No More Harry - Premier League 2020/21

[Ray de Galles]

I'm not suggesting it had any bearing on the goal - I didn't watch the game and am only looking at photos - but doesn't Allison's kit clash with Albion's?

I wouldn't say so ;

[Jah Womble]

What's that in reaction too?

I only saw the final ten minutes, though clearly that included the highlight of the match.

Wish I knew what that meant.

The finale was quite something - I’d not be so churlish as to deny that - but even Liverpool fans (well, some of them) are admitting they got a bit lucky this afternoon.

Edit: Okay, I’m there now - it was the misspelt ‘too’ that threw me. It was the disallowed WBA goal on top of what looked a clear infringement ahead of Salah’s equaliser. Check it out on MOTD.

[Felicity, I guess so]

If its the only way to deny Chelsea so be it

[Jah Womble]

Well, I’ve no issue with that obviously, but a Liverpool defeat (or draw) could - and I stress ‘could’ - have helped my lot, and by extension West Ham and Everton. (Although the latter made a total pudding of their home match with the Blades anyway.)

[Ray de Galles]

Wish I knew what that meant.

The finale was quite something - I’d not be so churlish as to deny that - but even Liverpool fans (well, some of them) are admitting they got a bit lucky this afternoon.

Edit: Okay, I’m there now - it was the misspelt ‘too’ that threw me. It was the disallowed WBA goal on top of what looked a clear infringement ahead of Salah’s equaliser. Check it out on MOTD.

Apologies, I seem to have an increasing homophone problem as I age. It genuinely worries me that it might be an early sign of something ominous.

[Satchmo Distel]

Chelsea finishing 5th and then losing the CL final would be glorious but we need Leicester to beat them on Tuesday first. Liverpool pipping Leicester on GD would be fucking horrendous based on how badly Liverpool have played since Xmas.

[hobbes]

Well, I’ve no issue with that obviously, but a Liverpool defeat (or draw) could - and I stress ‘could’ - have helped my lot, and by extension West Ham and Everton. (Although the latter made a total pudding of their home match with the Blades anyway.)

Nice to get a bit of good luck this season.

[Uncle Ethan]

There are still six teams that can finish 6th or 7th, from Liverpool down to Leeds (Chelsea could also still finish 6th, I think), but there's a caveat as to whether the players can be arsed about those competitions once Top 4 is mathematically impossible.

Liverpool fans will moan about Man U v Leicester for years/decades/millenia. They can fuck off, obviously.

Agreed it's a disgrace that EPL gets 8 days more life and attention than the Cup.

Especially in light of all the recent posturing about protecting national competitions from rapacious alternatives.

[Jah Womble]

Apologies, I seem to have an increasing homophone problem as I age. It genuinely worries me that it might be an early sign of something ominous.

Sign of a highly active mind. I shouldn't worry unduly.

Nice to get a bit of good luck this season.

You've had a lovely 2-3 years...

[Satchmo Distel]

As with all the bigger sides, Liverpool still get free kicks and penalties for their forwards falling over and do loads of unnoticed shirt-pulling in the box and tactical fouling in midfield. If they have been gettting fewer such free kicks and penalties this season, it's because they have been creating far less and what they do create is executed more slowly.

[Jah Womble]

As with all the bigger sides, Liverpool still get free kicks and penalties for their forwards falling over and do loads of unnoticed shirt-pulling in the box and tactical fouling in midfield.

No, no - you don't understand! That is what others do to Liverpool!

[Mr Cogito]

What's with the refs going past time to allow the corner to be taken, or the attack to peter out, or even just to wait until the goal kick is taken so they can blow when the ball is in the air? When did that become a thing? Not that they have to go the full Clive, but it's just plain wrong.

[ursus arctos]

The displayed "time added on for stoppages" is not, and has never been, a fixed maximum.

It is rather a minimum, and one that is first subject to the fact that the actual time may well not be an integral number of minutes (4 min 20 would be shown as 4) and that the referee retains absolute discretion in extending the time if s/he deems it necessary.

[Mr Cogito]

Yes, true, but that's always been the case, as you say. There's something else been going on the last couple of years that seems to be promoting "excitement" at the expense of "accuracy".

Or fairness?

[ursus arctos]

Under the current regime there is no way to determine "accuracy" because the time intended is never communicated to anyone outside the officiating team.

[Mr Cogito]

I think determining "accuracy" is my own experience of watching football and observing when they are likely to blow the whistle - which is, anecdotally of course, now always based on the how the passage of play is developing, and in a way it never used to be. Depending on how close or dead the match is, etc.

[ursus arctos]

I don't watch enough English football to have perceived such a change, but it is perfectly possible that one is taking place, I just don't think "accuracy" is a particularly good way to couch it.

The more flexible approach you describe has been common on the continent for years.

[Sporting]

Under the current regime there is no way to determine "accuracy" because the time intended is never communicated to anyone outside the officiating team.

Surely the board held up with time added on?

However, refs have degression beyond this, I believe. Similar to a teacher not having to end a class just because the bell goes.

[caja-dglh]

The board goes up based on the sideline time keeping by the fourth official. The ref who has the whistle can differ in opinion.

[ursus arctos]

And the board is rounded to the nearest full minute.

[Simon G]

What's with the refs going past time to allow the corner to be taken, or the attack to peter out, or even just to wait until the goal kick is taken so they can blow when the ball is in the air? When did that become a thing? Not that they have to go the full Clive, but it's just plain wrong.

I don't know for certain, but it was always my understanding that the ball must be "in-play" when the final whistle goes. Now, to contradict myself, I've also seen a final whistle blown on multiple occasions when the ball is out of play, but I've always believed the opening part of my post to be why they let goal kicks get taken.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

I've never understood why "added time" is extended for things that happen in added time like injuries, but not for goals. I thought the ref had to add on an additional minute for when a goal was scored, and players were fannying about celebrating it, etc. But if (like with Alisson yesterday) a team scores with (as the commentators love to say) "literally the last touch of the game" why is there not a further, and subsequent, minute added on?

[Mr Cogito]

If the goal is scored with last kick, when the ref's flexible determination of time is up, then any fanning about after the goal, celebrating ,is after the match has finished - nothing to add on. And re Simon G's point, the game's up when it's up, regardless of where the ball is, according to the laws. And I don't disagree with anything Ursus has said about the referees flexibility. I'm just saying that on top of all that, there's a new convention that you allow corners etc to be taken or an attack to play out. Or even, as a minor part of that convention, that you wait until the ball is in play before blowing the whistle.

Fair enough, there are laws, and then interpretations, I just don't like this one. And I do think it is a very English Premier League thing, and part of their ongoing bullshit about being the most watchable league with the best referees yada yada *yawn*.

I have absolutely no doubt that it's a thing, and fairly new one too. You can't tell from any individual game - who knows how long the ref was planning to add before the Liverpool corner in that particular game - but watching game after game you can see it happening, from when it doesn't (dead matches with 2 goal differences etc) to when it does.

And it's definitely not an issue of ref bias. It is applied regardless of the importance of the match, our who it might be favouring. I have no doubt whatsoever that if it had been up at the other end, the ref would have done the same.

[hobbes]

No, no - you don't understand! That is what others do to Liverpool!

You know he was probably talking about Spurs too? Unless you don't consider them "one of the bigger sides?"

[Satchmo Distel]

What's with the refs going past time to allow the corner to be taken, or the attack to peter out, or even just to wait until the goal kick is taken so they can blow when the ball is in the air? When did that become a thing? Not that they have to go the full Clive, but it's just plain wrong.

Clive Thomas of course famously blew for time when a corner was coming in during the 1978 World Cup, costing Brazil, and the stick he got for that might have reiterated that he'd broken a norm.