Jump to content

Liverpool 2-0 Saints - Match Thread

SuperSAINT

By SuperSAINT,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, Master Bates said:

Vestergaard red card to stick? That's bullshit

 

19 hours ago, egg said:

Really?? Outrageous. 

 

19 hours ago, Master Bates said:

Apparently so, just awaiting confirmation via the press or club. 

Source? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toadhall Saint

Toadhall Saint

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Quite. Nobody comes out of this looking good. That makes two red cards that we have had rescinded recently.

It’s incredible that neither was over turned on the night. Now if I was a conspiracy theorist............😉

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OttawaSaint

OttawaSaint

Posted
Posted

Certainly raises a few eyebrows and surely they will have to overhaul the whole VAR process.

It's definitely wide open to, "hmm that's a close one, I don't want to get into trouble...Saints are safe, this could cost Leicester a Champs league place, just go for the safest option and they'll rescind it anyway if I'm wrong...".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chapel End

Chapel End

Posted
Posted

Great news but questions have to be asked about the competence of these officials getting these decisions completely wrong.

Anyone with just a slight understanding of the game could see just how ridiculous the Vestergard sending of was. 

How/why are these idiots coming to such stupid conclusions?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
davefizzy14

davefizzy14

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, John D said:

Vestergaard available after red card overturned. 

Good, finally the right decision! :)

Some of these officials and decisons need proper looking into as its becoming more and more ridiculous.

Edited by davefizzy14
Link to comment
Share on other sites
redder freak

redder freak

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, John D said:

Vestergaard available after red card overturned. 

I don’t understand why this decision wasn’t made during the game. Didn’t the ref, John Moss and assistants have the technology available to scrutinise it properly? Are they trying to save money by limiting VAR replays until after the match?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, BERMUDASAINT said:

Are you scrambled egg? Do you watch the game with both eyes? Are you a ref? Because the decision they make are criminal and any other professional job they would be fired ! And their boss does nothing but protect the criminals. I think you have Stockholm syndrome! You sympathize with ref because you accept the shit they have handed out over the years and except it as normal. 

 

4 hours ago, BERMUDASAINT said:

No corruption?? Still think no bias?? Still good ref call? Still no blatant mistakes by all involved, ref, var , fa ???? No ref calls this season that made you blink!! No calls that refs almost made up or var found the slightest advantage for the bigger clubs to win? We must watch a different game! 

Mate, whatever you're smoking / drinking, give it up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OttawaSaint

OttawaSaint

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, redder freak said:

I don’t understand why this decision wasn’t made during the game. Didn’t the ref, John Moss and assistants have the technology available to scrutinise it properly? Are they trying to save money by limiting VAR replays until after the match?

There are no repercussions for it (aside for maybe a one game ban). They can play it safe knowing the decision if wrong will be fixed by someone else later. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, redder freak said:

I don’t understand why this decision wasn’t made during the game. Didn’t the ref, John Moss and assistants have the technology available to scrutinise it properly? Are they trying to save money by limiting VAR replays until after the match?

I said earlier that the referee could have consulted his assistant in order to buy some time or asked to go and see a replay of the incident on the pitchside monitor. I think that in previous times before the presence of VAR he would have sought other advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, OttawaSaint said:

There are no repercussions for it (aside for maybe a one game ban). They can play it safe knowing the decision if wrong will be fixed by someone else later. 

They will be reprimanded but behind closed doors. Make no mistake, the referees want to get it right and are mortified when they don’t. VAR is supposed to give them extra counselling.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Pamplemousse said:

The referee conversations leading to the decision making process should be broadcast. Rugby does it, cricket does it, but football is arrogant enough to think it has to be different.

Absolutely this, there needs to be transparency, but that's only part of it for me. In VAR the focus is mostly on not wanting to undermine the ref hence the "clear and obvious" nonsense. If VAR remains, it should be on the basis that its used to get to the right decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeremy

Jeremy

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Convict Colony said:

Bro the apathy i have at the moment is mind blowing.

It feels like we keep playing the same teams.

If we dont play our fastest CB in this one I give up - Its time for the wall of Valladolid to get a game and put Stephens on his right as he's the best bollocker of players and officials we have. 

"Bro"?  That's a New Zild (Zealand) term if ever I heard one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted
On 04/05/2021 at 13:27, saint lard said:

So Ralph in all his wisdom is going to rotate the keepers until the end of the season. 
Utter  shambles. 
get this idiot out of our club. 

What would you do if you were safe, stuck in mid-table nothingness, and had two extremely well paid but similar goal keepers, and needed to make a decision on the number 1 for the next season?

Makes entire sense to rotate them now. Got a hunch we may shift one in the summer to free up wages. My preference would be Forster as he's on the most and I think McCarthy is better in some elements, but to be honest they're both incredibly average so we'll just have to see how it shakes out. But it makes sense to use this opportunity I think.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charlie Wayman

Charlie Wayman

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

What would you do if you were safe, stuck in mid-table nothingness, and had two extremely well paid but similar goal keepers, and needed to make a decision on the number 1 for the next season?

Makes entire sense to rotate them now. Got a hunch we may shift one in the summer to free up wages. My preference would be Forster as he's on the most and I think McCarthy is better in some elements, but to be honest they're both incredibly average so we'll just have to see how it shakes out. But it makes sense to use this opportunity I think.

I suppose it is a tacit acknowledgement that he regards them both as pretty useless. If he had a clear first choice he would use it.

Edited by Charlie Wayman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Garrett

Saint Garrett

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Obviously Ralph has the option of fielding eleven players at Anfield but he might prefer to select only ten after last week's excellent display.

Never change a "winning" team.............

Nonsense. Change a winning team if you think it will give us a better chance of getting a result. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Never change a "winning" team

That is nonsense. So if our best player was suspended and missed a league win vs a bottom of a table team you wouldn't then start him in a cup final a week later because it would be changing a winning team?

Edited by Matthew Le God
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nordic Saint

Nordic Saint

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Obviously Ralph has the option of fielding eleven players at Anfield but he might prefer to select only ten after last week's excellent display.

Never change a "winning" team.............

Is our defence better with or without Vestergaard?  In the 11 Premier League & FA Cup games he has missed this season, we have kept 6 clean sheets. Looking back, most of our best defensive performances, like the 1-0 wins v Man City and Spurs and the 2-0 win v Chelsea last season and the 1-0 wins v Liverpool and Arsenal this season, have been when he hasn't played. The players seem to cover each other better and show more team spirit when he's not there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DT

DT

Posted
Posted

Baffling to me why he's not playing Salisu in the middle of the defence and using that as the template for next season when Vestergard is gone (presumably)

I'd go and offer what it takes to get Maitland Niles in with the Vest cash and let him play in midfield (after all) with Ward Prowse to add to that spine, and use any other cash (Ings? Walcott wages?) to get a decent keeper in to replace McCarthy/Forster. We need to build solidity. IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Obviously Ralph has the option of fielding eleven players at Anfield but he might prefer to select only ten after last week's excellent display.

Never change a "winning" team.............

Just a couple of minor points:

(1) we didn't win

(2) Minamino can't play

(3) Vesty wasn't part of the 'winning' team that didn't win, so do you keep him or not. In my mind his blunder that lead to the incident was awful, and he should be dropped on that basis alone. 

Edited by VectisSaint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

his blunder that lead to the incident was awful, and he should be dropped on that basis alone.

I agree it was poor but to drop a player for an incident is daft. Imagine if we did that for an attacking player; KWP scoops one cross into the car park and gets dropped for the next game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I agree it was poor but to drop a player for an incident is daft. Imagine if we did that for an attacking player; KWP scoops one cross into the car park and gets dropped for the next game.

Think its you that's a bit daft, to think that anyone would apply that logic to an attacker who simply mistimes or miskicks. Defenders get dropped for these type of incidents, Wesley Hoedt made a living from it, and the howls of derision from some on here when Stephens makes an error and demand he never plays for Saints again. Vesty's total lack of concentration was exactly what Ralph did not need early on in the game against Leicester. His reaction on the touchline blanking the defender as he went down the tunnel spoke volumes to me. Ralph was livid, not with the red card but with the incident that lead up to it. Really would not be surprised if he does not get picked against Liverpool (that said Bednarek has been making howlers most weeks yet seems to be untouchable). It was the old Vestegaard back, not the one we have seen for most of this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Cat

The Cat

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, VectisSaint said:

Think its you that's a bit daft, to think that anyone would apply that logic to an attacker who simply mistimes or miskicks. Defenders get dropped for these type of incidents, Wesley Hoedt made a living from it, and the howls of derision from some on here when Stephens makes an error and demand he never plays for Saints again. Vesty's total lack of concentration was exactly what Ralph did not need early on in the game against Leicester. His reaction on the touchline blanking the defender as he went down the tunnel spoke volumes to me. Ralph was livid, not with the red card but with the incident that lead up to it. Really would not be surprised if he does not get picked against Liverpool (that said Bednarek has been making howlers most weeks yet seems to be untouchable). It was the old Vestegaard back, not the one we have seen for most of this season.

This is where it's so unfair on defenders and keepers. Make one mistake and you get pelters yet a striker could swan around doing fuck all for 89 minutes and then score with his arse and some people are happy.

Vestergaard miscontrolled the ball, made a perfectly decent and legitimate tackle yet he's being called out for it? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DT

DT

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, VectisSaint said:

Endofcontractitis I believe

Ralph: ‘We are looking at other [left-back] targets because the offer we have made has not been accepted from his side.’

what a tosser. Get rid of Redmond while we’re at it. Troublemakers   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Keef

Saint Keef

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, hasper57saint said:

And now for the good news. Our 'not a Friend', Kevin is scheduled to Ref us!

To be honest, we're fast running out of refs who are our "friends".

I may well be wrong, but if my memory serves me (not to be trusted!) I think the last time Kevin Friend refereed us he was ok and we had a good result. Not sure where this info can be found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OttawaSaint

OttawaSaint

Posted
Posted

We shouldn’t be offering Bertrand anything. He’s like a millstone round our necks. Yes, he served us well but ever since he lost the captaincy (and a bit before that) he’s been useless. Never in position, way off the pace, always passing back, wait for the other team to get set while taking a throw in and gives it straight to him. He looks criminally unfit. Get rid.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toussaint

Toussaint

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, DT said:

Ralph: ‘We are looking at other [left-back] targets because the offer we have made has not been accepted from his side.’

what a tosser. Get rid of Redmond while we’re at it. Troublemakers   

How much does Bertrand think he’s worth I wonder? I could see this not working out the way he wants it to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Billy the Kidd

Billy the Kidd

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, DT said:

Ralph: ‘We are looking at other [left-back] targets because the offer we have made has not been accepted from his side.’

what a tosser. Get rid of Redmond while we’re at it. Troublemakers   

Why does Ryan not accepting our offer make him a tosser?

Seriously, it is his life and decision, you may not like his decision, but it doesn’t make him anything of the sort. He has given us a great 7 or 8 years, it is such a shame a you cant be more nice about things.

I would be interested to understand your inside track on the ‘trouble-makers’ quote. Or again, was that just a feeling you have 😉

I dont think we should offer him anything more than a 1 year deal, and bring someone in to compete and over take him, and maybe the deal isn’t about money, but length of contract.

Edited by Billy the Kidd
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, DT said:

Ralph: ‘We are looking at other [left-back] targets because the offer we have made has not been accepted from his side.’

what a tosser. Get rid of Redmond while we’re at it. Troublemakers   

Behave. Someone isn't a "tosser" cos they say no to the pay that they're offered. It's Bertrand's job, and probably his last contract. We could be offering half his current wages, pay as you play, month to month, anything that he thinks unfair. 

That said, I wouldn't offer anything as he looks finished and disinterested to me, but don't be throwing the insults around when you don't know what's happening. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SKD

SKD

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, OttawaSaint said:

We shouldn’t be offering Bertrand anything. He’s like a millstone round our necks. Yes, he served us well but ever since he lost the captaincy (and a bit before that) he’s been useless. Never in position, way off the pace, always passing back, wait for the other team to get set while taking a throw in and gives it straight to him. He looks criminally unfit. Get rid.

He’s been a toxic player in the dressing room since his best mate Fonte left imo.
 

Good riddance to him. 

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chapel End

Chapel End

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, DT said:

Ralph: ‘We are looking at other [left-back] targets because the offer we have made has not been accepted from his side.’

what a tosser. Get rid of Redmond while we’re at it. Troublemakers   

So if you were offered less money than you wanted to do a job you would just take it would you?

He has a choice just as anyone would in taking a job and if you think it should be any different in football them I'm afraid it's you who is the tosser.

Redmond is only a trouble maker in your head because you don’t like him 🙄

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})

  I accept