TheGoodJoe:


That was why the penalty was not given. If you read the article, the officials did not talk of the ball hitting Bernardo Silva's arm. The ball ricocheted to Silva's arm and was not a deliberate act.

Replay shows clearly that Trent Arnold Alexander on the other hand saw the ball and chose to use his hand to stop it. Which is clearly a deliberate act for a penalty.

The officials chose to deny it which shows a clear case of their corruption.

izzou:


Huh?

Okay, where should Trent's hand be? At home?

I have attached the rules for handball in the EPL. Read it, digest it, and show me how Trent is guilty

boladale123:
The rule says that if the team that scored a goal, had handled the ball proceeding to that particular goal ,then the goal is disallowed.
In practice,you can not handle a ball before you score a goal, hence ,mancity should get a penalty or otherwise if you say the ball touches mancity player before alexander, then , it should have been a fool & free kick.

Juliuss01:


Did Man City scores and the goal was cancelled?, Or you mean Man city can no longer win in Anfiled without penalties or red card ?.

Wait even Pep Guardiola was scared of Anfiled , playing mind game with Sadio Mane over diving, his words ahead of the match made him suspicious.

It will be unfair to Liverpool if the Bernardo silver's hand ball should should overlooked and then punished Trent for his own.

I have said it ahead of this season that Man city will suffer in the hand of VAR because of the pattern of their game. They escaped many error last season where the ref favour them.

From off side goals to red cards and penalties. Hence they wouldn't have won the league last Season.

They would have won Tottenham Hotspur in champion's league last season when they were running up and down and scored off side goals , it was VAR that recalled and cancelled, otherwise there pattern would have overshadowed the ref.

Then again we could say why the so much noise on the Liverpool Man City match .... It happens to everyone, it was Liverpool last previous week and it was Man City last week.


Liverpool had an hand ball with Aston Villa not taken and a goal ridiculously disallowed nobody made noise.

Manchester United fouled Origi and the ref did not respond to it, hence Manchester United scored , does anyone sees that ?.

Meanwhile, Bernardo silver's goal should have been cancelled too, because there was a foul before the ball was passed to him, but the ref chosed to neglect it so what's the sympathy for Man City all about or just bad belle for Liverpool.

Shezkid:


Last time I checked I didn't create this thread so talk with sense.... Even when that goal was cancelled I felt bad for Liverpool and EPL VAR operators are SHIT....

HIGHESTPOPORI:
OK your point is Silva hand deflected the ball to Arnold but Silva own was not deliberate while Arnold own was deliberate

TheGoodJoe:


That was why the penalty was not given. If you read the article, the officials did not talk of the ball hitting Bernardo Silva's arm. The ball ricocheted to Silva's arm and was not a deliberate act.

Replay shows clearly that Trent Arnold Alexander on the other hand saw the ball and chose to use his hand to stop it. Which is clearly a deliberate act for a penalty.

The officials chose to deny it which shows a clear case of their corruption.

Shezkid:


His hands should be at his back.... The PK that was given to Liverpool against Spurs then shouldn't be a PK because the player was pointing to his player to Mark a player... I'm sure you didn't watch that match...

TheGoodJoe:


Some of you guys do not read at all.

The article is about the player's lying that Arnold's handball was not deliberate, when it was. The pictures proved it.

alasane:


since the official did not talk about meaning??........Your sense of reasoning very shallow

izzou:


Lol

When Firminho's goal was cancelled against Aston Villa because his armpit(abi armpit hair) was offside, who's agenda was clear then?

I'm not here to argue back and forth with you. Oliver was solely in charge of making the decision, and even if he gave the penalty, we all would live with it

But my point is if he had given that penalty, then we would be seeing about 5 similar cases on every match. Sterling purposely played it on his hand, and there was no other possible place to keep his hands.

Like your article said, his hands had to be somewhere

TheGoodJoe:


It was not deliberate because it was close and it was on the run. The problem is, why would Michael Oliver lie it was not deliberate and why did the VAR official support the lie. My verdict corruption.

TheGoodJoe:


Trent Arnold handled the ball that led to the goal. On any account the ball should have been stopped.

Either way, the article is about the EPL officials lying that Arnold's handball was not deliberate when the pictures showed it was and the VAR officials had the luxury of replays.

SmartyPants:


I'm a man Utd fan here so Ivan speak as a complete neutral.

A penalty is a penalty. If it means giving 5 penalties a game then they should change the rules not refuse to apply them. That was a penalty to me, and I believe it would have been called as such in many other games.

I don't know about conspiracy theories though.

izzou:


You felt bad for them right?
You didn't think they were being favoured?

But now, you think they are being assisted Abi?

Learn to analyze a match without being emotional.

I'll still say it again and again. If Oliver had given Sterling that penalty, then we will be seeing that stunt in every single match, again and again

Sterling did it on purpose. The distance was very close and there's no way it wouldn't hit anyone's had. Oliver used his discretion. Simple

TheGoodJoe:


What are you typing?

Did anyone say the ball did not hit Bernardo Silva? Even the interview in the article did not talk about it because the ball deflected off Bernardo Silva to his hand which does not count as handball, like the Rojo's case against Nigeria.

That was not why it was ruled out if you bothered to read the article. It was ruled out because they claimed Trent did not intend to use his hand, which they are lying.

HIGHESTPOPORI:
You are the only person talking abt lie here

Shezkid:


FYI I don't care about any team in EPL..if I see a wrong call by the ref I'll talk.. and you saying Sterling did it on purpose means you started watching ball last week because that's not an excuse..... there's no rule on that and it has happened a million times and it was given as PK...

TheGoodJoe:


What are you typing?

Did anyone say the ball did not hit Bernardo Silva? Even the interview in the article did not talk about it because the ball deflected off Bernardo Silva to his hand which does not count as handball, like the Rojo's case against Nigeria.

That was not why it was ruled out if you bothered to read the article. It was ruled out because they claimed Trent did not intend to use his hand, which they are lying.

HIGHESTPOPORI:
But Bernardo Silva hand deflected it there,that's what people are saying

izzou:


There were two cases that had penalty controversies

Which one are you referring to?

izzou:


Huh?

Okay, where should Trent's hand be? At home?

I have attached the rules for handball in the EPL. Read it, digest it, and show me how Trent is guilty

izzou:


Can you show me how many times this season, this type of case occurred, and they gave a penalty?

Show me please.

edward1106:



Could you help us ask Trent if he did it on purpose or not so we agree with you.

Even as the law (Knowledge) stands, sometimes discretion (Wisdom) is applied.

SmartyPants:


The Arnold one

SmartyPants:


I'm a man Utd fan here so Ivan speak as a complete neutral.

A penalty is a penalty. If it means giving 5 penalties a game then they should change the rules not refuse to apply them. That was a penalty to me, and I believe it would have been called as such in many other games.

I don't know about conspiracy theories though.

edward1106:



Could you help us ask Trent if he did it on purpose or not so we agree with you.

Even as the law (Knowledge) stands, sometimes discretion (Wisdom) is applied.

kilisi:


If the ball had travelled straight to Sterlin and he scores, it would have been ruled out according to the new rule which states that any handball in the build up to a goal whether deliberate or not makes the goal invalid. So you can see why it is not proper for that to be given as offside?

SmartyPants:


the argument about whether Trent meant it or not is not relevant. At the beginning of this season, new rules were announced that stated intention would no longer be taken into account.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1263332

izzou:


There were two cases that had penalty controversies

Which one are you referring to?

Shezkid:


Spurs vs Liverpool...