In his post-match press conference on Saturday, Liverpool boss Brendan Rodgers slammed referee Martin Atkinson for ruling out what appeared to be a perfectly fair goal. After being fouled by Bacary Sagna, Luis Suarez took a quick free kick, and the ball found it's way to Jordan Henderson (via Daniel Sturridge), who tapped it into the net. Rodgers labelled the decision 'poor' and 'disappointing', and ex-Reds Mark Wright and Ian St. John have joined the chorus of dissatisfaction over the decision.
Speaking to reporters after the game, Rodgers raged:
"It is disappointing, to be honest. I thought it was a poor decision because you have to let the game flow, but that was the reason he gave it. It was clever play (from us), and we got a goal from it."
Analysing the game on LFC TV, St. John slated refereeing standards in general, and noted that Atkinson took no action in the second half when the Reds took another very quick free kick. He observed:
"What's the difference between the two incidents?! Referees are not improving the game. With every game you watch, there are some shocking decisions, and this was a shocker"
Former Liverpool defender Mark Wright expressed similar outrage:
"The goal should’ve stood. I can’t believe the referee pulled it back. It’s our attack; Suarez gets rugby tackled to the floor, but he's very clever and puts the ball down, and Liverpool go on and score"
It appears that, within the letter of the law, Atkinson was technically correct to disallow the goal and bring back the play, and if that's the case, then Liverpool can have no complaints.
What if the roles were reversed? An Arsenal player gets fouled; they go on to score and the ref allows the goal. How would LFC fans react to that? I'm pretty sure many fans would be on Atkinson's back, arguing that he blew the whistle and the game should've been stopped...
Author: Jaimie K
Speaking to reporters after the game, Rodgers raged:
"It is disappointing, to be honest. I thought it was a poor decision because you have to let the game flow, but that was the reason he gave it. It was clever play (from us), and we got a goal from it."
Analysing the game on LFC TV, St. John slated refereeing standards in general, and noted that Atkinson took no action in the second half when the Reds took another very quick free kick. He observed:
"What's the difference between the two incidents?! Referees are not improving the game. With every game you watch, there are some shocking decisions, and this was a shocker"
Former Liverpool defender Mark Wright expressed similar outrage:
"The goal should’ve stood. I can’t believe the referee pulled it back. It’s our attack; Suarez gets rugby tackled to the floor, but he's very clever and puts the ball down, and Liverpool go on and score"
It appears that, within the letter of the law, Atkinson was technically correct to disallow the goal and bring back the play, and if that's the case, then Liverpool can have no complaints.
What if the roles were reversed? An Arsenal player gets fouled; they go on to score and the ref allows the goal. How would LFC fans react to that? I'm pretty sure many fans would be on Atkinson's back, arguing that he blew the whistle and the game should've been stopped...
customer surveys
Author: Jaimie K
0 Comments:
Post a Comment