The Ref Stop

Burnley vs Liverpool

  • Thread starter Thread starter Runner-Ref
  • Start date Start date
The Ref Stop
Happy with that. I think imo, that’s in line with what Maguire had his goal disallowed for earlier this season, and I think it’s obstructs Trafford’s sight line.

Whether he was fouled into that position is it’s own question, but that would shock everyone giving a PK there.
 
I'm not convinced he's made any difference to the keepers actions and I think he was pushed into an offside position and would have been clearly not in line without that. I don't know if you can give a penalty for a small push that affects the attackers position, but penalising the attacker for being pushed seems like nonsense.

Also, has anyone seen a replay of the foul that resulted in Gakpo's goal being disallowed? I couldn't see anything live or on the initial replay and that's all there was.
 
GraemeS said:
I'm not convinced he's made any difference to the keepers actions and I think he was pushed into an offside position and would have been clearly not in line without that. I don't know if you can give a penalty for a small push that affects the attackers position, but penalising the attacker for being pushed seems like nonsense.

Also, has anyone seen a replay of the foul that resulted in Gakpo's goal being disallowed? I couldn't see anything live or on the initial replay and that's all there was.
Click to expand...
I think it’s the safest bet to disallow that, however I didn’t see Trafford immediately claim he had obstructed him, which is often an indication. One of those that could swing either way, and really could use a camera behind the goal or directly above the keeper maybe?

As for the foul on Gakpo’s goal, it looked soft, but to me I thought Salah tried to shoot, Burnley player was there first, and Salah just kicked the back of his legs. PT Blew immediately and certainly not a C&O error.
 
Remember it was given on field and this is a subjective part of offside. So you're looking for a C&O error even before we worry about the push. I don't think it was that because there's clear doubt if he was even in line or having any effect.
 
Good advantage on that 2nd goal by PT.

@GraemeS I agree, it could definitely be said that it wasn’t C&O. For me, I was happy with the decision to disallow it personally, but I understand why you suggest it’s not C&O, I’m just not sure where I sit on it being C&O
personally
 
Aside from it being one of the most boring games of football benown to mankind...

Thought the offside ruling was about right to be honest. Think Salah was just close enough to line of sight to warrant it being offside, and glad PT went to the monitor to make the decision himself - added credibility to the decision.

Couple of excellent advantages leading to goals in 90 minutes that I will never get back.
 
There was a fairly awful advantage not long before the second goal too though. Fairly typical "PL advantage", but a great example of why possession =/= advantage is taught down the pyramid - Liverpool advantage that leads to them giving up an unmarked shot 5 seconds later isn't great!
 
george.g said:
Happy with that. I think imo, that’s in line with what Maguire had his goal disallowed for earlier this season, and I think it’s obstructs Trafford’s sight line.

Whether he was fouled into that position is it’s own question, but that would shock everyone giving a PK there.
Click to expand...
I agreed with the offside in real time, if the push wasn't putting the attacking player in an offside position never a penalty. But if the push causes a player to be offside and a goal to be disallowed, then I don't know if you could use something like they use in the NFL where they say penalty declined and an advantage is not obtained by the team commiting the offence.

edit added, This would need to be changed in the LOTG first.


I wonder if this will become a tactic teams may try to do now. Knowing it won't be a penalty but could stop a goal being allowed against them.
 
Last edited:
GraemeS said:
There was a fairly awful advantage not long before the second goal too though. Fairly typical "PL advantage", but a great example of why possession =/= advantage is taught down the pyramid - Liverpool advantage that leads to them giving up an unmarked shot 5 seconds later isn't great!
Click to expand...
I remarked that safe (and arguably correct) refereeing would be to award the FK after the misplaced pass, I actually expected it
 
george.g said:
I remarked that safe (and arguably correct) refereeing would be to award the FK after the misplaced pass, I actually expected it
Click to expand...
Debatable at best. Going back is not meant to happen when a team fluffs the advantage. (But I agree that too often we get advantage played for mere possession that isn’t close to an actual advantage p, but seems common at high levels, especially the PL.)
 
In law I’m guessing we can’t (for the ruled out goal):

- play advantage for the push (soft I know), award the goal
Or
- play advantage for the push, pull it back because the offside offence (however unintentional), award a penalty

Feels like, as it stands, offside is the only call because the push isn’t enough to warrant a penalty even if it’s the reason Salah is offside.
 
I don't know what a "legal push" is? Yes it's soft and wouldn't be given normally, but if it was a "bigger push" then I think you could definitely disallow and give the penalty. And you could still justify doing it here in law, even if a penalty for that in isolation would be a surprise.

I do wonder if the push should have been shown to the referee as part of the process? Football doesn't seem to do well with mitigation (see Jones being pulled/fouled before his red card tackle) and while a real fix would take law changes, requiring preceeding pushes/pulls to be included in any subjective VAR decision would be an easy interim improvement.
 
GraemeS said:
I don't know what a "legal push" is?
Click to expand...
That can’t theoretically exist, not while Law 12 make clear that it’s an offence to push a player.

In spite of that, if every push was illegal, I would spent a lot of time counting out 9.15M, and have to start listening to those “in the back” shouts, and that would be the death of me
 
george.g said:
That can’t theoretically exist, not while Law 12 make clear that it’s an offence to push a player.

In spite of that, if every push was illegal, I would spent a lot of time counting out 9.15M, and have to start listening to those “in the back” shouts, and that would be the death of me
Click to expand...
And where does law 12 make it clear that it's an offence to push a player?

It still has to be CRUEF before it's an offence so, technically speaking, there is wiggle room for a "legal push."
 
It doesn't, I've just realised.

In my head it was one of the 7, but given that it's not, I'd agree there's an argument for a push to be legal. It just depends if you decide a push has become careless.

Whoops...

Good job I don't quote that to players on a Saturday aye
 
Salah is pushed in the penalty area, thus making him offside, thus meaning the goal is disallowed.

Therefore, if Salah had not been pushed, Liverpool would have had an obvious goal scoring opportunity , therefore the push denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity. The push was not an attempt to play the ball.

Therefore, the outcome should be a penalty and a red car for the player who pushed.

Not my original thinking, something I saw, somewhat tongue in cheek, online, but quite a compelling argument.
 
Or did Salah impede progress of opponent? 😏 (Also tongue in cheek)

Honestly, I don't think you can find a happy medium here.

Nobody (really) wants a penalty given for that (unless you are a Liverpool fan, but even then I would ask you to think about what your expectation would be in your own box).
You can't allow the goal, because law 10 specifically says a goal can't be awarded if the attacking team commit an offence.
It's the right decision but one which football will always find it difficult to accept. One which, common sense, if allowed, would say let the goal stand.
 
Last edited:
I’ve never really thought careless “worked” for pushing. What, he carefully pushed the opponent? I think it is more useful to think of pushing through the lens of trifling—a lot of pushing doesn’t have any meaningful impact on the opponent. YMMV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top