Bournemouth being robbed at Anfield

[Jacko51]

Goal disallowed for the sort of contact which, if it had been by a defender, would never have been given as a penalty in a million years. Then the Dippers score a goal which should have been disallowed under the new offside law. Feel sorry for them.

[Port Vale Paul]

Obviously that liner has not read the new offside ruling,,,,,,,,,,,,doh

[For Us All]

Daylight robbery.

[For Us All]

They need to get used to it unfortunately, refs continue to forget the laws of the game at grounds like Anfield, Old Trafford and The Emirates when it comes to the home teams.......

 

You can say that again.:rolleyes:

[VantaaVale]

Both poor decisions by the officials. Bournemouth deserved a point from that game.

[Howjy04]

The ref also missed the holding of the Bournemouth player by Clyne in the disallowed goal incident.That non offside decision was the worst in football history.

[Trampilot]

The higher you go.

 

The crappier it gets.

[stupers]

The Liverpool goal was clearly offside, there's no doubting that.

 

As for the disallowed goal, I think I disagree. He clearly has both his hands on Lovren's shoulders as the ball comes in, whilst there is little to no contact from Lovren to Elphick. Hands on the shoulder stops Lovren from challenging for the ball fully (Even though his positioning is awful). In my opinion the ref was right to disallow the goal. Elphick put himself in a position where the referee could disallow the goal, and he did. There was another incident in the 2nd half when Liverpool were defending another set piece where Skrtel clearly impedes the Bournemouth attacker and that was a clear-as-day penalty. The referee was very inconsistent with his bookings as well, Bournemouth clearly getting some bad decisions against them.

 

I just don't think the disallowed goal was one of them. But I think most of you disagree with that statement!

[JOHNNYAITCH]

I can see why the goal was disallowed; but on another day it wouldn't be. Nature of the game..some you get some you don't

 

However, the Liverpool goal was a truly outstanding mistake by the officials; right up there with the best/worst.

 

I hope that Liverpool can play a lot better than they have done so far cos if not, they won't achieve anything this season. Bournemouth need to keep their heads up and keep doing what they are doing, but take some of the few chances that will come their way.

[Little_Al]

It is difficult to tell from a two dimensional TV picture but there does seem to be a case for off side on the Liverpool goal. It probably should be used as an illustration of the difficulty of applying the new interpretation of the law and the need to go back to the law and leave offside to the judgement of the referee. There was however a very strong case for disallowing the Bournemouth "goal" and the fact that sometimes attackers get away with foul play on should have nothing to do with the correctness of that decision. On the whole I felt the referee gave the home side the benefit of the doubt on several occasions and was probably influenced by the crowd.

[VantaaVale]

I have to say that Eddie Howe conducted himself in the after match interview impeccably, given the match was decided by one shockingly poor decision and one which as he put it was "soft". He would not be drawn into slating the match officials, which would just have made a bad situation worse.

[Paul6754]

I'm struggling to find the change in the law from last season which "disallows" the Liverpool goal, premumably its a change in the way the phrase "Interfering with play" is interpreted by the ref. There was a Liverpool player in an offside position who moved towards the ball but didn't make contact but there have been numerous similar instances where this has happened and the player hasn't touched the ball and the goal has stood, I can recall one instance where a player standing in an offside position jumped over the ball in the line of sight of the goalie and the goal stood.

[VantaaVale]

I'm struggling to find the change in the law from last season which "disallows" the Liverpool goal, premumably its a change in the way the phrase "Interfering with play" is interpreted by the ref. There was a Liverpool player in an offside position who moved towards the ball but didn't make contact but there have been numerous similar instances where this has happened and the player hasn't touched the ball and the goal has stood, I can recall one instance where a player standing in an offside position jumped over the ball in the line of sight of the goalie and the goal stood.

 

From the Premier League:

 

A player in an offside position (which Coutinho was) shall be penalised if he;

 

1. Clearly attempts to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or; (which Coutinho did)

 

2. Makes an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball." (which Coutinho did)

 

As clear an offside decision as you'll see this season.

[Howjy04]

From the Premier League:

 

A player in an offside position (which Coutinho was) shall be penalised if he;

 

1. Clearly attempts to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or; (which Coutinho did)

 

2. Makes an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball." (which Coutinho did)

 

As clear an offside decision as you'll see this season.

Or any season.

[captain scarlet]

I wonder how many goals Bournemouth got like that last season ? and how many lucky decisions also they got while playing at home?, Swings and roundabouts . Because it was in the premiership its highlighted more .