Juliuss01:


Did Man City scores and the goal was cancelled?, Or you mean Man city can no longer win in Anfiled without penalties or red card ?.

Wait even Pep Guardiola was scared of Anfiled , playing mind game with Sadio Mane over diving, his words ahead of the match made him susceptible.

It will be unfair to Liverpool if the Bernardo silver's hand ball should should be overlooked and then punished Trent for his own.

I have said it ahead of this season that Man city will suffer in the hand of VAR because of the pattern of their game. They escaped many error last season where the ref favoured them, from off side goals to red cards and penalties. Hence they wouldn't have won the league last Season.

They would have won Tottenham Hotspur in champion's league last season when they were running up and down and scored off side goals , it was VAR that recalled and cancelled the goal, otherwise their pattern would have overshadowed the ref.

Then again we could say why the so much noise on the Liverpool - Man City match .... It happens to everyone, it was Liverpool previous week and it was Man City last week.


Liverpool had an hand ball with Aston Villa not taken and a goal ridiculously disallowed nobody made noise.

Manchester United fouled Origi and the ref did not respond to it, hence Manchester United scored , does anyone sees that ?.

Meanwhile, Bernardo silver's goal should have been cancelled too, because there was a foul before the ball was passed to him, but the ref chose to neglect it so what's the sympathy for Man City all about or just bad belle for Liverpool.

lexy2014:


How can u c a person move his arm, understand y and how he moved his arm in a still picture?

izzou:


It was because of difficult decisions that VAR was introduced

But in a match, the referee is totally in charge of a match. And yes, he can use his discretion. That's why a referee can penalize a striker for diving, even when there was a contact

If Sterling had pinned the ball on his leg, raised it up and placed it on a defender's arm, would you as a referee give a penalty? The answer is no.

D4Daymoo:


This assertion is wrong and wrongly interpreted. Define ricochet and it is justified to say it is to Silva and then not, to Trent

TheGoodJoe:


He moved his arm because he was trying to break Dance.

SmartyPants:




1. The ball hit the city player's hand but it was not a handball. the rules are clear:

"Premier League players will be allowed extra leeway when it comes to ricocheted handballs.

It is often impossible to avoid contact with the ball if it has deflected off the body of an opponent, team-mate, or even another part of the own player.

So a handball will not be awarded if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/nearby."

Ball clearly ricochets of Lovren onto Silva's arm. That is not a handball by the rules.

Then in the same passage of play, the ball is played onto Arnold's outstretched arm. here is what the rules have to say about that:

"If the ball hits a player who has made their body "unnaturally bigger" then a foul will be awarded."

by having his hand outstretched, he certainly made his body bigger. the ref has defended this by saying he didn't think it was intentional, but the intention is not the appropriate test. unnatural positioning is, and going by that, that was a clear penalty.

2. I didn' t see the second one but by narration, it should have been a penalty.

lexy2014:


U are making a very baseless argument based on just two pictures that u can't even defend. If u had used motion picture or video as d basis of ur argument, am sure u would have made a point. But to use just 2 pictures, guy u have nothing to say

niaralandtopuser:
if it hit Silva hands then the right decision would have been to return the ball for a handball against mancity. The rules are clear but English ref love to behave the way it suit them

TheGoodJoe:


Clap for yourself.

TheGoodJoe:
Neil Swarbrick, the man whose job it is to oversee the implementation of VAR in the Premier League claimed it was the correct decision.

Speaking on BBC Five Live, he said: “That’s the subjective part – was it in an unnatural place? When you look at it, at no point does Trent Alexander-Arnold’s arm move towards the ball.

“His body posture … his arm is there. His arm has got to be somewhere. His arm is slightly away from his body but that is a neutral, natural position for his stance at that moment in time.

“The ball came from a short distance at pace, and just happened to hit that arm. He didn’t move the arm towards the ball, it just hit the arm.

“Michael Oliver has seen that clearly. That’s what he explained. He said ‘I know it’s hit the arm, but there is no arm movement, it’s come at short distance, I’m comfortable that that’s not deliberate handball’.

“It has to be deliberate in the penalty area to give a penalty. It’s different to scoring a goal, where it can be accidental. To give a penalty it’s got to be deliberate.

“Michael deemed it not to be deliberate. The VAR has looked at that, listened to what Michael said, and it absolutely married up.”

Except that is simply not true.

Not only that, Swarbrick, Oliver and the VAR all failed to see it, which questions either their eyesight or their integrity – take your pick.

Swarbrick also failed to mention the actual letter of the law.

He said it was about whether the arm was “in an unnatural place”.

The law actually states: “It is usually an offence if a player: touches the ball with their hand/arm when: the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger” or when the arm is raised above the head.

From being by his side, Alexander-Arnold’s arm indisputably rises and moves away from his body, therefore making his body “unnaturally bigger”.

VAR has been an unmitigated disaster. And with officials refusing to admit huge errors, and do something about them, it will continue to be so.



By the time the ball reaches Alexander-Arnold and strikes him, his arm has risen to a 45-degree angle





https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/var-liverpool-handball-alexander-arnold-17242608

TheGoodJoe:


You are just evading the truth. The above article clearly highlights the corrupt decision and lies made by the EPL officials.

The VAR officials knew it was a penalty and clearly denied City it. This is why I like VAR, now we know the agenda is clear.

izzou:


Deliberate? Do you know the meaning of Deliberate?

I have explained my stance on the matter. Oliver could have given the penalty and it will be fine. But when that stunt is pulled on your own defender, hope you don't cry.

I'm done repeating myself.

TheGoodJoe:


What are you saying?

The pictures showed his hand moved towards where it should not be going.

That shows it was deliberate.

Finito.

TheGoodJoe:


It was a penalty because Arnold Alexander had time to remove his hand and made his himself bigger with his arm. Finally moved his arm to the ball. Blatant penalty.

Finito.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTreCQCmBx0

majamajic:
on the build up , it was man city player that first hit the ball with his arm , before it gets to the Liverpool player

djoe21:


The article highlighted nothing!

How was it a penalty when the ball actually came off the hand of B. Silva before hitting Arnold on his arm? Are you sure you are not just angry that Liverpool won?

TheGoodJoe:


I do not really visit there. I have been a city fan since 2010 and I have seen and known the agenda is real.

Notatribalist:
is that the excuse now? So why are they calling for penalty to be awarded to city? And what if city had gone ahead to score after the ball hit Silva's hand? Football is 50/50 thing, sometimes it goes for you and some other time it goes against you. No need flogging a dead horse.

majamajic:
on the build up , it was man city player that first hit the ball with his arm , before it gets to the Liverpool player

Kulas:


Keep quiet and learn to stand with truthno matter whose ox is gored

ajl:
Someone must be a crook to think that the referee should award a penalty for that. First, the liverpool player left hand was to his left-side extended in natural downward direction and was not extended outward deliberately or accidentally to obstruct the ball .

segzy3:
that is not a justification for denying city,he could have just blown for a free kick when it hit Bernardo hand

majamajic:
on the build up , it was man city player that first hit the ball with his arm , before it gets to the Liverpool player