NOT gone down.. and attempted to score.. and then missed.. (i.e. the contact was enough to change the outcome).. a penalty would NOT have been given..
Until that changes, 95% of strikers that feel contact in the box are going to go down, whether they are quick enough to do it just after contact or 3 steps later is another matter..
-------------------------
On the softness of it... Unfortunately the only person who really knows if it was enough contact for a penalty is Jota.. and therein lies the issue..
Well and Dubravka :
Dubravka said: “My arms are not trying to catch him. I don’t have to agree, but at the end of the day it was a penalty.”
- Status