Crystal Palace vs. Liverpool Match Thread

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 21 of 21 << First < 17 18 19 20 21

The Dolphin 28 Jan 22 6.43am
Originally posted by Oddball2021 People keep going on about the penalty decision. What really hurt was Liverpool being given time to regroup. They were rattled and we looked like scoring one or two more. It was close to the 80 minute mark when the incident happened. What was appalling was the sheer amount of time that transpired as Friend and VAR chatted about what to do. It went on for at least 5 minutes! Liverpool players rushed around Klopp for water and team-talk. Both Friend and his VAR mate were equally at fault. The VAR decision for Friend to view the footage strongly implies that he got his original decision wrong. He gave the penalty because he's a gutless coward because that's what all the gutless refs will do - they will agree with VAR. But that wasn't what killed our comeback - even if the penalty was missed, Liverpool were given time to regroup and the momentum was stopped. I noted that the time was 80 minutes when the incident took place, and showed 90 minutes when the penalty was scored. Did we get the TEN MINUTES that was wasted, in Liverpool's favour, by Friend and VAR? No - SIX minutes. Friend needs to be sacked. He should have dismissed the VAR request and played on, because in the context of the game Palace's momentum and Liverpool's disarray were the main factors. I have been watching VAR now and it favours the big teams - so what's the point? Good point on time wasted - 5 subs in the 2nd half = 2.5mins for sure + another on average 2mins + 6 mins for the var means that there should have been 10 mins added on. The sooner they stop the clock for wasted time the better - but I suspect that TV would overrule that! Edited by The Dolphin (28 Jan 2022 6.45am)
Alert a moderator to this post

The Dolphin

28 Jan 22 6.43am

Originally posted by Oddball2021

People keep going on about the penalty decision. What really hurt was Liverpool being given time to regroup. They were rattled and we looked like scoring one or two more. It was close to the 80 minute mark when the incident happened. What was appalling was the sheer amount of time that transpired as Friend and VAR chatted about what to do. It went on for at least 5 minutes! Liverpool players rushed around Klopp for water and team-talk. Both Friend and his VAR mate were equally at fault. The VAR decision for Friend to view the footage strongly implies that he got his original decision wrong. He gave the penalty because he's a gutless coward because that's what all the gutless refs will do - they will agree with VAR. But that wasn't what killed our comeback - even if the penalty was missed, Liverpool were given time to regroup and the momentum was stopped. I noted that the time was 80 minutes when the incident took place, and showed 90 minutes when the penalty was scored. Did we get the TEN MINUTES that was wasted, in Liverpool's favour, by Friend and VAR? No - SIX minutes. Friend needs to be sacked. He should have dismissed the VAR request and played on, because in the context of the game Palace's momentum and Liverpool's disarray were the main factors. I have been watching VAR now and it favours the big teams - so what's the point?

Good point on time wasted - 5 subs in the 2nd half = 2.5mins for sure + another on average 2mins + 6 mins for the var means that there should have been 10 mins added on.
The sooner they stop the clock for wasted time the better - but I suspect that TV would overrule that!

Edited by The Dolphin (28 Jan 2022 6.45am)

Alert a moderator to this post

taylors lovechild 28 Jan 22 8.45am
The "added time" situation just makes no sense as pretty much every game it is between 3-5 minutes irrespective of whether there are VAR calls, subs, goals scored, etc. The only time it is longer than six minutes is when there is a major issue like a heady injury. I don't remember the last time I saw a game where it was less than two minutes. The other thing I've always wondered is why there is rarely more than a minute added on in the first half. It can't just be because of subs can it? There's no point us analysing the Liverpool game any more, even if we'd equalised they'd have ruled it off for hurting Klopp's feelings.
Alert a moderator to this post

taylors lovechild

28 Jan 22 8.45am

Send a Private Message to taylors lovechild

The "added time" situation just makes no sense as pretty much every game it is between 3-5 minutes irrespective of whether there are VAR calls, subs, goals scored, etc. The only time it is longer than six minutes is when there is a major issue like a heady injury. I don't remember the last time I saw a game where it was less than two minutes. The other thing I've always wondered is why there is rarely more than a minute added on in the first half. It can't just be because of subs can it?

There's no point us analysing the Liverpool game any more, even if we'd equalised they'd have ruled it off for hurting Klopp's feelings.

Alert a moderator to this post

Sansbup Norfolk 28 Jan 22 11.43am
The FA used to say that the laws were applied evenly from the top of the game to the lowest level. They've compromised that stance by introducing VAR so why don't they now have off-field timing which is stopped whenever play stops?
Alert a moderator to this post

Sansbup

Norfolk 28 Jan 22 11.43am

The FA used to say that the laws were applied evenly from the top of the game to the lowest level. They've compromised that stance by introducing VAR so why don't they now have off-field timing which is stopped whenever play stops?

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 21 of 21 << First < 17 18 19 20 21

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Crystal Palace vs. Liverpool Match Thread

Site Map

Sponsors