Jump to content

English Premier League.


maroonlegions

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Bongo 1874 said:

You say that mate but as someone that watched the game we allowed Man Utd far too much time you only need to see Brunos goal as an example too understand , Man Utd were never in trouble easy for them tbh. 

 

 

Infact i don't know if you noticed but when the final whistle went did you see 4/5 Newcastle players running up to Ronaldo for his shirt. 

 

Embarrassing tbh. 

 

 

I saw it. You only got away with that because Ronaldo kept his shirt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mikey1874

    431

  • Tazio

    277

  • Maroon Sailor

    228

  • CJGJ

    193

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Bongo 1874
3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

I saw it. You only got away with that because Ronaldo kept his shirt. 

More because of what the score was, just shows you what sort of mentality the players have but, years ago Newcastle challenged Man Utd, just a distant memory I'm afraid now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They lost a goal still playing 343, equalised still in 343, changed it immediately to 442 with a sub - I think it was gomez in the middle for a center half.    Go on to score two quality goals.    To be fair the equaliser was decent also. 

 

Some turn around.   That 343 had them too spaced apart.    They are closing down better now. 

Edited by HMFC01
Link to post
Share on other sites
Roxy Hearts
23 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

Everton on fire! Rafa is the man

They've been superb second half. Didn't see first.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bongo 1874

 

Everton look a strong team this season, Rondon still to get upto speed, think them and Leicester City will be interesting teams to watch, Leicester Signed a good young midfielder called Boubakary Soumaré, Newcastle tried to sign him years ago but he turned us down.

 

Patson Daka is one to watch out for 👍

 

Edited by Bongo 1874
Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot

Interesting read that. 

Our Bob ended up getting it in the neck all from a debate about Leeds. 

🤷‍♂️

 

At least Bongos moved on from Stendel. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
RustyRightPeg
10 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

Interesting read that. 

Our Bob ended up getting it in the neck all from a debate about Leeds. 

🤷‍♂️

 

At least Bongos moved on from Stendel. 

 

 

 


I had to read it back a couple of times to make sure it was him. But it was and I can’t understand how it got to him.

 

bizarre

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/09/2021 at 10:15, Jambo-Fox said:

😂 and Tottenham Hotspur (spuds) who have NEVER won the Premier League are ….. you can’t be serious, you really are joking 🙃 

 

There is no big 6, there's a big 4.

 

Really there's a big 3 IMO, United, City and Chelsea, with Liverpool just behind but unable to keep up financially.

 

Don't blame you for dreaming but those 4 are waaaay ahead of Leicester and west ham (west ham lol)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bongo 1874
41 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

Interesting read that. 

Our Bob ended up getting it in the neck all from a debate about Leeds. 

🤷‍♂️

 

At least Bongos moved on from Stendel. 

 

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:


I had to read it back a couple of times to make sure it was him. But it was and I can’t understand how it got to him.

 

bizarre

My apologies i wasn't the one who brought Bob up, he was used as an example from a different poster, something to do with if he played like that and a Richter Scale. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Bongo 1874 said:

More because of what the score was, just shows you what sort of mentality the players have but, years ago Newcastle challenged Man Utd, just a distant memory I'm afraid now. 

 

What, once, a quarter century ago?

I'd say Newcastle are doing what Newcastle have always done - existing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot
19 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:


I had to read it back a couple of times to make sure it was him. But it was and I can’t understand how it got to him.

 

bizarre

 

🤣🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nookie Bear
1 hour ago, RustyRightPeg said:


I had to read it back a couple of times to make sure it was him. But it was and I can’t understand how it got to him.

 

bizarre

 

It really is not that difficult to comprehend.

 

I made the comparison by saying Robbie would win things with a Top 6 team - it was relevant to the Bielsa chat and i felt using a name we probably all know would allow me to make my point.

 

However, i can only apologise so will amend my statement to: "even the Head Coach of Mushuc Runa, Geovanny Cumbicus would win things with the Top 6."

 

Better?

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

There is no big 6, there's a big 4.

 

Really there's a big 3 IMO, United, City and Chelsea, with Liverpool just behind but unable to keep up financially.

 

Don't blame you for dreaming but those 4 are waaaay ahead of Leicester and west ham (west ham lol)

Can’t disagree with that nor would I dispute it! It’s exactly my thoughts …

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

It really is not that difficult to comprehend.

 

I made the comparison by saying Robbie would win things with a Top 6 team - it was relevant to the Bielsa chat and i felt using a name we probably all know would allow me to make my point.

 

However, i can only apologise so will amend my statement to: "even the Head Coach of Mushuc Runa, Geovanny Cumbicus would win things with the Top 6."

 

Better?

Head Coach of Mushuc Runa, Geovanny Cumbicus …..

 

Why did you have to mention him? Many JKBrs will be clamouring to demand him as coach 😂 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nookie Bear
1 minute ago, Jambo-Fox said:

Head Coach of Mushuc Runa, Geovanny Cumbicus …..

 

Why did you have to mention him? Many JKBrs will be clamouring to demand him as coach 😂 

 

ITK :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

The problem on Saturday was the finishing.

 

Newcastle would have deserved to be 2-0 up at half time, apart from conceding during the extra minute played for their time wasting. 

The problem was the shite goalkeeping on the first two goals.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bongo 1874
5 hours ago, Smithee said:

 

What, once, a quarter century ago?

I'd say Newcastle are doing what Newcastle have always done - existing.

Fans deserve far better and club has no ambition just Ashley hoping every year the stay up, so he can get his Premier League and TV deal Money. 

 

 

Would you believe me if i told you Celtic, Rangers, Hearts have better training grounds / facilities than Newcastle who are a premier league club? 

 

Could easily be a top 10 club every year, instead of this relegation cannon thodder!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Fans deserve far better and club has no ambition just Ashley hoping every year the stay up, so he can get his Premier League and TV deal Money. 

 

 

Would you believe me if i told you Celtic, Rangers, Hearts have better training grounds / facilities than Newcastle who are a premier league club? 

 

Could easily be a top 10 club every year, instead of this relegation cannon thodder!! 

 

Aye he's a nob, no argument there, but right now seems like normal service from them rather than sub par.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Fans deserve far better and club has no ambition just Ashley hoping every year the stay up, so he can get his Premier League and TV deal Money. 

 

 

Would you believe me if i told you Celtic, Rangers, Hearts have better training grounds / facilities than Newcastle who are a premier league club? 

 

Could easily be a top 10 club every year, instead of this relegation cannon thodder!! 

History shows they are below a top ten club most seasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stendelnator
1 hour ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Fans deserve far better and club has no ambition just Ashley hoping every year the stay up, so he can get his Premier League and TV deal Money. 

 

 

Would you believe me if i told you Celtic, Rangers, Hearts have better training grounds / facilities than Newcastle who are a premier league club? 

 

Could easily be a top 10 club every year, instead of this relegation cannon thodder!! 

Thodder?

 

Thucking hell 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, benny said:

History shows they are below a top ten club most seasons.

 

Yep, this won't be nice viewing for a toon fan

799px-Newcastle_United_FC_League_Perform

Link to post
Share on other sites

First touch. And more records in longest gap between goals for same club and equals most appearances

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Fans deserve far better and club has no ambition just Ashley hoping every year the stay up, so he can get his Premier League and TV deal Money. 

 

 

Would you believe me if i told you Celtic, Rangers, Hearts have better training grounds / facilities than Newcastle who are a premier league club? 

 

Could easily be a top 10 club every year, instead of this relegation cannon thodder!! 

I think it’s a toss up between Newcastle & West Ham as to who has the worst premier league club

training ground!

 

Even Leicester City Ladies (just promoted from championship last season) have a better training centre! They have inherited the whole ex Leicester City FC training ground post their move to their new £100million Seagrave training centre!!

 

Cashley knows what he is doing … (as in make money from Geordies!)

Edited by Jambo-Fox
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bongo 1874
11 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said:

I think it’s a toss up between Newcastle & West Ham as to who has the worst premier league club

training ground!

 

Even Leicester City Ladies (just promoted from championship last season) have a better training centre! They have inherited the whole ex Leicester City FC training ground post their move to their new £100million Seagrave training centre!!

 

Cashley knows what he is doing … (as in make money from Geordies!)

Yeah you're new training ground looks impressive tbh, West Ham make up for it though with bringing through academy players, and have done really well under Moyes recently. 

 

 

 

Edited by Bongo 1874
Link to post
Share on other sites

So referees are allowing some very physical challenges now. See Everton v Burnley. 

 

But if the main consideration is the effect on the player - Burnley player on Monday did exactly the same tackle as the Harvey Elliot injury, where Leeds player got a 3 match ban - then for example are there going to be lots of retrospective bans if the injury only comes to light after the game?

 

Difficult challenge. 

 

Where is the consideration to player safety?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The epl refs have carried on from the euros where a more tolerant style of refereeing has been noticeable. 
 

It’s good to see. For too long players were crying for a foul because they’ve been brushed by a shoulder when in truth they were simply outmuscled. 
 

It shows refs probably do want a game to flow but were bound by previous soft laws.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Debut 4 said:

The epl refs have carried on from the euros where a more tolerant style of refereeing has been noticeable. 
 

It’s good to see. For too long players were crying for a foul because they’ve been brushed by a shoulder when in truth they were simply outmuscled. 
 

It shows refs probably do want a game to flow but were bound by previous soft laws.  

 

Totally agree. I said for years there were too many fouls basically for collisions where players barely touched. 

 

They might need to be careful though. I've also seen very dangerous tackles ('he got the ball first ref') ignored too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Totally agree. I said for years there were too many fouls basically for collisions where players barely touched. 

 

They might need to be careful though. I've also seen very dangerous tackles ('he got the ball first ref') ignored too. 

 

Aye it's been really annoying, they never seemed to stop and think Right they went over in a heap, but did one of them actually commit a foul?

 

That whole thing porteous was up to with cutting in between the winger and the ball made it look like a foul on him if there was contact, but the attacker wasn't committing a foul.

Edited by Smithee
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
7 hours ago, milky_26 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58570818

 

the leeds player who was sent off for the challenge that injured harvey elliot has had his appeal to the red card dismissed and will now serve a 3 match ban. harvey elliott tweeted after it that it was the wrong decision and has described it as a freak accident.

 

Harvey has been heavily sedated for a few days. ::troll::

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
4 hours ago, Debut 4 said:

The epl refs have carried on from the euros where a more tolerant style of refereeing has been noticeable. 
 

It’s good to see. For too long players were crying for a foul because they’ve been brushed by a shoulder when in truth they were simply outmuscled. 
 

It shows refs probably do want a game to flow but were bound by previous soft laws.  

 

 

 

I'm not sure Ken Early from the Irish Times agrees with you. 

 

Quote from: Ken Early in the Irish Times
Ken Early: Harvey Elliott injury exposes nonsense of ‘let it flow’ directive

Liverpool have shown you can play fast and furious football without endangering players
  
You don’t often see Jürgen Klopp lost for words, but that’s what happened in his post-match interview on Sky, when Geoff Shreeves wanted to know what he had said to referee Craig Pawson after seeing his player Harvey Elliott badly injured in a challenge with Leeds’ Pascal Struijk.

Klopp had been angry during the exchange with Pawson, but now he stared absently into the middle distance and spoke in disjointed fragments. “Nothing important... I’m not sure it’s the right moment to speak about these kind of things... yeah, no... nothing important really.”

Klopp might have been wondering: when is the right moment to speak about “these kind of things”? Apparently never. Three weeks ago, Liverpool beat Burnley 2-0 and Klopp complained afterwards about the lenience shown by the referee towards what he deemed foul play by Burnley’s strong forwards Ashley Barnes and Chris Wood.

“I’m not 100 per cent sure if we are going in the right direction with these decisions,” he said. “It’s like we’re going 10 to 15 years backwards. The message now is let the game flow, but nobody exactly knows what that means. I like decisions that favour the offensive team, that’s fine. But we have to stick to protecting the players. We cannot deny that. If you like that sort of thing, watch wrestling.”

Klopp’s concern for player safety might have seemed understandable in the context of last season, when he saw the likes of Virgil van Dijk and Thiago Alcântara sidelined for months by wild challenges. But he was laughed out of town. Sean Dyche criticised him for “namechecking” – snitching on – Wood and Barnes. Alan Shearer’s theory was that Klopp was playing mind games, putting pressure on referees with a “pantomime” designed to get favourable treatment in future.

“This is the man that talked about heavy metal football,” marvelled Gary Neville, “Football being fast and furious, the excitement of English football, the cut and thrust of it, sliding tackles.”

It’s unclear why Neville assumed that when Klopp spoke about “heavy metal football” he meant sliding tackles – why not hairspray and leather trousers? Actually, one of Klopp’s big contributions has been to show how a team can be fast and aggressive without being dirty.

Aura of violence
There’s a folk belief in English football that all the best teams have an aura of violence, an attitude summed up by that exemplar of the bulldog spirit, José Mourinho: “A team of good boys, nice boys, the only thing that they win at the end of the season is the Fair Play cup. Which is something I’ve never won and I’m not interested in winning that.”

Klopp’s Liverpool have topped the Fair Play table for the last five seasons running. It’s not because they are good boys or nice boys who lack the mentality of champions. Rather, they have made a tactical choice. Klopp believes it is counterproductive to slide into risky challenges or generally to give away cheap fouls.

He tells the players that when they are pressing, it is “absolutely forbidden” to give away a foul. There’s no point working to close down opponents only to let them off the hook with easy free kicks. If you’re sloppy in the challenge, the referee can be the opponents’ best defender.

Klopp therefore never had much to gain from the “let it flow” directive issued by the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL), which he correctly foresaw would encourage dangerous, reckless play. Instead, he got to be the first manager to see English football’s retro fixation reduce one of his players to collateral damage.

English football is obsessed with turning the clock back to the days when men were men, and the old men who now populate the stands were children. That’s what the return of “common sense” to refereeing is all about. But, like the fictional John Hammond, wretched impresario of Jurassic Park, PGMOL failed to grasp the destructive potential of what they were unleashing in a world that is no longer equipped to deal with it.

By all means summon the “let it flow, it’s a man’s game” spirit of yesteryear, but you better hope you can also bring back the nine-stone players, the boggy potato-field pitches and, most importantly, the ingrained habits of self-preservation that characterised that uncompromising age.

Look at the incident that left Elliott with that terrible injury. Fabinho chips it forward towards Elliott, who, with typically enterprising technique, lets the ball drop beyond him then takes a touch on the run and accelerates after it.

The important thing to note is that his touch takes him back across the path of the pursuing Pascal Struijk. This is entirely deliberate. Elliott has seen Struijk, he knows he is there, and he is cutting across his path to make sure he gets his body between Struijk and the ball.

Chasing
No footballer of the 1960s would have done this. Any player who deliberately took the ball back across the path - and thus within the range – of a chasing six-foot-three defender knew he would be taking his life in his hands.

Any player who did somehow end up in this dangerous situation would at least have understood he was in danger – he would be expecting a big sliding challenge to arrive at any second, and his mind and body would be focused as one on the question of how to evade it.

Elliott, who was born in 2003, didn’t expect it. Elliott, who grew up playing academy football on nice pitches, thinks the worst that can happen is he gets barged in the back and wins a free kick. Elliott has simply not considered that Struijk might come leaping through his space, right foot stretching for the ball and left knee crunching “hard-but-fair” through the back of Elliott’s planted leg.

He has grown up in an era when dangerous tackles from behind are banned and so he never learned how to avoid them. Now he pays for that gap in his knowledge with a big chunk of his promising career. Let it flow! Pawson, who would send Struijk off when he realised the extent of Elliott’s injury, never even blew for a foul.

“Let it flow” is, of course, a self-defeating nonsense – the game flows much faster now than it did in the days when legbreakers were legal. One of the most sordid aspects of the whole awful incident was Sky’s squeamish refusal to show replays – ostensibly out of some concern for Elliott, the first but assuredly not the last victim of the new dispensation.

The injury should have been shown on repeat. If people are so in love with common sense, why shield them from the consequences?

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

I'm not sure Ken Early from the Irish Times agrees with you. 

 

Quote from: Ken Early in the Irish Times
Ken Early: Harvey Elliott injury exposes nonsense of ‘let it flow’ directive

Liverpool have shown you can play fast and furious football without endangering players
  
You don’t often see Jürgen Klopp lost for words, but that’s what happened in his post-match interview on Sky, when Geoff Shreeves wanted to know what he had said to referee Craig Pawson after seeing his player Harvey Elliott badly injured in a challenge with Leeds’ Pascal Struijk.

Klopp had been angry during the exchange with Pawson, but now he stared absently into the middle distance and spoke in disjointed fragments. “Nothing important... I’m not sure it’s the right moment to speak about these kind of things... yeah, no... nothing important really.”

Klopp might have been wondering: when is the right moment to speak about “these kind of things”? Apparently never. Three weeks ago, Liverpool beat Burnley 2-0 and Klopp complained afterwards about the lenience shown by the referee towards what he deemed foul play by Burnley’s strong forwards Ashley Barnes and Chris Wood.

“I’m not 100 per cent sure if we are going in the right direction with these decisions,” he said. “It’s like we’re going 10 to 15 years backwards. The message now is let the game flow, but nobody exactly knows what that means. I like decisions that favour the offensive team, that’s fine. But we have to stick to protecting the players. We cannot deny that. If you like that sort of thing, watch wrestling.”

Klopp’s concern for player safety might have seemed understandable in the context of last season, when he saw the likes of Virgil van Dijk and Thiago Alcântara sidelined for months by wild challenges. But he was laughed out of town. Sean Dyche criticised him for “namechecking” – snitching on – Wood and Barnes. Alan Shearer’s theory was that Klopp was playing mind games, putting pressure on referees with a “pantomime” designed to get favourable treatment in future.

“This is the man that talked about heavy metal football,” marvelled Gary Neville, “Football being fast and furious, the excitement of English football, the cut and thrust of it, sliding tackles.”

It’s unclear why Neville assumed that when Klopp spoke about “heavy metal football” he meant sliding tackles – why not hairspray and leather trousers? Actually, one of Klopp’s big contributions has been to show how a team can be fast and aggressive without being dirty.

Aura of violence
There’s a folk belief in English football that all the best teams have an aura of violence, an attitude summed up by that exemplar of the bulldog spirit, José Mourinho: “A team of good boys, nice boys, the only thing that they win at the end of the season is the Fair Play cup. Which is something I’ve never won and I’m not interested in winning that.”

Klopp’s Liverpool have topped the Fair Play table for the last five seasons running. It’s not because they are good boys or nice boys who lack the mentality of champions. Rather, they have made a tactical choice. Klopp believes it is counterproductive to slide into risky challenges or generally to give away cheap fouls.

He tells the players that when they are pressing, it is “absolutely forbidden” to give away a foul. There’s no point working to close down opponents only to let them off the hook with easy free kicks. If you’re sloppy in the challenge, the referee can be the opponents’ best defender.

Klopp therefore never had much to gain from the “let it flow” directive issued by the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL), which he correctly foresaw would encourage dangerous, reckless play. Instead, he got to be the first manager to see English football’s retro fixation reduce one of his players to collateral damage.

English football is obsessed with turning the clock back to the days when men were men, and the old men who now populate the stands were children. That’s what the return of “common sense” to refereeing is all about. But, like the fictional John Hammond, wretched impresario of Jurassic Park, PGMOL failed to grasp the destructive potential of what they were unleashing in a world that is no longer equipped to deal with it.

By all means summon the “let it flow, it’s a man’s game” spirit of yesteryear, but you better hope you can also bring back the nine-stone players, the boggy potato-field pitches and, most importantly, the ingrained habits of self-preservation that characterised that uncompromising age.

Look at the incident that left Elliott with that terrible injury. Fabinho chips it forward towards Elliott, who, with typically enterprising technique, lets the ball drop beyond him then takes a touch on the run and accelerates after it.

The important thing to note is that his touch takes him back across the path of the pursuing Pascal Struijk. This is entirely deliberate. Elliott has seen Struijk, he knows he is there, and he is cutting across his path to make sure he gets his body between Struijk and the ball.

Chasing
No footballer of the 1960s would have done this. Any player who deliberately took the ball back across the path - and thus within the range – of a chasing six-foot-three defender knew he would be taking his life in his hands.

Any player who did somehow end up in this dangerous situation would at least have understood he was in danger – he would be expecting a big sliding challenge to arrive at any second, and his mind and body would be focused as one on the question of how to evade it.

Elliott, who was born in 2003, didn’t expect it. Elliott, who grew up playing academy football on nice pitches, thinks the worst that can happen is he gets barged in the back and wins a free kick. Elliott has simply not considered that Struijk might come leaping through his space, right foot stretching for the ball and left knee crunching “hard-but-fair” through the back of Elliott’s planted leg.

He has grown up in an era when dangerous tackles from behind are banned and so he never learned how to avoid them. Now he pays for that gap in his knowledge with a big chunk of his promising career. Let it flow! Pawson, who would send Struijk off when he realised the extent of Elliott’s injury, never even blew for a foul.

“Let it flow” is, of course, a self-defeating nonsense – the game flows much faster now than it did in the days when legbreakers were legal. One of the most sordid aspects of the whole awful incident was Sky’s squeamish refusal to show replays – ostensibly out of some concern for Elliott, the first but assuredly not the last victim of the new dispensation.

The injury should have been shown on repeat. If people are so in love with common sense, why shield them from the consequences?

Typed by Ken Early as he sat in his Liverpool FC jammies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

I'm not sure Ken Early from the Irish Times agrees with you. 

 

Quote from: Ken Early in the Irish Times
Ken Early: Harvey Elliott injury exposes nonsense of ‘let it flow’ directive

Liverpool have shown you can play fast and furious football without endangering players
  
You don’t often see Jürgen Klopp lost for words, but that’s what happened in his post-match interview on Sky, when Geoff Shreeves wanted to know what he had said to referee Craig Pawson after seeing his player Harvey Elliott badly injured in a challenge with Leeds’ Pascal Struijk.

Klopp had been angry during the exchange with Pawson, but now he stared absently into the middle distance and spoke in disjointed fragments. “Nothing important... I’m not sure it’s the right moment to speak about these kind of things... yeah, no... nothing important really.”

Klopp might have been wondering: when is the right moment to speak about “these kind of things”? Apparently never. Three weeks ago, Liverpool beat Burnley 2-0 and Klopp complained afterwards about the lenience shown by the referee towards what he deemed foul play by Burnley’s strong forwards Ashley Barnes and Chris Wood.

“I’m not 100 per cent sure if we are going in the right direction with these decisions,” he said. “It’s like we’re going 10 to 15 years backwards. The message now is let the game flow, but nobody exactly knows what that means. I like decisions that favour the offensive team, that’s fine. But we have to stick to protecting the players. We cannot deny that. If you like that sort of thing, watch wrestling.”

Klopp’s concern for player safety might have seemed understandable in the context of last season, when he saw the likes of Virgil van Dijk and Thiago Alcântara sidelined for months by wild challenges. But he was laughed out of town. Sean Dyche criticised him for “namechecking” – snitching on – Wood and Barnes. Alan Shearer’s theory was that Klopp was playing mind games, putting pressure on referees with a “pantomime” designed to get favourable treatment in future.

“This is the man that talked about heavy metal football,” marvelled Gary Neville, “Football being fast and furious, the excitement of English football, the cut and thrust of it, sliding tackles.”

It’s unclear why Neville assumed that when Klopp spoke about “heavy metal football” he meant sliding tackles – why not hairspray and leather trousers? Actually, one of Klopp’s big contributions has been to show how a team can be fast and aggressive without being dirty.

Aura of violence
There’s a folk belief in English football that all the best teams have an aura of violence, an attitude summed up by that exemplar of the bulldog spirit, José Mourinho: “A team of good boys, nice boys, the only thing that they win at the end of the season is the Fair Play cup. Which is something I’ve never won and I’m not interested in winning that.”

Klopp’s Liverpool have topped the Fair Play table for the last five seasons running. It’s not because they are good boys or nice boys who lack the mentality of champions. Rather, they have made a tactical choice. Klopp believes it is counterproductive to slide into risky challenges or generally to give away cheap fouls.

He tells the players that when they are pressing, it is “absolutely forbidden” to give away a foul. There’s no point working to close down opponents only to let them off the hook with easy free kicks. If you’re sloppy in the challenge, the referee can be the opponents’ best defender.

Klopp therefore never had much to gain from the “let it flow” directive issued by the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL), which he correctly foresaw would encourage dangerous, reckless play. Instead, he got to be the first manager to see English football’s retro fixation reduce one of his players to collateral damage.

English football is obsessed with turning the clock back to the days when men were men, and the old men who now populate the stands were children. That’s what the return of “common sense” to refereeing is all about. But, like the fictional John Hammond, wretched impresario of Jurassic Park, PGMOL failed to grasp the destructive potential of what they were unleashing in a world that is no longer equipped to deal with it.

By all means summon the “let it flow, it’s a man’s game” spirit of yesteryear, but you better hope you can also bring back the nine-stone players, the boggy potato-field pitches and, most importantly, the ingrained habits of self-preservation that characterised that uncompromising age.

Look at the incident that left Elliott with that terrible injury. Fabinho chips it forward towards Elliott, who, with typically enterprising technique, lets the ball drop beyond him then takes a touch on the run and accelerates after it.

The important thing to note is that his touch takes him back across the path of the pursuing Pascal Struijk. This is entirely deliberate. Elliott has seen Struijk, he knows he is there, and he is cutting across his path to make sure he gets his body between Struijk and the ball.

Chasing
No footballer of the 1960s would have done this. Any player who deliberately took the ball back across the path - and thus within the range – of a chasing six-foot-three defender knew he would be taking his life in his hands.

Any player who did somehow end up in this dangerous situation would at least have understood he was in danger – he would be expecting a big sliding challenge to arrive at any second, and his mind and body would be focused as one on the question of how to evade it.

Elliott, who was born in 2003, didn’t expect it. Elliott, who grew up playing academy football on nice pitches, thinks the worst that can happen is he gets barged in the back and wins a free kick. Elliott has simply not considered that Struijk might come leaping through his space, right foot stretching for the ball and left knee crunching “hard-but-fair” through the back of Elliott’s planted leg.

He has grown up in an era when dangerous tackles from behind are banned and so he never learned how to avoid them. Now he pays for that gap in his knowledge with a big chunk of his promising career. Let it flow! Pawson, who would send Struijk off when he realised the extent of Elliott’s injury, never even blew for a foul.

“Let it flow” is, of course, a self-defeating nonsense – the game flows much faster now than it did in the days when legbreakers were legal. One of the most sordid aspects of the whole awful incident was Sky’s squeamish refusal to show replays – ostensibly out of some concern for Elliott, the first but assuredly not the last victim of the new dispensation.

The injury should have been shown on repeat. If people are so in love with common sense, why shield them from the consequences?

“Protecting players”.  Hate the phrase. 
 

I’ve not seen the tackle but it sounds like one that would happen with or without strong or weak rules. Many of these writers are a bunch of geeks who’ve probably never even played school football.

 

The “let it flow debate”, I would say, is more attributed to preventing the game being stopped for less obvious fouls where two players are jostling for the ball at close quarters, not leg breaking lunges which will happen periodically in the game anyway.

 

Stops people like Sterling automatically raising an arm for a foul and maybe focuses him to learn to be stronger and protect the ball better.  It’s good to see the puzzled faces of players who’ve played for a foul and don’t get it. 
 

 

Edited by Debut 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
Just now, Tazio said:

Typed by Ken Early as he sat in his Liverpool FC jammies.

 

I doubt you've any idea if he supports an English team let alone LFC. He seems to me to be a bit of a Tom English type journo tbh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

I doubt you've any idea if he supports an English team let alone LFC. He seems to me to be a bit of a Tom English type journo tbh. 

As much idea as you have. I'm basing my sarcy comment on the tone of the piece. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
Just now, Tazio said:

As much idea as you have. I'm basing my sarcy comment on the tone of the piece. 

 

Oh, I just read it. Didn't hear any tones tbh. Maybe I should have had the volume up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Oh, I just read it. Didn't hear any tones tbh. Maybe I should have had the volume up. 

 

Strange to just focus on one tackle. There's some shocking fouls by Liverpool players recently same as every side. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
9 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Strange to just focus on one tackle. There's some shocking fouls by Liverpool players recently same as every side. 

 

What shocking fouls?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too many of my age group +55 and above hark for the good old days of Norman Hunter, Tommy Smith, etc.

Proper Hard Men, no they weren't, proper cowards more like. Anyone can throw themseves into a ridiculous tackle on an opponent who has no chance of being hard back.

Imo, as an ex amateur who committed these same stupid tackles in my playing days. I feel ashamed thinking back.

I later became an amateur ref for 10+ years and seen it all for myself but had to decide what was fair and not.

Rant over 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

What shocking fouls?  

 

Just a couple of examples below. Van Dijk and Robertson. Leg breakers. Unpunished too.

 

It happens. Mistimed tackles is a normal thing. Unlucky injuries too.

 

 

Edited by Mikey1874
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
3 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Just a couple of examples below. Van Dijk and Robertson. Leg breakers. Unpunished too.

 

It happens. Mistimed tackles is a normal thing. Unlucky injuries too.

 

 

 

You're a bit desperate lad. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Malinga the Swinga
On 15/09/2021 at 14:26, Debut 4 said:

The epl refs have carried on from the euros where a more tolerant style of refereeing has been noticeable. 
 

It’s good to see. For too long players were crying for a foul because they’ve been brushed by a shoulder when in truth they were simply outmuscled. 
 

It shows refs probably do want a game to flow but were bound by previous soft laws.  

 

 

Now it appears they are bound by rules where Klopp demands no-one challenge or tackle his players, but Liverpool should be allowed to break play up by committing niggly fouls whenever team threaten to break.

As Mikey has pointed out above, Liverpool players also commit shocking tackles but the Liverpool loving media shy away from pointing them out and are scared to offend the bullying aggressive nature of Klopp.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Now it appears they are bound by rules where Klopp demands no-one challenge or tackle his players, but Liverpool should be allowed to break play up by committing niggly fouls whenever team threaten to break.

As Mikey has pointed out above, Liverpool players also commit shocking tackles but the Liverpool loving media shy away from pointing them out and are scared to offend the bullying aggressive nature of Klopp.

 

 

Liverpool are a great team, and they are good to watch on how they play etc. 

 

But the amount of bias and decisions the top 4-6 get is quite shocking to be honest. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
RustyRightPeg
28 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Now it appears they are bound by rules where Klopp demands no-one challenge or tackle his players, but Liverpool should be allowed to break play up by committing niggly fouls whenever team threaten to break.

As Mikey has pointed out above, Liverpool players also commit shocking tackles but the Liverpool loving media shy away from pointing them out and are scared to offend the bullying aggressive nature of Klopp.

 

 


He moaned about Burnley, quite rightly. Earlier in the season they were treating the game against Liverpool like a wrestling match. Barnes up front is just a huddie. They still play like it’s the 80s and are dreadful to watch. Tarkowski put a tackle in on Richarlison on Monday night against Everton (I’m a sucker for a big tackle but even I winced). It was a cowards tackle, one where a player was running to the touch line to stop a ball going out, managed to stop their momentum and are a sitting duck as they turn round. 
 

The tackle on Elliot was unfortunate, no malice, just an unfortunate tangle of legs. Klopp is good with the media but he’s very, very protective of his players and it’s quite tiresome. Contact sport and all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...