• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

***OMT TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR vs Liverpool***

glasgowspur said:
Thats not a sending off for city, keeper is covering ffs.
He's obviously been told he's made a clam of that and didn't want to stick his neck out again.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you're being ironic.
It's a clear red card. Denying a goal scoring opportunity with no intent to play the ball.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
The fist issue is Robertson’s time to pass… royal has to be much much closer.
Dier IMO positions himself based on where his wing back is. Davies actually marks a man which is ultimately his job. No one form midfield tracks anyone and what you stills don’t show is bissouma walking before realising brick I need to run and bentacur being way behind the play
Click to expand...
Which is why Skipp has to play, and always makes our defence look better.
 
Watching the game back
Kane in the first half was everywhere but CF
Second half the opposite
Felt like the same midweek
Anyone else notice it?
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Watching the game back
Kane in the first half was everywhere but CF
Second half the opposite
Felt like the same midweek
Anyone else notice it?
Click to expand...
It is because of our position on the pitch. In the first half when we're really, really deep and on the back foot he has to come back to get the ball. When we're playing higher up and on the front foot he can play in a standard CF position without there being a HUGE chasm between him and our midfield.
 
Kandi1977 said:
I'm guessing you're being ironic.
It's a clear red card. Denying a goal scoring opportunity with no intent to play the ball.
Click to expand...
I have only seen it on my phone, and not even full screen, but i was thinking more about the double jeopardy rule. Seems that rule has been changed.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Watching the game back
Kane in the first half was everywhere but CF
Second half the opposite
Felt like the same midweek
Anyone else notice it?
Click to expand...

Didn't watch the opening hour of the game, but may very well be a pattern there.

As Finney points out it's probably connected to us playing deeper or mor advanced. I also think Kulusevski makes a difference. He's a really good link player between the middle and final third, taking some of that responsibility off Kane allowing Kane to spend more time around the box and drop deep more selectively.

I think that also makes Kane harder to defend against, both having another target for the link moves, but him becoming less predictable as he's not deep as often.
 
glasgowspur said:
I have only seen it on my phone, and not even full screen, but i was thinking more about the double jeopardy rule. Seems that rule has been changed.
Click to expand...
That's only if you genuinely try to play the ball, and in a position to actually win the ball. Just taking out a player with no chance of getting the ball, it's a penalty and red card if the player was denied a goal scoring opportunity.
 
Finney Is Back said:
It is because of our position on the pitch. In the first half when we're really, really deep and on the back foot he has to come back to get the ball. When we're playing higher up and on the front foot he can play in a standard CF position without there being a HUGE chasm between him and our midfield.
Click to expand...
I’d agree but even when we had the ball first half he was never playing CF
 
glasgowspur said:
Misses out peh getting passed around in midfield by salah and then jogging back as salah, firmino and Robertson all run past him. If tracks salah none of that happens.
Click to expand...
yeah his recovery to defensive position is often slow. he takes his time. grumbles, points at his boot etc. with little concern that we are under attack at times.
 
DeanoAustin said:
In the stadium, I was certain it was a push. Saw it on Twitter afterwards, I knew I was proven right. Then listened to commentary and Neville, if I caught it right, said "TAA hasn't done enough there to warrant a penalty". I was shocked. Now here's the bit I do not understand.

If a player feels even the slightest touch on his foot or ankle, you hear "well there was contact so that's a pen" or "he's entitled to go down if he feels a touch".

It is beyond any doubt that there was contact from TAA yesterday and he was absolutely nowhere near the ball. It also wasn't a shoulder, he's shoved Sess in the back. How is that any different and why then is there a question mark over whether or not it was a pen? I heard someone say that Sess went down easy...he's travelling at pace and got shoved in the back. I'm absolutely gobsmacked it wasn't a pen - that happens outside the box and it's a free kick without any question or debate.
Click to expand...
Like what happened in the 2nd half from Trent on Sess and that was given as a foul, if anything it was less contact than the pen
It was clear that the officials were told to favour Pool, can't have them out of the CL places before Xmas !!
 
So now the dust has settled somewhat, a question to those who watched it live or on TV:

Was the final scoreline fair?
If not, being fair and honest, what should it have been?
 
glorygloryeze said:
So now the dust has settled somewhat, a question to those who watched it live or on TV:

Was the final scoreline fair?
If not, being fair and honest, what should it have been?
Click to expand...
We should have won 2-1
They got an incredibly soft goal and diers mistake was unforced and very poor
We were denied a stonewall penalty and arguably another one for a kick on mouras head
They rarely threatened in reality and we’re spanking shots on sight
They reminded me of Poch team when he left … tired and laboured going through the motions.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
We should have won 2-1
They got an incredibly soft goal and diers mistake was unforced and very poor
We were denied a stonewall penalty and arguably another one for a kick on mouras head
They rarely threatened in reality and we’re spanking shots on sight
They reminded me of Poch team when he left … tired and laboured going through the motions.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks. So you think they are heading downwards overall? Did Nunez look good (aside from what i read is an assist)?
 
glorygloryeze said:
So now the dust has settled somewhat, a question to those who watched it live or on TV:

Was the final scoreline fair?
If not, being fair and honest, what should it have been?
Click to expand...

2-2 for me (Clive), I thought Liverpool were good in the first half, they moved the ball quickly and we looked sluggish most of the time. At half time I thought we were heading for something like 0-4. Genuinely impressed by our transformation from the start of the second half (even without any personnel changes!!). Once Kane scored I was convinced we’d at least equalise and probably should have especially with Lenglet’s header.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Nunez looked like Andy Carroll
His play is very similar
He shoots in sight and doesn’t pass when a pass is the better option
Click to expand...
After he took a heavy touch and the ball ran out for a goal kick Lee Dixon said ‘he was unlucky, he ran out of space’. Typical of the pro LiVARpool bias.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back