Liverpool v Aston Villa Post-Match Thread

[Damo70]

I'm sure all these people who appear to be racially abusing Stan Collymore only mean it in a 'matey' way. Just as Suarez did.

[danlanza]

I have to say dive or no dive it was still a penalty, the contact was so minimal but there was some.

Sorry Ian J but reading monumental bollocks like that like makes me despair for the human race,  to want to turn my back on football and kill small furry animals. I'll try and speak loudly and slowly so you understand:

IT'S A FUCKING CONTACT SPORT AND MINIMAL CONTACT DOES NOT= A FOUL.  Geddit? 
IF IT'S A DIVE IT CAN'T POSSIBLY BE A FOUL - they are mutually exclusive, although I sincerely doubt you would know what that means.

Spot on that. I also like Legions picture, says it all. Cheating fucker Suarez.

[onje_villa]

No, I've seen plenty of people who genuinely feel that it was a penalty. Like I said, I'm undecided but at worst it's a soft decision, there is no conclusive evidence one way or the other (no, not even that Vine...).

And what about Bacuna, was that cheating? Anyway, I'm taking Devil's advocate to the extreme here as I don't especially like the bloke but I think we're overdoing the victim thing here a bit

Again, the incident with Bacuna is irrelevant to the discussion about the penalty. One incident doesn't impact on the other.

OK but we're not talking about it in any great depth though are we?

[danlanza]

I'm sure all these people who appear to be racially abusing Stan Collymore only mean it in a 'matey' way. Just as Suarez did.

Stan is bigger and better. He will lose no sleep because of morons on twater.

[SheffieldVillain]

No, I've seen plenty of people who genuinely feel that it was a penalty. Like I said, I'm undecided but at worst it's a soft decision, there is no conclusive evidence one way or the other (no, not even that Vine...).

And what about Bacuna, was that cheating? Anyway, I'm taking Devil's advocate to the extreme here as I don't especially like the bloke but I think we're overdoing the victim thing here a bit

Again, the incident with Bacuna is irrelevant to the discussion about the penalty. One incident doesn't impact on the other.

OK but we're not talking about it in any great depth though are we?

No, because it didn't cost the Villa the win. I'm amazed that you're so surprised that fans of a club would want to debate a decision which cost their side the match.

[onje_villa]

No, I've seen plenty of people who genuinely feel that it was a penalty. Like I said, I'm undecided but at worst it's a soft decision, there is no conclusive evidence one way or the other (no, not even that Vine...).

And what about Bacuna, was that cheating? Anyway, I'm taking Devil's advocate to the extreme here as I don't especially like the bloke but I think we're overdoing the victim thing here a bit

Again, the incident with Bacuna is irrelevant to the discussion about the penalty. One incident doesn't impact on the other.

OK but we're not talking about it in any great depth though are we?

No, because it didn't cost the Villa the win. I'm amazed that you're so surprised that fans of a club would want to debate a decision which cost their side the match.

Of course I'm not amazed. Not at all, just surprised at how far it's being taken. How a disputed penalty early in the second half "certainly" cost us the win.

Also surprised how even though objectively many people think it was a penalty and many think it wasn't, it would appear to have been decided here that it was definite cheating and that there's some sort of media cover-up going on.

[SheffieldVillain]

Of course I'm not amazed. Not at all, just surprised at how far it's being taken. How a disputed penalty early in the second half "certainly" cost us the win.

Also surprised how even though objectively many people think it was a penalty and many think it wasn't, it would appear to have been decided here that it was definite cheating and that there's some sort of media cover-up going on.

Want some objectivity?
http://dynamic.pulselive.com/dynamic/client/bbc/motd/index.html?uid=bbc&poll=motd

BBC national poll - the question 'did Luis Suarez dive'? The result - 69% said 'yes'. A little more objective that the 'many people you have seen'.

[ktvillan]

But Onje how can it have been a penalty when he wasn't touched?  Or if you think he was touched, it was barely sufficient to brush a fly away, and it was more a case of Suarez throwing his trailing leg towards Guzan than anything Guzan did.  At first sight and normal speed, yes, you can see why people may have been fooled.  But I cannot understand how anyone with normal eyesight and even a basic knowledge of the laws of the game can say it was penalty after seeing the replays.  Unless you accept that "being clever" (aka cheating) is now an acceptable part of the game, as the likes of Line Acre and She-Rah seem to.   

[onje_villa]

Of course I'm not amazed. Not at all, just surprised at how far it's being taken. How a disputed penalty early in the second half "certainly" cost us the win.

Also surprised how even though objectively many people think it was a penalty and many think it wasn't, it would appear to have been decided here that it was definite cheating and that there's some sort of media cover-up going on.

Want some objectivity?
http://dynamic.pulselive.com/dynamic/client/bbc/motd/index.html?uid=bbc&poll=motd

BBC national poll - the question 'did Luis Suarez dive'? The result - 69% said 'yes'. A little more objective that the 'many people you have seen'.

That's one source and it would also indicate that though a majority thought it was a dive, it was far from clear-cut. If you do a little reading on the subject, it's quite clear that it's a subject that has split public opinion. Different fans, pundits and newspapers having differing opinions.

I seem to remember Gabby's penalty against Blues being the same.

[olaftab]

What they say about Leopards applies to cheaters as well!

[Toronto Villa]

What they say about Leopards applies to cheaters as well!

How long have you been saving that gem up for?

[SheffieldVillain]

That's one source and it would also indicate that though a majority thought it was a dive, it was far from clear-cut. If you do a little reading on the subject, it's quite clear that it's a subject that has split public opinion. Different fans, pundits and newspapers having differing opinions.

I seem to remember Gabby's penalty against Blues being the same.

70% compared to 30% isn't clear-cut. Really? It's a sight more conclusive than your 'I've seen many people who think it was a penalty', isn't it?

Gabby's penalty against Blues, the incident with Bacuna yesterday and whether the ball crossed the line in 1966 is still irrelevant to whether Suarez dived or not.

[onje_villa]

But Onje how can it have been a penalty when he wasn't touched?  Or if you think he was touched, it was barely sufficient to brush a fly away, and it was more a case of Suarez throwing his trailing leg towards Guzan than anything Guzan did.  At first sight and normal speed, yes, you can see why people may have been fooled.  But I cannot understand how anyone with normal eyesight and even a basic knowledge of the laws of the game can say it was penalty after seeing the replays.  Unless you accept that "being clever" (aka cheating) is now an acceptable part of the game, as the likes of Line Acre and She-Rah seem to.   

That's fair enough KT, the honest answer is I'm not sure what I think - look once and you can see contact, look again and there isn't any. I do think that "looking for" penalties and free-kicks is unsavoury but for me you can't prove it either way with that image.

And even if you could, I wouldn't be getting as annoyed as some people on here. I find this sort of thing quite similar to the views on referees - this one's a United fan, we never get anything of that one, we never get the breaks... etc

Plenty of stuff goes against us, plenty in our favour. Can't recall us complaining at Gabby's penalty vs the Blues.

[onje_villa]

That's one source and it would also indicate that though a majority thought it was a dive, it was far from clear-cut. If you do a little reading on the subject, it's quite clear that it's a subject that has split public opinion. Different fans, pundits and newspapers having differing opinions.

I seem to remember Gabby's penalty against Blues being the same.

70% compared to 30% isn't clear-cut. Really? It's a sight more conclusive than your 'I've seen many people who think it was a penalty', isn't it?

Gabby's penalty against Blues, the incident with Bacuna yesterday and whether the ball crossed the line in 1966 is still irrelevant to whether Suarez dived or not.

But it's relevant to our reaction to it - that's sort of the point I've been trying to make here.

[SheffieldVillain]

But it's relevant to our reaction to it - that's sort of the point I've been trying to make here.

On one hand you have a decision that won us a match, on the other a decision that cost us the lead in a match/lost us the match. You'd kind of expect the reaction to be different, wouldn't you, it being a Villa forum?