The Goal..

[Andy @ Allerton]

At the match I was convinced that it was a goal. Looking at the telly it's obviously a f***ing goal.

 

How long can this f***ing corrupt FA get away with this s****? Every f***ing season there are 3 or 4 decisions that always f*** us up - and these stupid f***ing c**** in the middle are paid to be as biased as this?

 

For f***s sake. Utterly f***ing s****. Cheating f***ing b******s.

[Andy @ Allerton]

It's exactly for decisions like this that make my laugh my head off when Engerlund get utterly corrupt, s**** decisions.

 

How do you like them apples - the f***ing bent FA. f*** England.

[Duncan Disorderly]

As said on MOTD last night, Liverpool at home against Stoke shouldn't have rested upon one disallowed goal decision.

[Andy @ Allerton]

As said on MOTD last night, Liverpool at home against Stoke shouldn't have rested upon one disallowed goal decision.

 

 

But. It. Did.

 

Corrupt FA in corrupt officials shocker.

 

 

f*** England - I hope they get f***ed to s**** in their next game the f***ing corrupt cheating c****.

[Smith]

I heard Torres was offside. Not sure myself.

 

Edited September 21, 2008 by Smith

[Stevie H]

As said on MOTD last night, Liverpool at home against Stoke shouldn't have rested upon one disallowed goal decision.

it's not about resting or relying on it though is it. had we scored that early we'll now never know how many more goals we might have scored and how different the match might have been. i don't necessarily buy andy's conspiracy theory but the incident in isolation is frustrating as f***.

[John am Rhein]

f*** England - I hope they get f***ed to s**** in their next game the f***ing corrupt cheating c****.

 

[Earl Hafler]

 

You two could be Hinge & Bracket.

[lawrie]

If that goal had been allowed we would have won by at least 3 - to say that we shouldnt rely on one decision is daft because it WAS a goal

[Sion]

If that goal had been allowed we would have won by at least 3 - to say that we shouldnt rely on one decision is daft because it WAS a goal

 

exactly, not like it was a dubious pen shout, it was a blatent goal.

The confidence it will have given stoke, and the confidence taken from us, is big enough a reason.

[D.Boon]

Andy, you're talking out of your hole........again.

[Tyler]

it was a goal based on way rules are set out

if it was properly disallowed then every player who is offside when a free is hit should be ruled as offside

 

there needs to be an american football challenge system introduced with tv evidence

too much can rest on this

 

everton penalty decision last week was even if you hate the bitters a disgraceful decision too

 

mistakes are not part of the game and don't even themselves out

[Guest spk]

legit goal but they had another 88 minutes and wasted them. f***ing disgraceful

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

I heard Torres was offside. Not sure myself.

 

 

 

it was a goal based on way rules are set out

if it was properly disallowed then every player who is offside when a free is hit should be ruled as offside

 

there needs to be an american football challenge system introduced with tv evidence

too much can rest on this

 

everton penalty decision last week was even if you hate the bitters a disgraceful decision too

 

mistakes are not part of the game and don't even themselves out

 

No-one touched the ball after Gerrard hit it, no-one interfered with play or other players. It was a legit goal & a howler of a decision.

 

A bit like when Reina was done for handball o/s the box - you won't see another like that this season

[Flight]

It was the ref who disallowed it not the linesman I think ? Didn't see the linesman indicate anything. And the ref couldn't see anything to disallow it. Crazy decision.

[usualsuspect]

On a lighter note that controversy is nothing compared to the dross dished out to Watford. The refs are consistently c***

Edited September 21, 2008 by usualsuspect

[Mr Makaveli]

As said on MOTD last night, Liverpool at home against Stoke shouldn't have rested upon one disallowed goal decision.

 

as much as I agree with you there.. we should have scored more but we didnt. we won 1-0 only... and the FA have f***ed us yet again. whatever about the owners.. its about f***ing time we sent a message to the FA. sick of this f***ing s***. Im very unhappy about this.

[John am Rhein]

You two could be Hinge & Bracket.

 

I'll be Bracket

[Tosh]

You can't be as Andy is unhinged

[Billy Dane]

legit goal but they had another 88 minutes and wasted them. f***ing disgraceful

 

We, surely?

 

A goal in the first two minutes for us would have changed Stoke's game plan completely.

[Guest spk]

they the players.

 

tbf to stoke, hull and west brom they seem to know what theyre doing this year in that they are actually taking the game to most clubs and defending like lions against the big boys. can they sustain this though? i doubt it as the season drags on but i think a couple of the established prem teams might end up relagated come the end of the season.

[Flight]

they the players.

 

tbf to stoke..... they are defending like lions against the big boys.

 

 

This is the same Stoke Everton scored 3 against last week and who have conceded 10 in their last four games ?

 

 

I get behind Rafa on most things, but there is ZERO excuse for playing Kuyt in a 4 4 2, most especially against Stoke at our gaff. Every single time he does he is s*** and he hurts the team.

Edited September 21, 2008 by Flight

[kop205]

It was the ref who disallowed it not the linesman I think ? Didn't see the linesman indicate anything. And the ref couldn't see anything to disallow it. Crazy decision.

 

Liner put his flag up straight away, I was sat right in line in the Main Stand.

 

Though Rafa says the ref claimed he disallowed it.

Edited September 21, 2008 by kop205

[MFletcher]

The problem with decisions like this is that one goal can decide matches, regardless of the quality of the opposition. It's OK saying we had another 88 minutes to score, but we scored a perfectly legitimate goal that was ruled out. It's frustrating as hell. It's not as if it was a blatant penalty shout - that penalty could be missed. This was a clean goal, scrubbed off for no obvious reason other than refereeing incompetence.

 

And it's OK saying it should have had no impact on the overall result - but it did.

[FC Showster]

The problem with decisions like this is that one goal can decide matches, regardless of the quality of the opposition. It's OK saying we had another 88 minutes to score, but we scored a perfectly legitimate goal that was ruled out. It's frustrating as hell. It's not as if it was a blatant penalty shout - that penalty could be missed. This was a clean goal, scrubbed off for no obvious reason other than refereeing incompetence.

 

And it's OK saying it should have had no impact on the overall result - but it did.

 

It has no impact on the overall result if we're 4-0 up with 10 minutes left. People need to realise that the first goal is vital in every league game we play - whether it's against the bottom sides, mid-table, or title rivals it forces teams to come out and be more open