Bournemouth (H) - Sat 27th Aug 2022 (3:00pm)

[John102]

Bournemouth deserve everything they got, for Scott Parkers awful Thom Browne blazer.

[Bjornebye]

3 minutes ago, John102 said:

Bournemouth deserve everything they got, for Scott Parkers awful Thom Browne blazer.

I don't mind Scott Parker. He was a decent enough player and comes across genuine as a coach. Good luck to him. 

[DalyanPete]

5 hours ago, Daisy said:

Worst result we could have possibly hoped for with that shit stain in the stands

Have a fuckin day off.

[A_S]

You could've retired on the odds of Liverpool scoring 9 and not so much as an assist, let alone goal, from an unsubbed Mo!

 

Absolutely fantastic for the kids to score today. Both well taken, too. 

[Red Shift]

Much more like it Redmen. Loved the intensity right from the get go. The whole team knew what they wanted to do. It all came together!

I really really wanted Southampton to pinch an equaliser at St. Mary’s, because we’d have leapfrogged the Red Shite, but alas, not to be. We’re back baby, we’re back…and so is Bobby!

 

Onwards & Upwards.

[Funkasy]

Bobby is shit.

[Pungkoq Hang]

4 hours ago, Funkasy said:

Bobby is shit.

Well, someone had to do it

[Simbo]

Can anyone explain why the own goal was allowed yesterday? Diaz was offside when the ball was played, it was heading straight to him and the defender desperately tried to stop it reaching him by putting a toe on it and directing it in. Surely that made Diaz active?

[Barnesey]

Because he didn’t touch it. Daft rule. Thought the same when bobby scored his second at Watford last season with Mo clearly offside and affecting play without touching the ball. 

[jonnyp]

23 minutes ago, Simbo said:

Can anyone explain why the own goal was allowed yesterday? Diaz was offside when the ball was played, it was heading straight to him and the defender desperately tried to stop it reaching him by putting a toe on it and directing it in. Surely that made Diaz active?

LiVARpool, powers that be, scab 6 init’?

[Anubis]

1 hour ago, Simbo said:

Can anyone explain why the own goal was allowed yesterday? Diaz was offside when the ball was played, it was heading straight to him and the defender desperately tried to stop it reaching him by putting a toe on it and directing it in. Surely that made Diaz active?

Mepham told the ref it was his dream to score at Anfield and begged him to let it stand.

[Anubis]

This made me smile, from the Up The Cherries Forum.

Audenshaw Cherry

UTC Legend

Yesterday at 5:45 PM

#518

Reasons to be cheerful?

1. We will be first on Match of the Day.
2. We equalled a Premier League record.
3. We are not bottom (yet)
4. In the last three games we have prevented Haaland, Jesus and Salah from scoring.

[Jairzinho]

Four games in, -14 goal difference, still ahead of Everton in the table.

[Le Duan]

Chances of the word ‘nein’ appearing in at least one Sunday tabloid headline?

[Joey8FrogsLegs]

1 hour ago, Barnesey said:

Because he didn’t touch it. Daft rule. Thought the same when bobby scored his second at Watford last season with Mo clearly offside and affecting play without touching the ball. 

A rule clearly made by people that dont understand football at all.

[Torvald Utne]

2 hours ago, Simbo said:

Can anyone explain why the own goal was allowed yesterday? Diaz was offside when the ball was played, it was heading straight to him and the defender desperately tried to stop it reaching him by putting a toe on it and directing it in. Surely that made Diaz active?

The last two... It was clearly offside.  Stupid decision, as baffling as disallowing the palace goal.

Offside offence

 

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or

interfering with an opponent by:

preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or

challenging an opponent for the ball or

clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or

making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

[VladimirIlyich]

4 hours ago, Simbo said:

Can anyone explain why the own goal was allowed yesterday? Diaz was offside when the ball was played, it was heading straight to him and the defender desperately tried to stop it reaching him by putting a toe on it and directing it in. Surely that made Diaz active?

I spotted this right away myself. If a defender makes a deliberate attempt to play the ball and makes contact it nullifies the offside. The Champions League final goal was ruled out because it was deemed an accidental touch to the striker by Fabinho. 

[dockers_strike]

4 hours ago, Simbo said:

Can anyone explain why the own goal was allowed yesterday? Diaz was offside when the ball was played, it was heading straight to him and the defender desperately tried to stop it reaching him by putting a toe on it and directing it in. Surely that made Diaz active?

Who fucking cares after Rashford was judged on side on Monday night?

[Jose Jones]

It should have been offside. The problem is football authorities (and the PGMOL refs in particular) have zero knowledge of football and can’t tell the difference between when a player deliberately plays a back pass which is intercepted by an opposition player (not offside) or stretches to prevent an offside attacker getting in and inadvertently plays the ball like yesterday. 

So they interpret the rule so that any slight touch by a defender means the attacker can never be offside. It’s bollocks, because referees are imbeciles.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

[KMD7]

https://socceronsunday.com/article/scott-parker-on-liverpool-trashing-a-draw-would-have-been-a-fair-result/

 

Scott Parker has insisted his side were unlucky to lose by a record-equalling 9 goal margin at Anfield on Saturday. The trashing leaves relegation-tipped Bournemouth with a -14 goal difference 

 

“A draw would have been a fair result,” Parker told Soccer on Sunday. “I told Jürgen after the game, ‘Your boys have got away with one here’. I thought we controlled the game, but then they’ve snuck 9 goals in from absolutely nowhere. Sometimes you don’t get what you deserve in football.” 

 

 

“I couldn’t be prouder of my players,” said the 41 year-old. “They did everything I asked of them, if you don’t count the 9 goals. It was always going to be difficult when the 9th went in, but I still felt there was something for us in the game. If we got that first goal, the other 8 would have followed. But alas, it wasn’t to be.”

“Jürgen will be a very, very relieved man right now,” he added.

 

 

 

 

[Colonel Bumcunt]

I'll say more about the performance soon, but fuck me the Mepham OG was an appalling decision by the ref. 

 

I mean, how unfair is that? If we were on the other side of that decision we'd be furious. 

[TheHowieLama]

49 minutes ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

I'll say more about the performance soon, but fuck me the Mepham OG was an appalling decision by the ref. 

 

I mean, how unfair is that? If we were on the other side of that decision we'd be furious. 

We lost a Champions League final trying to play to that rule.

[Strontium]

1 hour ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

I'll say more about the performance soon, but fuck me the Mepham OG was an appalling decision by the ref.

 

The referee doesn't have much choice but to apply the rules as they exist.

[Colonel Bumcunt]

All in all, 3 points and lots of goals and a big boost, but Bournemouth didn't have the tools to exploit the usual channels.

But the performance level of Trent was a key difference, they had no answer to his brilliance all over the pitch.