Anthony Gordon

[Hafnia]

2 hours ago, Bailey said:

It wasn't a booking because two players can come together and it not be a foul and not be a dive.

The ref doesn't refer anything to VAR. VAR steps in when there has been a clear and obvious error (at least that is now I understand it). It wasn't clear and obvious IMO and I can see why it wasn't given. On the other hand, if it was given, there also wouldn't be enough to overturn it either. It is a bit like an umpires call on the cricket.

I can see both arguments and as I said before, I wish more of these type of fouls weren't given generally because IMO it ruins the game.

Are you suggesting that a defender be allowed to get behind a player and instigate “accidental” coming togethers?  Because that is exactly what happened…. Do you not recall the Tony Hibbert penalty and red card on Gerrard? Where the penno was not only given but a red card too? Hibbert was side to side and gerrrard threw his leg across.  That was contentious.

Gordon was ahead of matip, how was it not a foul? 

The ref can refer to var and absolutely should refer to var. most people in the game are incredulous that 1. Var never instigated the review 2.  If the ref never had a clear view then he should have reviewed it.

[Cornish Steve]

Discussions about VAR are always going to be a waste of time. Decisions are undoubtedly influenced by the biggest game sponsors, and they are betting companies with a vested interest in certain outcomes. Follow the money, as they say. Until the rot is removed, by banning all involvement by betting companies, the nonsense will continue and betting favourites will reap VAR rewards.

A number of teams might consider using whatever weight they have to call for a thorough and independent investigation into the influence of outside money on Premier League football.

[patto]

On 27/04/2022 at 09:24, FairWooney said:

He does go down quite a lot but he does also win quite a lot of fouls.

If your saying neither are getting given anything, Gordon has won 1 penalty and is the 11th most fouled player in the league.  Richarlison is the 3rd most fouled player in the league.

I don't however have any stats on how the number of times they are given a foul compares to the number of times they hit the deck!  (In Richarlison's case I imagine he probably goes down about 5 times per game whilst getting given 2.4 fouls per game.

 

--

I was undecided on a foul and I'd say it could have been a penalty but I'd be inclined to say not.

This is the a frame or 2 before Gordon has his "foot stood on".

Gordon has moved his foot across and infront of Matip, they are both already through a step here and Gordon's foot comes down underneath Matip's.  Clearly this only happens because Gordon has put his leg across as 2 right legs wouldn't naturally come together no matter how close you are running together. 

That's not me saying that he's necessarily deliberately played for the foul but it is a coming together that you can't fault the defender for.

Some would say from the image that he's "holding" Gordon and that he shoved him but I don't really see that, yeah he has his arm on him but no more than the average situation where 2 players are running.  He doesn't shove him, Gordon is going down as soon as he gets Matip's foot on his.  Matip may have given a bit of a push on the way as his arm came off Gordon but that was about it.

Would it have been given a foul in the middle of the pitch?  PROBABLY

Should it have been referred to VAR for a check?  DEFINITELY

The ref as you can see was in a good position but he can't see the angle that we are seeing so this is exactly the kind of thing that should go to VAR.  The ref can see close contact and a player going down in the box, doesn't think it's a pen but with a minute or two's check can be completely sure by seeing all angles.

I don't believe he would have given it after a VAR check but at least it would have been rightly considered.

Are you also WOKE I’m so glad you don’t ref our games the fact it’s now 46/47 games since Liverpool had a penalty given against them this is corruption at its best we had 1 corner the ref went over to see if the ball was in the quadrant I’ve never ever seen a ref do this why has he done this he never checked 1 of Liverpools 13 does this not make you think something is wrong with officials Atwell has been involved in a few decisions against us.  

[FairWooney]

38 minutes ago, patto said:

Are you also WOKE

LOL! 

I just try to look at things objectively rather than purely with my heart!

I don't disagree that bad decisions are made, that they'd have given it had it been at the other end of the pitch or that Liverpool and certain other teams get much more decisions than other teams but that doesn't mean that I can't look at our own decisions and objectively say that i'm not sure I'd have given it.

If I was the ref I'd have gone straight for VAR because it was clearly a close call that needed further inspection.  That's the whole point of having VAR.

[patto]

42 minutes ago, FairWooney said:

LOL! 

I just try to look at things objectively rather than purely with my heart!

I don't disagree that bad decisions are made, that they'd have given it had it been at the other end of the pitch or that Liverpool and certain other teams get much more decisions than other teams but that doesn't mean that I can't look at our own decisions and objectively say that i'm not sure I'd have given it.

If I was the ref I'd have gone straight for VAR because it was clearly a close call that needed further inspection.  That's the whole point of having VAR.

The whole point of VAR is it’s not working you can’t just use it when it suits and it’s wrong when some faceless bods decide who wins a 50/50 decision the whole system is corrupt. 

[StevO]

24 minutes ago, patto said:

The whole point of VAR is it’s not working you can’t just use it when it suits and it’s wrong when some faceless bods decide who wins a 50/50 decision the whole system is corrupt. 

Though I agree, they aren’t faceless. We know which ref is doing the VAR. But they are shit at refereeing on the pitch and shit at it in the VAR room. 

[Hafnia]

10 minutes ago, StevO said:

Though I agree, they aren’t faceless. We know which ref is doing the VAR. But they are shit at refereeing on the pitch and shit at it in the VAR room. 

But it’s no different to road rage….. they are protected by a shell (room in wherever it is) and their brain will make decisions that they otherwise would not do if faced with an immediate feedback. 
 

it wouldn’t take a great deal of work to automate var. var flags up an incident, the ref reviews. 
 

there should also be a challenge system in place where if var isn’t reviewing something the manager can instigate it. 2 per game. 

[Sibdane]

1 hour ago, Hafnia said:

But it’s no different to road rage….. they are protected by a shell (room in wherever it is) and their brain will make decisions that they otherwise would not do if faced with an immediate feedback. 
 

it wouldn’t take a great deal of work to automate var. var flags up an incident, the ref reviews. 
 

there should also be a challenge system in place where if var isn’t reviewing something the manager can instigate it. 2 per game. 

I’ve wondered how this would work in football before. In the NFL you get three challenges/game and lose a timeout if you’re wrong. Not sure what the penalty could be in the EPL scenario. 
 

I’m not exactly crazy about play reviews in football, but the EPL is really screwing up VAR. Like comically bad and obviously corrupt. 

[Palfy]

2 hours ago, Hafnia said:

But it’s no different to road rage….. they are protected by a shell (room in wherever it is) and their brain will make decisions that they otherwise would not do if faced with an immediate feedback. 
 

it wouldn’t take a great deal of work to automate var. var flags up an incident, the ref reviews. 
 

there should also be a challenge system in place where if var isn’t reviewing something the manager can instigate it. 2 per game. 

Like in cricket and tennis.  I’ve always maintained that VAR would be a problem and have always favoured on field refereeing decisions to stand, VAR has got things right and as also got things wrong, but my big problem is VAR is inconsistent when it comes to reviewing incidents which has made it not an even playing field. I would get rid of it instead they try to improve it but how do you improve something that is always going to rely on human input. 

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

1 hour ago, Palfy said:

Like in cricket and tennis.  I’ve always maintained that VAR would be a problem and have always favoured on field refereeing decisions to stand, VAR has got things right and as also got things wrong, but my big problem is VAR is inconsistent when it comes to reviewing incidents which has made it not an even playing field. I would get rid of it instead they try to improve it but how do you improve something that is always going to rely on human input. 

VAR is not the problem ,it’s the corrupt twats that are using( or in some cases not using )it that is the problem. I thought it was going to even the playing field but instead it has just become another tool to use to the advantage of the Sky6

I honestly think in years to come Panorama will do a program about the corruption in the Premier League. It sounds far fetched to think it really is rigged but how else do you explain all the bizarre decisions that went in favour of The Shite when they won the league during lockdown. It was good PR for the Premiership and so the powers that be made sure it happened

Likewise the Rodri handball at Goodison the other week. You can possibly understand the Ref getting it wrong in real-time, even though the officials were the only people in the ground that missed it, but how can anybody review that on camera with all the time in the world to analyse and digest what happened then come to any other decision than penalty ?

They are qualified Referees themselves so they know the rules, it’s extremely clear and obvious so the only conclusion I can honestly come up with is that they are corrupt

So I’ve now come full circle on it and want it abolished . Its probably all academic to us anyway given we will likely be in the Championship next season 

[Bailey]

On 27/04/2022 at 16:28, Hafnia said:

Are you suggesting that a defender be allowed to get behind a player and instigate “accidental” coming togethers?  Because that is exactly what happened…. Do you not recall the Tony Hibbert penalty and red card on Gerrard? Where the penno was not only given but a red card too? Hibbert was side to side and gerrrard threw his leg across.  That was contentious.

Gordon was ahead of matip, how was it not a foul? 

The ref can refer to var and absolutely should refer to var. most people in the game are incredulous that 1. Var never instigated the review 2.  If the ref never had a clear view then he should have reviewed it.

I am not sure the ref can refer to VAR. I think it works the other way around in that VAR review the game and then tell the ref if there is something to look into.

I think VAR only get involved if there is a clear and obvious error. Dont quote me on it but I have read anything official that says otherwise. I admit I havent looked that hard.

In terms of the foul, just because he is ahead of the defender it doesnt give him the right to instigate the contact and go down but in the same breath, if he is genuinly getting across the player and is brought down it is a foul.

IMO that is why it can be seen both ways. 

[Hafnia]

38 minutes ago, Bailey said:

I am not sure the ref can refer to VAR. I think it works the other way around in that VAR review the game and then tell the ref if there is something to look into.

I think VAR only get involved if there is a clear and obvious error. Dont quote me on it but I have read anything official that says otherwise. I admit I havent looked that hard.

In terms of the foul, just because he is ahead of the defender it doesnt give him the right to instigate the contact and go down but in the same breath, if he is genuinly getting across the player and is brought down it is a foul.

IMO that is why it can be seen both ways. 

No, the ref can absolutely instigate a var review.  This is the reason pundits are going mad, refs are doing nothing at times because they think var will make the decision that they don’t want to do. 
 

“For subjective decisions, either the referee informs the VAR that a decision should be reviewed or the VAR identifies a “clear and obvious error” in one of the four match-changing situations and communicates this to the referee.”

[SpartyBlue]

On 29/04/2022 at 15:54, Hafnia said:

No, the ref can absolutely instigate a var review.  This is the reason pundits are going mad, refs are doing nothing at times because they think var will make the decision that they don’t want to do. 
 

“For subjective decisions, either the referee informs the VAR that a decision should be reviewed or the VAR identifies a “clear and obvious error” in one of the four match-changing situations and communicates this to the referee.”

The issue, for me, is that the ref would have to question his own judgement to initiate a review. He would have to say “I’m not sure” or “I may have missed that.” How many people in general have that much humility, never mind a person paid for their judgement. 

[Hafnia]

9 hours ago, SpartyBlue said:

The issue, for me, is that the ref would have to question his own judgement to initiate a review. He would have to say “I’m not sure” or “I may have missed that.” How many people in general have that much humility, never mind a person paid for their judgement. 

The vast majority of Referees in the prem are absolute nob heads. Power hungry, arrogant and full of self importance. 

[Bailey]

On 29/04/2022 at 20:54, Hafnia said:

No, the ref can absolutely instigate a var review.  This is the reason pundits are going mad, refs are doing nothing at times because they think var will make the decision that they don’t want to do. 
 

“For subjective decisions, either the referee informs the VAR that a decision should be reviewed or the VAR identifies a “clear and obvious error” in one of the four match-changing situations and communicates this to the referee.”

Where did you get that from out of interest?

[Bailey]

1 minute ago, Bailey said:

Where did you get that from out of interest?

@Hafnia

Dont worry, just found it! Thanks for bringing it to my attention. 

Saying that though it still doesnt really change things. If VAR say its not a clear and obvious error the outcome shouldn't change.

Incidentally say two identical incidents outside the box this weekend. One involving a Man City player that went down when it wasn't given. Another one happened yesterday with Gordon when it was even more exagerated and it was given! 

[Shukes]

Personally for the good of football, I hope more incidents are turned down. I love football being a contact sport. 

[Hafnia]

39 minutes ago, Bailey said:

Where did you get that from out of interest?

Premier league website 

[Hafnia]

36 minutes ago, Bailey said:

@Hafnia

Dont worry, just found it! Thanks for bringing it to my attention. 

Saying that though it still doesnt really change things. If VAR say its not a clear and obvious error the outcome shouldn't change.

Incidentally say two identical incidents outside the box this weekend. One involving a Man City player that went down when it wasn't given. Another one happened yesterday with Gordon when it was even more exagerated and it was given! 

Define clear and obvious though? Another intangible  phrase that no ref understands 

Atwell from the var room instructed the ref to review the yellow card given to Allan vs Newcastle… that wasn’t a clear and obvious error.  Yet someone as anal as him who checked Gordon’s ball was in the corner markings didn’t think to check a penalty where going down was of no advantage?  Pathetic, absolutely pathetic and demonstrative of the piss weak personalities officiating games.  Piss weak cos they are trying to appease the glamour clubs. 
 

whichever at you try and paint this Bailey it’s gross mismanagement of a system that should be pretty much fool proof and in other countries and competitions it is…. So why isn’t it here? 
 

I would have thought that you would know the rules as to how var can and should be used especially when trying to make an argument that Gordon’s wasn’t a penalty when everyone else in football says it was. 

[Hafnia]

18 minutes ago, Shukes said:

Personally for the good of football, I hope more incidents are turned down. I love football being a contact sport. 

I love football being a fair sport so when it’s just us who get incidents turned down or ruled against us then I get pissed off.

tarkowski and shelvey should have walked on two fouls against our players yet Allan gets walked for a professional trip? 

[Bailey]

5 hours ago, Hafnia said:

Define clear and obvious though? Another intangible  phrase that no ref understands 

Atwell from the var room instructed the ref to review the yellow card given to Allan vs Newcastle… that wasn’t a clear and obvious error.  Yet someone as anal as him who checked Gordon’s ball was in the corner markings didn’t think to check a penalty where going down was of no advantage?  Pathetic, absolutely pathetic and demonstrative of the piss weak personalities officiating games.  Piss weak cos they are trying to appease the glamour clubs. 
 

whichever at you try and paint this Bailey it’s gross mismanagement of a system that should be pretty much fool proof and in other countries and competitions it is…. So why isn’t it here? 
 

I would have thought that you would know the rules as to how var can and should be used especially when trying to make an argument that Gordon’s wasn’t a penalty when everyone else in football says it was. 

Its a sport involving human beings that have different views on incidents. Other countries don't all get it right either. 

I don't like VAR and never have. I don't like the lack of transparency, I hate the rule changes that have come in because of it (handball and offsides in particular) and whichever way you cut it someone is still making a decision based on their own judgement albeit with more evidence. Sometimes that additional evidence isn't a good thing, like the Allan incident. In slow motion it looks much worse than it was.

I still think its a call that could have gone either way. It certainly wasn't nailed on IMO and Gordon clearly diving before wouldn't have helped with either official on a debateable call. 

[Heath]

I absolutely love Anthony Gordons' direct and pacy style of play, just hope he can start adding more goals to his game. 

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

https://twitter.com/england/status/1534308715477843974?s=21&t=c17wUJyd4-HZtywqZVAvMg

[Romey 1878]

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/everton-anthony-gordon-diving-pressure-24179389

[Romey 1878]

 

[Shukes]

Brilliant news, oh it’s no news…. Brilliant anyway.

I would also like to share a world breaking first as I’m ITK!

No one wants Gylfi and he will NOT be moving to Bayern this year.

[Shukes]

Kind of makes more sense now I’ve read the Richarlison thread hahaha!

[Goodison Glory]

read that Spurs valuation of Gordon was £40M

[c1982]

13 minutes ago, Goodison Glory said:

read that Spurs valuation of Gordon was £40M

Tbh on paper, purely stats, that’s a good price… BUT he’s almost priceless to us. We simply can’t sell in the way that West Ham state £150m for Rice and Villa managed to hold on to Grealish for so long - even Spurs with Kane.

[Wiggytop]

9 hours ago, Goodison Glory said:

read that Spurs valuation of Gordon was £40M

And Richy at £50m, proven over 4 season in the PL, Brazil’s no 9 and he’s valued at £10m over Gordon who’s had 1 decent season and is still very much learning his trade, it’s a joke how Spurs operate.

Anyhow, I want both to stay end of.