GWT: Premier League Round 23

[Chimaera]

It was a foul, but it was soft.

Stones has to be stronger than that in the future, or he has to sell it by going down.

It's a tough call to make because it happens so quickly, and it doesn't look like the line judge was giving any help on it.

I'll be honest in saying that I rather the officials let them play a bit, and not call that, then blow his whistle every time a player topples over. It's certainly a hard choice.

While the foul was important in that goal, Firmino still had a ton to do, and his take on the chip was exquisite.

 

[Evilo]

Ridiculous to even argue about shoulder to the back being a foul.

No surprise however.

 

[hatterson]

I don't mind officials letting them play when that foul occurs in the middle of the field and doesn't create or stop a chance, but when it occurs 15-20 yards from goal and is clearly going to directly lead to a scoring chance, it needs to be whistled.

 

[YNWA14]

Ridiculous to even argue about shoulder to the back being a foul.

No surprise however.

No surprise however that you don't have any actual valid grounds to call it a foul other than that's your own judgment and some other peoples' judgment of the situation. When in reality, and by the law of the game, it was deemed not a foul. Could you show me in the rulebook where it says that what Firmino did was a foul? This kind of situation happens all-the-time and isn't called. People are overly focused on it though because it resulted in a goal (a beautiful one at that).

People forget that Soccer isn't a no contact sport, and that while shoulder to shoulder contact is generally what people view as something that is legal it's not actually in the rulebook, and it is always up to the ref's discretion what they deem to be excessive force/reckless regardless of how the contact occurs (shoulder to shoulder can also be a foul, btw).

So yeah, it was deemed correctly not a foul. You might think it was one, but it wasn't and it was judged not to be.

 

[Evilo]

Stop turning the tables around.

You're the only one here defending an unsustainable point once again, and only and absolutely only because it favored your team.

That doesn't take away anything from Firmino's shot, but it should have been whistled, period.

 

[YNWA14]

How am I turning the tables around? I provided my view on it, and backed it up with the laws of the game. You simply say it's ridiculous because your opinion is that it should have been blown. I'm asking for some kind of reasoning beyond your opinion that it was a foul and you're telling me that I'm 'turning the tables around'.

Have I ever called for something like that as a foul when it was against my team before? I'm fairly sure that I've asked for the players on Liverpool (specifically Matip) to be stronger on the ball when they've been pushed around in a similar fashion because of the rules and how open it is for the ref's discretion. I've seen many Liverpool players pushed around in the box in a similar fashion and when any of them go down I'm fairly sure the overall sentiment on here was that they need to be stronger and that it wasn't a foul (specifically players like Coutinho and Moreno who got outmuscled often, and I can think of even one recent even between Coutinho/Hazard where everyone claimed it was a dive even though there was contact and I was not calling for a foul). It seems to flip flop based on preference/bias but that's not surprising.

 

[hersky77]

I don't mind officials letting them play when that foul occurs in the middle of the field and doesn't create or stop a chance, but when it occurs 15-20 yards from goal and is clearly going to directly lead to a scoring chance, it needs to be whistled.

It would have been a very harsh foul to give, in the moment especially given the magnitude of the game. Was it a foul, most likely, but sometimes the officials just need to let them play, and thats what he did.

And its not like bobby had a clear path to goal, he had to chip it over ederson to even have a chance at goal.

 

[Evilo]

You haven't backed it up with anything.
Really. Read what you wrote again.

Anyone who's played football for at least a year in children categories knows a shoulder to the back is a foul. There's just no way around it.
Maybe the ref thought it was shoulder to shoulder, and then he simply made a mistake. At no point a ref would let a play like this go if he knows it's shoulder to back.

 

[bluesfan94]

Can someone post a gif/video of it?

 

[Epictetus]

Can someone post a gif/video of it?

Clippit

Personally, I think it was borderline. Unfortunately, with the way the game is, Stones probably needed to go down to fully convince the ref of the foul.

 

[YNWA14]

You know how much of a foul it is when not a single player on the city team was calling for one.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

You know how much of a foul it is when not a single player on the city team was calling for one.

Walker clearly raises his hands asking for a call...

 

[YNWA14]

Walker clearly raises his hands asking for a call...

He raises one arm then keeps running. Looks more like what they would do for an offside call.

Not a single one of them argues it, or tries to approach the ref over the play. In situations like that when a goal results and players feel like there was a foul normally they'd all be furious at the ref and swarming him.

But eh...whatever. If people want to believe it was a foul or are really that upset over it so be it. None of the players on the field, nor the managers addressed it at all (that I've seen) so I think that speaks for itself.

Ask The Ref: Firmino did not foul Stones

But eh, at least some of the ESPN broadcasters agree with you, but the actual ref.....

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

He definitely not asking for an offside...I checked for that. As soon as Bobby makes contact with Stones, Walker raises his hands. You're right though people will see what they wanna see.

 

[YNWA14]

Yeah, the retired PL ref and General Manager of the Professional Refereeing Association in NA is probably just a massive Liverpool fan too, and is completely biased. Rules of the game be damned.

Also I didn't say he was calling for offside -- I was just saying it wasn't much of a call for a foul.

 

[Evilo]

Who talked about a conspiration exactly?

 

[bluesfan94]

I think it could have been called either way. Nothing too odd there

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Yeah, the retired PL ref and General Manager of the Professional Refereeing Association in NA is probably just a massive Liverpool fan too, and is completely biased. Rules of the game be damned.

Also I didn't say he was calling for offside -- I was just saying it wasn't much of a call for a foul.

first it was "no city called for a foul" then it wasn't much of a call.... it was certainly a call for a foul. He carried on playing because there was no whistle.

 

[VEGASKING]

I watch espn fc every day and Peter Walton is terrible on the ask the ref segment. No matter how bad the call he always sides with the decision the ref made.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I think it could have been called either way. Nothing too odd there

Agreed.

 

[The Abusement Park]

Meh it’s not that egregious of a non call. Definitely a shoulder to the back but I’d rather see stuff like that go. Just seems like it’d be a weak call if they blew the play dead there