The Liverpool flaw that could deprive Jurgen Klopp his farewell title…

The Mailbox identifies one worrying trend that could come back to bite Liverpool in the Premier League title race, while the penalty debate continues to rage…

Get your views in to theeditor@football365.com…

Are Liverpool flat-track bullies? 
Following the hoopla of our glorious draw (yawn) at home vs City, I thought a little gravitas was needed for balance.

Our record v the top 4 this year is rather abysmal.

Played 5. Drew 3. Lost 2. That’s 12 dropped points out of 15 for those keeping score at home.

Are we flat-track bullies? Do teams win titles by beating everybody except their top rivals?
Scott, LFC Toronto

The Klopp effect
When I saw the line-ups on Sunday, I didn’t for one minute think we couldn’t compete or couldn’t give City a game. That is what Jurgen Klopp is able to do. Backup goalie, untested right back, midfield with less than half a dozen matches together, star forward out. No problem. The culture and the system run deep. I guess you just take it for granted after nearly a decade.
Niall, Annapolis

READ: Liverpool top the list of 10 best Premier League clubs to support in the last decade

Perception of Liverpool
Reading the mailbox most days perhaps I’m simply misunderstanding the perspective of rival fans so let me test by trying to summarise the opinions of Liverpool (from rivals) and you can correct me if I’m wrong about what you think.

According to mailbox; Liverpool are entitled whiners who have every ref in their pocket (despite being bottom of the VAR table for the 5th of 6 years). We are also a rich team who can spend on whoever we want (despite not having the money to sign players after winning a champions league).

We have the worst, most ungracious complainer of a manager who has underachieved with a team of players which everyone claims is overrated and sh*t yet somehow have underachieved at the same time.

And we have the worst fans who have no right to boo an anthem which represents a country which has wiped it’s ass with the city for 40 years. Fans who are entitled and complain (but only when winning – I don’t recall anyone saying this when woy was getting us relegated) and always victimise themselves and believe they should get everything they want with no effort.

Is that about right? If you’re answering yes ask yourself how much of that applies to yourselves and your own team and manager?
I suppose your fans quietly accept unfairness? Your manager does not complain? You have every refereeing decision go against you but because you’re bastions of fair play you clap and applaud and talk about what a great job the ref does? You never spend any money and always hunt for free players?

Not a single person can answer (honestly) yes to all those points. So perhaps Liverpool and it’s fans are not quite the demonic cry babies you make them out to be and are in fact just…fans.
Lee

Read more: 16 Conclusions on Liverpool 1-1 Man City: Diaz vs Walker, De Bruyne sulks, Haaland beats Van Dijk

Klopp ’17 v Klopp ’24
I would have loved it if in response to being interregated by Klopp regarding the Doku decision, Davidson could have just turned and pressed play on the nearby TV screen bringing up Klopp ’17’s own judgement on Mane’s infamous high foot into Ederson’s face.

“I don’t think it’s a red card, he didn’t see him,”
“I saw the goalie already and obviously it’s not that bad. In the first moment everyone thought it was really bad.

“It was unlucky, it was an accident. The goalkeeper comes out, Sadio wants the ball. To get a red card in a game like this is really unlucky.”

Thanks Klopp ’17. He wants the ball, it was an accident. These are the important things. Let’s be lenient, don’t spoil the match on such a moment. I mean it wasn’t so bad. Nobody was killed, even without the ball being ‘there’ to protect Ederson. You and the thousands of Liverpool fans at the time were very reasonable on interpreting the high foot. One of those 50-50 decisions. I’m sure you won’t change your tune should the shoe be on the other foot.
Nick

Apology incoming
Some interesting discourse on the penalty claim yesterday and lots of discussion on whether Doku touches the ball. It’s absolutely not even a question that Doku gets some of the ball, in fact MacAllister actually touches the ball first which makes it even funnier that Dane earlier pointed out that Doku clearly gets the ball first. However, it doesn’t matter as IFAB rules state the following:

What happens if a high foot makes contact with an opponent – A direct free kick is awarded (or penalty kick if the offence takes place in the offender’s penalty area) and the player may be shown a red or yellow card.

No mention of “getting the ball” here as far as I can tell.

It’s a penalty, no question. They got this one wrong and I’m looking forward to another apology from PGMOL. Hopefully we’ve filled our stamp book in and we can trade them in for some points.
Paul M LFC

…Wasn’t going to write in as I wasn’t sure I could be arsed but the takes on ‘the penalty’ in Monday afternoon’s mailbox got me thinking. If your boot is anywhere near an opponents face it can only be dangerous play, going for the ball or not. The point about Macalister being about to handle the ball if Doku hadn’t touched the ball is mute, because anyone’s automatic reaction to seeing a boot head towards your head is to get out of the way. ‘But he got the ball’ was the pundits response. I would wager that he wouldn’t have won the challenge if he went in with his head. Going in with a high boot will mean you have a better chance of winning the ball as opponents generally like having their eyes remain in their heads.

That said, it should have been a pen, the ref didn’t give it though so really we should all just move on. I don’t think Liverpool have made too much of a fuss about it – it’s just pundit fodder – but It does feel like incidents involving Liverpool players have been pored over to the nth degree by VAR, but when it’s the other way around the check happens in an instant. The true test will be if it happens again.

Also, I know it is, and I have a feeling that this is a mental thing to say, but I don’t think football should be considered a contact sport. Think of sports like boxing, Rugby etc, where the aim is literally to make contact with your opponent. Since when was that ever the case in football?
Tom (hoping Arsenal and City get embroiled in a Champions League tussle)

…Just felt the need to respond to at least one letter, and various other ridiculous theories, that was simply wrong in its description of the Doku – Mac Allister incident, and then you know I felt some other incidents needed a renewed, thorough interpretation.

Firstly it’s a loose ball that bounces between Doku and Mac Allister neither have taken the previous touch of the ball – there is no mitigating factor that Doku was in possession of the ball. In the Laws of the Game it is a foul if a player’s challenge for the ball is reckless and physically endangers his opponent. Was Doku’s challenge reckless? It absolutely is, because the fact is he doesn’t have to, but he does choose to, play a ball bouncing at chest height with an outstretched leg leading with his studs, as he feels it’s the only way he can get to the ball before his opponent who is, not unreasonably, looking to control it with his chest. Therefore due to the fact that the onus is on Doku to ensure that his challenge does not endanger his opponent (I believe studs into the rib cage / chest has an element of danger) the moment he cannot prevent his studs making contact with Mac Allister makes the challenge reckless, because nothing but himself forced him to try to win the ball in that manner. The fact the opposing team may benefit from your decision if you do not attempt a potentially reckless challenge, doesn’t make it justifiable when you do make one. And of course the degree of touch on the ball, again in the Laws of the Game, is irrelevant.

I hold Attwell on VAR more responsible than Oliver but, given they are among the country´s leading officials, I find their inability to be able to interpret the Laws correctly between them, with the aid of technology, scandalous.

Against Brighton when awarding Liverpool a penalty, the combination of onfield Anthony Taylor and VAR Craig Pawson failed to send off Pascal Gross. To borrow an NFL phrase Gross “horse collared” Szboszlai from behind, no attempt to play the ball, as at the moment of contact the ball was at the Hungarian´s feet on the grass, closer in than the penalty spot with the Brighton keeper leaving about two thirds of the goal to aim at at the moment of the foul, with no Brighton outfield player having a chance of coming between. In truth Taylor´s part is excusable but Pawson´s failure to assess the situation (with the replays as his aid) as a clear “DOGSO” in the area, and therefore a red card, was inexcusable.

The Odegaard handball at Anfield was not just inexcusable, it was inexplicable. Direct quotes from the ref and VAR conversation, Kavanagh “No, his hand’s on the floor. His hand’s on the floor”…….VAR “So he’s falling down”. Just to clarify for those who do not recall, at no point did Odegaard´s hand or arm touch the floor, and at no point did he fall over, he lowered his stance but remained upright the entire time. Which the VAR must´ve been able to see, but at no point does he tell the onfield ref, that none of what they used as justification for denying the penalty actually happened.

Now it´s a fair point to say that the refs are having to make these decisions quickly, in a pressurized, intense top level sport enviroment. Oh except of course when they do not, like the award of the Palace penalty v Liverpool at Selhurst Park, when they took the game back what 90 seconds to two, or even three minutes. Now in the interests of balance it was the correct decision in a game in which Liverpool almost certainly gained points from a incorrect decision – the Ayew second yellow when Palace were one up.

But if I may i´ll finish by going right back to the daddy of them all v Spurs. What got me was the VAR´s “I can´t do anything, I can´t do anything” excuse once the horror show became clear, and an excuse that all the talking heads, media and ex-refs ran with and failed to challenge, to attempt to pass it off as one of those things to move on from, you know, like all managers and other fans have done with all debatable decisions since then. Instructions as to what to do in the failure to register on the scoreboard a goal that has been declared valid, do not exist in the Laws of the Game, I guess they assumed at the top level such an act of gross negligence could not happen. Now, after the decision to instead play on from a free-kick, 30 seconds of inconsequential play passed until a throw-in, a natural stoppage – so in order to respond to the “I can´t do anything, I can´t do anything” excuse, I quote this paragraph from the very first page of the Laws of the Game –

“The Laws cannot deal with every possible situation, so where there is no direct provision in the Laws, The IFAB expects the referee to make a decision within the `spirit´ of the game and the Laws – this often involves asking the question, ´what would football want and expect?”…..now clearly that last phrase will be used for “hilarious” responses by those not fond of Liverpool, but I was amazed at the time nobody raised this as a clear direction that would have allowed the VAR to swiftly correct his huge error.

So there we go, thus far this season, Liverpool have had four matches turned against them by officials simply unable (unwilling?) to competently use VAR and to correctly interpret and implement the Laws of the Game that they should know off by heart. All of which were cynically downplayed by the usual interests.

Let us face up to it now Reds, we are going to lose this league by a point – agáin, and the man mostly responsible was called England! F§$king England! Of course!! That will teach us!!
Rob

VAR and officiating
I should just get it out there, I’m a Liverpool supporter (sorry/not sorry). I am absolutely exhausted on VAR and on the level of officiating in general.

Now to be clear, this is not an attack on the officials themselves. While we’ve watched the game evolve and speed up at the elite level we are still relying on the same model in officiating that, absent a few modest changes, was introduced back in the late 19th Century. The speed and athleticism in the game is so much greater than it was even a generation ago it creates a near no win for officials.

And while yes, there are some officials who don’t feel up to the standard regardless of where we set the bar, we only really have ourselves to blame that the abuse towards young officials at the grass roots level is so ingrained that it likely chases away plenty of prospective officials long before they have a chance to be evaluated for elite level assignments. Heck, I earned some good field side cash in my teen years but the abuse thrown my way made it a path not worth following.

With all of that, the real culprits to the mess we’re in are the officials that create the system and then expect Officials to apply those rules and then when they do bring in tools to hopefully make life better they don’t use them properly. All of this creates an inconsistency that is maddening for supporters of all clubs. And the fact that there doesn’t seem to be any accountability is just the cherry on that sundae.

This brings us to VAR. As a technical tool I’m okay with VAR. The idea that on a tight call, an Assistant leaves the play to go ultimately to call (or not call) the play at the resolution of the move and then refer goals to VAR is a reasonable way to do things. It’s not perfect, but for such a technical rule like Offsides it benefits the assistant. If we truly wanted to do away with VAR on offisides then we can’t have the rule in the rule book that expects an Assistant to measure infractions in millimeters.

Where VAR is failing both the fans and their own officials is in the decision review system. VAR creates a subjective system where multiple variables come into play which creates situations where the technology creates more uncertainty and inconsistency than it was created to solve. And then when it’s called into used and the official goes to review the play, it’s almost a foregone conclusion that the call on the pitch is reversed. VAR itself because of these plethora of regulations on when to us it creates a frustrating tapestry of decisions that you can’t rely in week on week.

For VAR to be impactful, the situation around it needs to be reversed. Use if for the same things. Offsides, penalty decisions, goal reviews, card reviews but change how it is applied. How I would propose that:

Separate VAR officials. VAR is a different beast than being on the field. Train people to do it and do it property
For technical calls things stay the same. If there is issues with how a rule is applied it isn’t down to the tech, change the rule.
For judgement calls, avoid ideas like clear and obvious errors and use it to help these officials on field call a game. If they miss something, don’t read into their decision making. Isolate the play tell them to look at it.
When an official is looking at a play it is with no commentary from the VAR official (just on pitch officials like a normal call), play it at full speed at the best angle you have to the infraction, limit the amount of times it can be played back (say 3 times) and have a guideline the resolution from pitch to monitor take no more than 30 seconds.

In this case, a VAR sees something that could’ve gone either way (so a truly contentious penalty call for example). He notifies the on field official that they may want to look at it, the official does, at full speed and makes a call based on their judgement. It keeps the judgement of the official on field as a the primary, rebrands VAR not as something needed to correct an official but as a positive tool to let them review tough decisions to validate their own thought process.

At the end of the day, as a supporter, I want reasonable consistency. I want to be able to look at similar situations over the course of a season and see the same standard applied to each of them. That doesn’t mean they’ll all go the same way, but that the same care was taken with each of them.

And if they can’t make the rules and the tools work together towards that consistency change the rules or scrap the technology.
Mark LFC

Spurs hamstrung
I would say that Spurs are unfortunate to have to be called considerably lesser of a side than Arsenal in the Winner and Losers section.

It really is worth asking yet again how Arsenal would have coped without, deep breath; Saliba, Gabriel, Rice, Odegaard, Saka, Jorginho and Martinelli – at the same time, for large parts of the season…it only took losing Saliba last season to shit the bed.

I’d guarantee that had Spurs have not lost van Der Ven and Maddison alone, we’d be at least ten points better off.
Dan

Happy to be here​
Gee shucks guys! As an Arsenal fan, I am just glad to be with those bigger guys at the top of that li’l old league yous have got over there. Good ol’ Mihir Nair for even mention li’l ol’ Arsenal, I sure am mighty honoured an’ all. We’ll just leave you bigger boys to play on the rest of the season while watch and admire – an’ we know it means more for Liverpool fans too!

Of course, let’s just ignore the fact Arsenal have scored more goals, conceded fewer, beaten both the other teams, just won eight games on the spin – breaking countless records in the process – absolutely outclassed Liverpool in the last game we played, have beasts throughout the team who will not get bullied, finished 17 points ahead of Liverpool last season (when we ‘choked’) and, lest we forget, sit top of the table. Did I mention the outclassing at the Emirates?

But y’all, thanks for even including us!
Jaimie ‘when Stewie Griffin becomes the voice of reason’ Kaffash, AFC, North London