Going slightly off topic, I've been wondering why the name Pawson rang a bell. I think he was the ref involved in an incident at home to Manchester United a few years ago. Townsend was bursting forward in the clear when Rojo came charging across and simply barged Townsend over, with no pretence of playing the ball. Pawson saw nothing wrong but the TV commentators slated him. Just a few days later Pawson was reffing another match, and, apparently conscious of his recent criticism, dished out a yellow for a perfectly legal tackle! So perhaps Mr Friend will be conscious that he owes us one.

I thought VAR was supposed to over turn clear and obvious errors?

Nothing clear or obvious about that penalty apart from Jota deviating to run into our keeper.

One more point

What sticks out for me is Klopp can forget all that bonhomie he delivers in abundance to his opponents. He supported this penalty decision, and still does apparently, so if he is the great guy he thinks he is he could say something like, 'yeah that was a bad decision but obviously it has helped our cause'.

Or maybe he congratulated Jota in the dressing room for being 'smart/really clever'.

I have not read all the comments but from what I have read elsewhere I reckon 98% of the comments from Liverpool fans (including one representing a Liverpool pub full of Reds) agree it was not a penalty. My scouser mate I watched the match with said the decision was "Appalling!"
I agree too about their second goal. I remember a few years back a great Palace goal at White Hart Lane was disallowed as Townsend (??) was interfering with play albeit he was 5 or 6 yards behind the goalkeeper !!

It is not the first crazy anti Palace decision from Friend and it won't be the last. Friend? I do not think so!!

Always remembering walking from the Holmesdale to the Whitehorse end at half time!

And never mention Heysel for gawks sake. Nothing to do with their fans that day either

Firstly, let's be clear - the penalty decision robbed us of what very small chance remained of atoning for yet more s*** Palace defending against a set-piece and a cross in the air. Liverpool had us chasing shadows for the first half an hour, but that's exactly when we most need to hang on in the game and avoid poor defensive mistakes. We didn't.

For the first goal, Schlupp is marking Fabinho but leaves him late to run with Van Dyke, thereby blocking what small chance Andersen had of tracking the Dutchman. For the second, our midfield shape is so bad that Andersen gets dragged over to meet Robertson, leaving Jota in oceans of space, and pulling both Guehi and Mitchell over into a fragile 2v3 behind him.

Even if we somehow overlook the poor quality of our finishing we have to mull over the poor defending when analysing the defeat. I'm sure our manager will be looking at both issues far more than the officiating, whatever he says in public.

Turning to the decisions nonetheless: VAR itself is neither good nor bad for the game really, it's all about how it is used. Also, remember that we have had our fair share of gifts from VAR, including unreal decisions away at United and Arsenal, so let's not tell ourselves a tale of bias against the little guy here. We are dealing with incredibly poor decisions and inconsistent processes, but not bias.

The argument that offside should be given against Firmino is not conclusive, but what I am amazed by is that VAR didn't seem to look at it even once. Compare this to the twenty replays they poured over for the penalty decision. The on-field ref gave nothing both times, so why the vast difference in VAR approach?

Regarding the penalty, it all comes down to a sensible understanding of what a foul is, and what cheating is. At the start of this season, the league said they would avoid giving soft free-kicks for minimal contacts, and would also stop being overly forensic with VAR replays.

For the first few months that worked so well that Klopp and Solskjaer were moaning about their precious babies being roughed up, and the leagues forward players seemed to be spending a bit more time playing the game and bit less time falling over. The tempo and flow of games became noticeably better once it became more about actually playing, and less about 'winning' decisions.

Now it's lapsed back towards last season: A soul-destroying clipboard full of technicalities rather than a football match.

For me, if you can't see the offence with the naked eye and at normal speed then the margin for human error has not been breached. The normal speed aspect is critical - all pundits agree that slow-motion makes any contact look worse, but what they neglect to mention is that it's only when watching play at normal speed that one can fully appreciate the change of direction and momentum that the nations leading s***houses employ when jumping away from the path of the ball and into a nearby defender, thereby initiating the 'foul' they benefit from. Kane has done it for years, Jota did it on Sunday. Wilf and Ayew have their moments, albeit in a slightly different style.

Many footballers will play as far beyond the letter and spirit of the laws of the game as they are allowed to. These are highly competitive animals under far greater pressure to win than to play honestly, and we are all to blame for that. What I find increasingly difficult to understand is how VAR officials (who referee live games too don't forget), somehow fail to consider the tricks that modern forwards call upon the moment a slow-motion replay switches on.

Baffling, alienating nonsense that pushes me further away from professional football and further towards watching the non-league game instead.

Edited by TheBigToePunt (26 Jan 2022 10.49am)