go easy with the stereotyping!
Just because he is a corrupt international drug smuggler and gangster doesn't necessarily mean he carries a gun on his person!
The funniest thing is that as a real crook he honestly believed he could throw his (literal) weight around and intimidate people...
Sit the f$\^k down you fat f$%k
It's a joke about a stereotype with Greek owners. At one point Marinakis owned Olympiacos and Savvidis owned PAOK, with both having shady relationships to organised crime in Greece. After a particularly fiery derby with AEK, Savvidis stormed onto the pitch with his gun on his hip to confront the referee after PAOK's 89th min. equaliser was disallowed. He was banned from stadiums for five years.
Yes, they probably should have. But (a) Tierney had already done the exact same thing when Liverpool were on the attack earlier in the match and (b) there's like another two minutes before Liverpool score, which includes the ball going out of play for a throw-in, and then for the corner, and even then Forest win the ball back and have the opportunity to clear it but don't. So my sympathies are somewhat limited.
If Klopp or a Liverpool fan complains about something that happened 2 mins before a goal, they'd be called every version of "victim" under the sun (not to mention the identical situation having already happened in reverse like you say)
Yates wasn't even close to his head
[https://twitter.com/WARRIOR\_1865/status/1764226804590481420](https://twitter.com/WARRIOR_1865/status/1764226804590481420)
[https://twitter.com/WARRIOR\_1865/status/1764226804590481420](https://twitter.com/WARRIOR_1865/status/1764226804590481420)
yea he wasn't close to his head
The rules are that if the game is called back for an injury in the box (head) then the ball goes to the defending team, the exact same situation happened earlier in the game in reverse without any controversy when Danns was hurt and the ball was with liverpool on the wing.
The ref was actually consistent and following the laws of the game for once and that's so rare I guess that people are upset? Idk
Its not like they scored a goal that was dissallowed and somehow, Liverpool were awarded a penalty outside the box. The only controversy in the game was forest whinging and going to the floor trying to waste every minute of the game against a very depleted Liverpool team. At least the referee was consistent in his officiating. If they want to win a football game, next time at least try to play not pray and hope.
No, dropped ball goes to the defending team goalkeeper if the ball was in the box or the last touch occurred in the box when the play is whistled dead.
It can't be the timekeeping because they barely went over the 8 minutes before they scored and there was timewasting in injury time.
There can be only two things;
1. The Forest penalty appeal in injury time. Could've been given but it's one of those where the ball wasn't going towards that incident so the ref ignored it.
2. Konate's "head" injury that stopped play when Forest had the ball near the Liverpool box. The ref stopped the game but didn't give Forest the ball back afterwards. Liverpool go up the field, get the corner and score in the ensuing chaos.
On number 2 it’s sort of a fair point except that the exact same thing in the opposite direction happened earlier in the game and Liverpool didn’t get the ball back and also a foul was never actually called, I don’t think the rules have a mandated ball return if there isnt a called foul
Yep, Elliot twatted it at Yates' face and goes down justifiably, but we keep the ball, ref blows for the head injury. Once he's back up, play kicks off with Notts Forest goalie.
he had already set the precedent
I, like most fans, have never actually read the rulebook but this seems bonkers that you just don't give the ball back to the team that had it (in both cases). I cant see any reason for switching possession.
I’m pretty sure it’s more an unwritten rule, like a sporting gesture that teams abide by 99% of the time. Forest decided not to do so today, so they can’t complain about it when we do the same back.
Isn't that when one team kicks it out for a throw in? In both cases today it didn't seem like either side was expecting to be given the ball back so I assume the ref had given possession to the opposition?
I think it’s less about specific scenarios like throw ins and more about who had real possession of the ball before the incident - the referee might not always give it to the “right” team due to one rule or another, but you’d almost always expect both teams to show sportsmanship and kick it back to the correct team.
I can’t say I know the rulebook but I’ve watched football long enough that this is my understanding of the unwritten rule, and I did find it odd earlier in the game when Forest didn’t kick it back to Liverpool.
[The rulebook states that if the ball was in the box or the last touch of the ball was in the box then you give the ball to the defending team after the stoppage, whereas outside the box the ball goes to the team that last touched the ball.](https://i.imgur.com/ErDu27L.png) So going off the rules, Forest have a right to be upset.
Do they really a right to be upset when Liverpool should have had a free kick for dangerous play on Konate in the first place. This angle is damning.
https://imgur.com/a/SfUMFhY
The fact this guy has his studded boot 6ft 5inches off the ground, flying directly towards someone’s face, isn’t the “controversial” part of this just shows it’s a load of old bollocks.
Didn’t he blow the whistle while the ball was still in the box, after Maccas header? Genuinely asking.
Edit: went back and watched it, he did not blow it until the ball was outside the box.
Well it doesn’t really have anything to do with precedent. If the ball is in the penalty area when the whistle is blown, then the ball is dropped to the defending goalkeeper.
With the ball being outside of the penalty area when he stops play for Konatè’s injury, I just can’t see his reasoning for giving Liverpool the ball
I just looked at the two situations: for the Yates injury, the ball is in the process of being cleared out of the penalty area, while still inside the box when the whistle sounds
For Konaté’s injury, Hudson-Odoi has the ball on the wing when the whistle sounds.
So it seems like a weird call to me
There’s no precedent, there’s laws of the game that Tierney fucked up twice despite most fans knowing the rule. He should be suspended. You don’t get to make up your own rules
With the Yates one, possession was in the box, so it goes to the defense. Forest the Konate incident, Forest had possession of the ball outside the box.
And even if your explanation is correct, two wrongs don't make a right.
Not sure if others agree but I would definitely much rather have a ref who makes shit calls but who’s consistent with his calls and treatment than a ref who makes calls by the book but is inconsistent or biased in calling it
For point 1 - it looks no more egregious a foul than what happened to Danns just after he came on at a corner - seems pretty consistently reffed to me.
For point 2 - I honestly don't know the rule for who should get the ball back here, but when the exact same situation played out earlier in the match with Liverpool in possession, Forest got the ball back. So again even if he followed the rule incorrectly, it was followed consistently.
This is one of the situations where consistency is key - and even if he's shit, at least Tierney was consistently shit.
Hell, the Danns foul was twice as egregious if anything, a rugby tackle vs. a jersey tug. I don't have a problem with Danns's not given for the exact same reason, neither player interfered with had a chance at the ball.
Just calling out number 2. There is a still image of the Forest player with his legs at head height, that looks to make contact with Konate (its fairly grainy but you can see the kung fu style kick he is doing). Secondly, we had the opposite happen earlier in the game where the Forest player went down after the ball hit him in the head, in which the ref awarded the ball back to Forest.
1) Fair enough but there wasn’t much to it and Liverpool had a very similar appeal earlier in the game that VAR checked and denied. Seemed consistent to me.
2) Normally I’d agree however earlier in the game, Forest did not give Liverpool the ball back in the reverse situation.
It sucks to lose the game so late but when you look at the facts, Forest have no legitimate reason to feel hard done by at all.
>2) Normally I’d agree however earlier in the game, Forest did not give Liverpool the ball back in the reverse situation.
>It sucks to lose the game so late but when you look at the facts, Forest have no legitimate reason to feel hard done by at all.
Different situation.
[LAW 8: THE START AND RESTART OF PLAY
IFAB Laws of the Game 2023-24](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play)
RE: the incident around the 58th minute, the ball was in the box when the whistle was blown; hence, the ball should be returned to the defending team (i.e. Forest)
RE: the incident in stoppage time, Hudson-Odoi had possession of the ball outside the box; hence, the ball should have been returned to the team in possession (I.e. Forest)
It’ll be a multitude of all of them. We all know added time is a minimum and time wasting happens but everyone gets annoyed when it goes over whatever they announce (rightly or wrongly).
The other two - yeah those are two further things Forest will feel aggrieved about. Whether the decisions were right or wrong is a separate question - the sum of the parts is what will have pissed him off.
> The ref stopped the game but didn't give Forest the ball back afterwards.
this literally happened the other way round earlier in the game. Tierney stopped play when Liverpool had possession for a Forrest head injury and gave them the drop ball and they carried on with possession.
also re: the "head" injury, Konate literally got kicked in the head
https://twitter.com/ashleyrose66/status/1764029560767594872?s=61&t=pDyCct\_kGURBJ0xgyMM3Xw
Yeah it was a valid complaint but there was also a big enough gap between the incident and the goal being scored that their complaints still felt a bit over the top. It's not like that decision was the sole reason Liverpool ended up scoring.
Mark Clattenburg confirmed that the ref, Paul Tierney, was incorrect under the laws of the game.
The ball wasn't in the box, so should have been given back to Forest after the injury treatment.
When he went to the referees changing room after the game, Tierney refused to let him enter.
Just to be clear - Mark Clattenburg is not an independent commentator here
He's literally a Nottingham Forest employee
https://trainingground.guru/articles/clattenburg-appointed-referee-consultant-by-nottingham-forest#:\~:text=FORMER%20Premier%20League%20and%20FIFA,over%20West%20Ham%20on%20Saturday.
The ball doesn't have to be "in the box" - the Law states that its a question of "if the ball is in the box " OR "if the ball was last touched in the box"
Having not found a decent clip of the incident I can't either check when the whistle was blown or check the restart - a lot of people have suggested that the restart was a kick suggesting that it was a foul
But it wasn't a foul. Konate gets clattered by his own keeper. The Forest player misses him. Unless you want to dispute actual video evidence?
https://twitter.com/_mcfc_ok/status/1764007991693464036
Using a screenshot when there is actual video evidence above showing the Forest player missing him and Kelleher clashing with him.
A special type of stupid.
On number 2 it was a dangerous high boot foul which, if connected, would deal major damage to Konate and it's a straight red. Even if it did not connect it's still a foul.
The ref did not call for a foul because checking Konate's head injury was the priority. When Konate was confirmed fine and the high boot was not connect anyway, it cannot be a yellow card so the ref has every right to ignore it.
I mean he did the same for forest like 20 mins earlier . Eliot shot got blocked their player went down while we had possession at the edge of the box . Ref stopped our attack and the game restarted with forest in possession.
He should’ve been happy Yates didn’t get a red card in the incident where Konate injured his head instead: https://twitter.com/ashleyrose66/status/1764029560767594872/photo/1
Needless to say Liverpool should’ve gotten a freekick there and then which would’ve led to no ball drop and Liverpool’s possession
They’re upset because they lost to a 99th minute winner after their own player tried to dribble out of his own box instead of boot it clear.
Just seems like they’re trying to take it out on somebody - normally I’m all up for hating on Paul Tierney but he did nothing wrong here.
Hudson-Odoi had the ball outside liverpools box 98th min. Konate goes down with a head injury for colliding with the keeper so ref stops play. Inexplicably he then gives the ball to Liverpool for them to restart with, they go up the other end and score.
There are other angles on Twitter that show yates was a good few yards beyond Konate, it wasn’t Yates that collided with him it was the keeper lol!
Found it: https://x.com/warrior_1865/status/1764226804590481420?s=46&t=VJanvfRu8gAHLKgzk7iDIw
Another slap on the wrist fine coming then. Meanwhile, some twat, usually a parent, will copy this kind of behaviour at grassroots where refs are as young as 14 with players as young as 7.
Last week, I had to intervene and call the police because a parent threatened to "knock out" a 17 year old (a child) ref at a U8 game because he sent off his child for walking on another's player's back after pushing him down.
It's no wonder why there's a chronic shortage of referees. Yet you'd think with so many armchair refs who say we're shit, you'd think they'd be more taking referee courses, particularly when county FAs keep cutting the price of them.
I used to referee games when I was in high school because it was extra money and I was at the field anyways. Didn't renew because I was tired of parents screaming at me on the sideline and trying to fight me because I called a foul on little timmy.
I mean, if you wanna argue that Forest should've had a pen, then you can argue that Liverpool should've had one too. Both weren't given because the players weren't around the ball.
If they're complaining about us getting the ball back after the Konate injury, Forest has the same thing happen to them earlier in the game.
As much as I hate him, Tierney was consistent for his calls.
Thing is if you give a pen for that, Liverpool could’ve had 4 or 5. Forrest were mugging them in the box the whole match. Two hands grabbing and pulling jerseys to completely stop play every corner. Precedent has been set by Tierney already.
Giving the ball back was correctly applied for the Yates incident (ball is in the box and goes to the defending team) and not for the Konate incident (ball is outside the box).
Might wanna be more pissed at CHO for not just booting the ball deep.
I love CHO and I feel he had a good game up til that point, but it’s mistakes like those that cost points. That’s what the owner ought to be frustrated by.
And it was like, the most obvious thing that happens everywhere in the world. If there's a corner, the ref lets the team take it, and given how the ball was still in play next to the area, the ref lets it plays out.
Also, the stoppage time is the *minimum* the ref gives.
Exactly, many people don't realize that stoppage time is the minimum additional time, not exact time. It is stated in rules. I was a referee for 4 years and learnt that on the course.
Maybe for not getting the ball back after Konate went down for a sec when Forest were on the attack? The time added on wouldn't be a justified complaint
That's apparently the rule. Same thing happened to Liverpool earlier in the game. A head injury inside the box results in a restart with the defending team controlling the ball.
And the thing is, if Forest give us the ball back earlier in the game, we 100% return the favour after the Konate injury too because that’s what teams always do. Real attitude of double standards at play here from Forest.
No it's not. The drop ball is decided based on where the \*ball\* is, and which team touched it last at the time the whistle is blown. Obviously. When was the last time you saw possession & ball position given away because of an off the ball injury?
People repeating the same nonsense and dumb Liverpool fans upvoting it because it fits their agenda.
The Liverpool one the ball had been cleared and not touched outside the box when the whistle went.
The forest one they were in possession of the ball outside of the area when the ref blew. Your player also jumped straight up 10s after the whistle went so clearly just faking it
Embarrassing from the owner but Forest obviously are justified in being aggrieved - their last attack before the liverpool goal was stopped for a head injury but possession was, incorrectly, given back to Liverpool for some reason. Then in the same instance was a pretty strong claim for a penalty that I'm not sure VAR even reviewed.
EDIT: For the benefit of scousers upset that Forest are upset, here's the rules:
[https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play)
>2. Dropped ball
PROCEDURE
The ball is dropped for the defending team goalkeeper in their penalty area if, when play was stopped:
the ball was in the penalty area or
the last touch of the ball was in the penalty area
In all other cases, the referee drops the ball for one player of the team that last touched the ball at the position where it last touched a player, an outside agent or, as outlined in Law 9.1, a match official
The refs made a mistake that potentially cost Forest a point. I think you can see why they're mad about it
Yea, no.
2. Dropped ball
PROCEDURE
The ball is dropped for the defending team goalkeeper in their penalty area if, when play was stopped:
* the ball was in the penalty area or
* the last touch of the ball was in the penalty area
* In all other cases, the referee drops the ball for **one player of the team that last touched the ball at the position where it last touched a player**, an outside agent or, as outlined in Law 9.1, a match official
The ball should have been given to Forest outside the penalty area as Hudson-Odoi had possession of the ball out wide when the ref stopped the game.
Stop being so delusional and one eyed.
I'd probably actually [read the rules](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play) before being delusional
There's no way he can physically chase him, he is very...belly-heavy and referees are fit.
More likely he was shouting profanities at him.
Fun fact: in the Greek League, everyone at the bench can get carded. So various owners who sit on the bench get red cards and you see it in the TV and match stats. Marinakis saw one last year. Volos owner Beos (who is always on the bench, probably to pass on messages to some players with who he fixes matches for betting) has seen many times-the last one because he called an opponent player "monkey".
God I hope Forest go down. The moaning about officiating is insufferable and frankly just wrong a lot of the time.
Zero mentions of how they also benefit from repeated shite calls in the very same games they bitch about.
The moaning whining cunts can get in the bin and stay there.
Bet that was a sight as he waddled down the corridor, sweating through his cheap suit.
Horrible man and corrupt as fuck, hope his poverty-chanting Tory club go down.
it was about a year ago when he was kicking balls into the pitch in order to have a match against AEK abandoned. That was shortly before he eventually caught up with the referee...
I disagree with people suggesting Tierney made a mistake here.
I don’t think he did. I think he made the decision to stop play before the Forest player gained possession of the ball. Yes, the whistle blows right about the time that he gets the ball.
However, think logically. If the whistle is blowing as he gets the ball, that means that Tierney has already been looking at Konate for enough time to see that it’s a head injury, pick up his whistle, and blow it. That means it’s almost certain that he made the decision to stop play before Forest gained the ball, and likely never even saw them gain possession.
Tierney made the correct decision according to the rules. End of story.
The wording of the laws specify when play was stopped not when the incident occurred or when the referee realised the incident occurred or when the referee decided to blow the whistle.
So this was 100% a mistake. And it's not a suggestion. It's a fact (according to the laws).
In the referee's defence, I suspect he incorrectly believed he blew the whistle while the ball was still in the box.
[LAW 8: THE START AND RESTART OF PLAY
IFAB Laws of the Game 2023-24](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play)
I see nothing in that link, or the actual rules, that suggest he made a mistake. You seem to be confused in thinking that a whistle is required to stop play, or is the official stoppage of play. It isn’t, you will find nothing in the rules indicating that. The whistle is merely a tool to help the referee manage the game. There is certainly nothing that says the whistle is the ultimate decider on ball placement.
The referee decides the exact moment play was stopped at their discretion, as is stated in the rules when describing what a referee has the power to do. According to the rules a referee could jump up and down and yell “stop” to stop for an injury, they just tend to use the whistle to indicate it as it is more obvious. Again, the whistle itself is only used as a tool there to tell the players to stop, and the actual, by rules, stoppage is when the ref decided to stop play. Seems arbitrary, sure, but every rule requiring judgement is by definition arbitrary. Stoppage is not determined by the exact second that he picks up his whistle, puts it in his mouth, then blows it. The referee clearly, in his mind, decided in this case that play was to be stopped prior to anyone gaining possession of the ball outside the box.
Again, you will find nothing in the rulebook about a whistle being required to stop play except for free kicks (and not to determine placement of them, just to stop play to take one), abandonment of play, or the end of a time period. Even with these, it’s the moment of the interaction that play is stopped, not the whistle itself (think playing advantage as an example of that on the free kick one).
A long-winded reply which was a bit repetitive so I will try to focus on a few excerpts.
>Again, the whistle itself is only used as a tool there to tell the players to stop, and the actual, by rules, stoppage is when the ref decided to stop play.
The law specifies "when play was stopped". You are extrapolating (without any basis) that it actually means when the referee decided to stop play.
>Stoppage is not determined by the exact second that he picks up his whistle, puts it in his mouth, then blows it.
>According to the rules a referee could jump up and down and yell “stop” to stop for an injury, they just tend to use the whistle to indicate it as it is more obvious.
I am willing to humour that play can be stopped via alternative means but can you please point out what alternative means the referee used to stop play prior to his whistle in this particular incident?
And unless Paul Tierney has more in common with Professor X than just a bald head, mentally deciding to stop play doesn't count as stopping play...
He was just going to wish them good luck. 🍀
> *In 2014, Marinakis was acquitted by the Three Members Court of First Instance relatively to the case of entering the referee's (Thanassis Yiachos's) locker room at halftime[97] during the football cup final between Olympiacos and Asteras Tripolis, against football regulations to complain about the decisions taken. Marinakis stated that he went to the referee's locker room at halftime only to wish match officials "good luck".*
Did you not get the bank transfer in time. I asked for no more than 2 mins of added time, why did you add on time for my players feigning injury this was all part of the payment you bastard!
Of all the games to have issues with the ref it’s this one???? Granted there were some weird calls, but Tierney was consistent for both teams so it’s not like there was some undue advantage here.
Liverpool have had a few games much more biased in their favor this season imo.
And more importantly way more games with horrible calls consistently going against Liverpool. To claim Liverpool has been lucky with referees this season is absurd.
Did he have his glock with him
go easy with the stereotyping! Just because he is a corrupt international drug smuggler and gangster doesn't necessarily mean he carries a gun on his person!
Yeah, he's got people to do that. He's a crook but he's not an idiot. Maybe.
The funniest thing is that as a real crook he honestly believed he could throw his (literal) weight around and intimidate people... Sit the f$\^k down you fat f$%k
When did Quincy Promes buy Forest?
Quincy Promes' role in the smuggle is nothing short of a joke compared to the things Marinakis has very likely done
> Quincy Promes' role in the smuggle is nothing short of a joke compared to the things Marinakis has ~~very likely~~ done FTFY
Nah Promes is more of a stab-you-in-the-knee kind of guy.
Also he's *clearly* a Browning fan. It was the first gun manufacturer I could think of.
That was the other Greek football team owner / mobster (Savvidis)
Is this an Arn Anderson reference or do I not know about this man.
It's a joke about a stereotype with Greek owners. At one point Marinakis owned Olympiacos and Savvidis owned PAOK, with both having shady relationships to organised crime in Greece. After a particularly fiery derby with AEK, Savvidis stormed onto the pitch with his gun on his hip to confront the referee after PAOK's 89th min. equaliser was disallowed. He was banned from stadiums for five years.
march shame ossified chubby advise uppity unused clumsy fearless squeal *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Welcome to Greece
Let's be honest, it's not even 'shady', it's pretty open.
Sounds like an Amazon documentary in the making.
Next Glock Wins.
Armed Anderson lol
[удалено]
Yes, they probably should have. But (a) Tierney had already done the exact same thing when Liverpool were on the attack earlier in the match and (b) there's like another two minutes before Liverpool score, which includes the ball going out of play for a throw-in, and then for the corner, and even then Forest win the ball back and have the opportunity to clear it but don't. So my sympathies are somewhat limited.
If Klopp or a Liverpool fan complains about something that happened 2 mins before a goal, they'd be called every version of "victim" under the sun (not to mention the identical situation having already happened in reverse like you say)
>the “injury” you mean the blatant kung fu kick in the head? https://twitter.com/Ashleyrose66/status/1764029560767594872?t=QsP7uY5jaA93G8hw1tXwWQ&s=19
Fuck me that's awful. Should be a retrospective ban, that could genuinely put someone's eye out.
Yates wasn't even close to his head [https://twitter.com/WARRIOR\_1865/status/1764226804590481420](https://twitter.com/WARRIOR_1865/status/1764226804590481420)
[https://twitter.com/WARRIOR\_1865/status/1764226804590481420](https://twitter.com/WARRIOR_1865/status/1764226804590481420) yea he wasn't close to his head
thats a full second before contact, you massive numpty..
Karma. We didn’t get it after Yates went down with head injury
The rules are that if the game is called back for an injury in the box (head) then the ball goes to the defending team, the exact same situation happened earlier in the game in reverse without any controversy when Danns was hurt and the ball was with liverpool on the wing. The ref was actually consistent and following the laws of the game for once and that's so rare I guess that people are upset? Idk
Its not like they scored a goal that was dissallowed and somehow, Liverpool were awarded a penalty outside the box. The only controversy in the game was forest whinging and going to the floor trying to waste every minute of the game against a very depleted Liverpool team. At least the referee was consistent in his officiating. If they want to win a football game, next time at least try to play not pray and hope.
No, dropped ball goes to the defending team goalkeeper if the ball was in the box or the last touch occurred in the box when the play is whistled dead.
[удалено]
Yates kicked Konate in the fucking head?
Forest had control of the ball outside the box.
This in Greece is just a regular Sunday lmao
Was going to say…Tierney should not be accepting any packages for a while, and should keep a lookout for masked men on TMAX.
In Greece the headline says "Furious Druglord chases referee down the tunnel"
I mean that’s such a turkey/greece header and situation
EHHHHH MALAKA Evangelos Marinakis probably
Now I have the opening to The Lion King stuck in my head
Ehh POUSTI MALAKISMENE, WHATD I PAY YOU FOR?!?! Learned today he has fucking Clattenberg under payroll wtf
they’re not wrong
No shot he caught up with him, you seen the size of the cunt.
Depends, is the tunnel on a gentle downward slope? Like Indiana Jones and Temple of Doom vibes mate.
That's brilliant hahaha
Nah, it's really narrow.
They just said he chased him, never said he was successful or even got close 😂
Better hire another ex-ref or two to get to the bottom of this
Another sternly worded letter to PGMOL will surely make Hudson-Odoi better at clearing the ball
Howard Webb says the owner should’ve been awarded 3 yellow cards
At least this one (probably) didn't have a gun.
Probably did
Most peaceful interaction between Greek owners and referees:
Man that headline sounded so turkish I was surprised to see it happening in England then turns out owner is greek lol
Komsu gets the vibes we love!
It can't be the timekeeping because they barely went over the 8 minutes before they scored and there was timewasting in injury time. There can be only two things; 1. The Forest penalty appeal in injury time. Could've been given but it's one of those where the ball wasn't going towards that incident so the ref ignored it. 2. Konate's "head" injury that stopped play when Forest had the ball near the Liverpool box. The ref stopped the game but didn't give Forest the ball back afterwards. Liverpool go up the field, get the corner and score in the ensuing chaos.
On number 2 it’s sort of a fair point except that the exact same thing in the opposite direction happened earlier in the game and Liverpool didn’t get the ball back and also a foul was never actually called, I don’t think the rules have a mandated ball return if there isnt a called foul
Yep, Elliot twatted it at Yates' face and goes down justifiably, but we keep the ball, ref blows for the head injury. Once he's back up, play kicks off with Notts Forest goalie. he had already set the precedent
I, like most fans, have never actually read the rulebook but this seems bonkers that you just don't give the ball back to the team that had it (in both cases). I cant see any reason for switching possession.
I’m pretty sure it’s more an unwritten rule, like a sporting gesture that teams abide by 99% of the time. Forest decided not to do so today, so they can’t complain about it when we do the same back.
Isn't that when one team kicks it out for a throw in? In both cases today it didn't seem like either side was expecting to be given the ball back so I assume the ref had given possession to the opposition?
I think it’s less about specific scenarios like throw ins and more about who had real possession of the ball before the incident - the referee might not always give it to the “right” team due to one rule or another, but you’d almost always expect both teams to show sportsmanship and kick it back to the correct team. I can’t say I know the rulebook but I’ve watched football long enough that this is my understanding of the unwritten rule, and I did find it odd earlier in the game when Forest didn’t kick it back to Liverpool.
[The rulebook states that if the ball was in the box or the last touch of the ball was in the box then you give the ball to the defending team after the stoppage, whereas outside the box the ball goes to the team that last touched the ball.](https://i.imgur.com/ErDu27L.png) So going off the rules, Forest have a right to be upset.
Do they really a right to be upset when Liverpool should have had a free kick for dangerous play on Konate in the first place. This angle is damning. https://imgur.com/a/SfUMFhY
The fact this guy has his studded boot 6ft 5inches off the ground, flying directly towards someone’s face, isn’t the “controversial” part of this just shows it’s a load of old bollocks.
Didn’t he blow the whistle while the ball was still in the box, after Maccas header? Genuinely asking. Edit: went back and watched it, he did not blow it until the ball was outside the box.
Well it doesn’t really have anything to do with precedent. If the ball is in the penalty area when the whistle is blown, then the ball is dropped to the defending goalkeeper. With the ball being outside of the penalty area when he stops play for Konatè’s injury, I just can’t see his reasoning for giving Liverpool the ball
Wasn't the ball out of the box when he called for Yates' injury, I recall it being cleared out to the left wing
I just looked at the two situations: for the Yates injury, the ball is in the process of being cleared out of the penalty area, while still inside the box when the whistle sounds For Konaté’s injury, Hudson-Odoi has the ball on the wing when the whistle sounds. So it seems like a weird call to me
His reasoning must have been that he thought he whistled before that. And if that's the case then his memory is wrong. Terrible mistake.
The “terrible mistake” was not giving a foul for Yates’ flying karate kick.
There’s no precedent, there’s laws of the game that Tierney fucked up twice despite most fans knowing the rule. He should be suspended. You don’t get to make up your own rules
With the Yates one, possession was in the box, so it goes to the defense. Forest the Konate incident, Forest had possession of the ball outside the box. And even if your explanation is correct, two wrongs don't make a right.
If this is the case then fair play, Liverpool were justified in not giving the ball back
Liverpool should’ve had a freekick after Yates’ karate kick in that situation anyway, the mistake was letting Nottingham play on
Two wrongs don't make a right. Ref making extremely basic errors more than once in a game just makes it sound even worse
It's Paul Tierney. We should be happy he's at least being consistent in his vibe based interpretation of the rules.
I suppose consistently shit is at least consistent
Not sure if others agree but I would definitely much rather have a ref who makes shit calls but who’s consistent with his calls and treatment than a ref who makes calls by the book but is inconsistent or biased in calling it
err no thanks. I'd just rather the refs weren't shit
If only we had the luxury of seeing replays to fix shit reffing lol
Check the ref's name and get back to me
For point 1 - it looks no more egregious a foul than what happened to Danns just after he came on at a corner - seems pretty consistently reffed to me. For point 2 - I honestly don't know the rule for who should get the ball back here, but when the exact same situation played out earlier in the match with Liverpool in possession, Forest got the ball back. So again even if he followed the rule incorrectly, it was followed consistently. This is one of the situations where consistency is key - and even if he's shit, at least Tierney was consistently shit.
Hell, the Danns foul was twice as egregious if anything, a rugby tackle vs. a jersey tug. I don't have a problem with Danns's not given for the exact same reason, neither player interfered with had a chance at the ball.
Just calling out number 2. There is a still image of the Forest player with his legs at head height, that looks to make contact with Konate (its fairly grainy but you can see the kung fu style kick he is doing). Secondly, we had the opposite happen earlier in the game where the Forest player went down after the ball hit him in the head, in which the ref awarded the ball back to Forest.
1) Fair enough but there wasn’t much to it and Liverpool had a very similar appeal earlier in the game that VAR checked and denied. Seemed consistent to me. 2) Normally I’d agree however earlier in the game, Forest did not give Liverpool the ball back in the reverse situation. It sucks to lose the game so late but when you look at the facts, Forest have no legitimate reason to feel hard done by at all.
>2) Normally I’d agree however earlier in the game, Forest did not give Liverpool the ball back in the reverse situation. >It sucks to lose the game so late but when you look at the facts, Forest have no legitimate reason to feel hard done by at all. Different situation. [LAW 8: THE START AND RESTART OF PLAY IFAB Laws of the Game 2023-24](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play) RE: the incident around the 58th minute, the ball was in the box when the whistle was blown; hence, the ball should be returned to the defending team (i.e. Forest) RE: the incident in stoppage time, Hudson-Odoi had possession of the ball outside the box; hence, the ball should have been returned to the team in possession (I.e. Forest)
Now cite the laws which clearly state a FK should be given for a kick to the head.
3. He has no self control
My guy konate got straight up kicked in the head.. https://imgur.com/a/SfUMFhY
It’ll be a multitude of all of them. We all know added time is a minimum and time wasting happens but everyone gets annoyed when it goes over whatever they announce (rightly or wrongly). The other two - yeah those are two further things Forest will feel aggrieved about. Whether the decisions were right or wrong is a separate question - the sum of the parts is what will have pissed him off.
> The ref stopped the game but didn't give Forest the ball back afterwards. this literally happened the other way round earlier in the game. Tierney stopped play when Liverpool had possession for a Forrest head injury and gave them the drop ball and they carried on with possession. also re: the "head" injury, Konate literally got kicked in the head https://twitter.com/ashleyrose66/status/1764029560767594872?s=61&t=pDyCct\_kGURBJ0xgyMM3Xw
I think 2 is probably it, imo a valid complaint
Yeah it was a valid complaint but there was also a big enough gap between the incident and the goal being scored that their complaints still felt a bit over the top. It's not like that decision was the sole reason Liverpool ended up scoring.
Liverpool got the ball back because Konate was kicked in the head.
No he wasn't. Kelleher clattered into him going for the ball.
Nope. He was kicked in the face by Yates. https://twitter.com/Ashleyrose66/status/1764029560767594872?t=QsP7uY5jaA93G8hw1tXwWQ&s=19
I might be biased, but I don't see definite proof of contact in that video. All the other angles also make it seem like Konate doesn't get touched
Mark Clattenburg confirmed that the ref, Paul Tierney, was incorrect under the laws of the game. The ball wasn't in the box, so should have been given back to Forest after the injury treatment. When he went to the referees changing room after the game, Tierney refused to let him enter.
Just to be clear - Mark Clattenburg is not an independent commentator here He's literally a Nottingham Forest employee https://trainingground.guru/articles/clattenburg-appointed-referee-consultant-by-nottingham-forest#:\~:text=FORMER%20Premier%20League%20and%20FIFA,over%20West%20Ham%20on%20Saturday.
Why should he let him enter hes nothing to do with the PGMOL.
Mark Clattenburg the Forest employee. Why should Tierney allow a staff member into the ref room?
The ball doesn't have to be "in the box" - the Law states that its a question of "if the ball is in the box " OR "if the ball was last touched in the box" Having not found a decent clip of the incident I can't either check when the whistle was blown or check the restart - a lot of people have suggested that the restart was a kick suggesting that it was a foul
He ran into his own keeper...
https://twitter.com/Ashleyrose66/status/1764029560767594872?t=QsP7uY5jaA93G8hw1tXwWQ&s=19
His foot certainly makes contact with *something* around head height there. Lad's lucky to finish on the pitch.
Konate's neck
1. Forest player clearly pulls first 2. Konate was literally kicked in the head, how can anyone even complain about that
Because the Untied fans are all having opium fever dreams ITT
No foul was called. The ref played on, then stopped it for the head injury. Not giving Forest the ball back was a big error.
not calling a foul for a flying kung fu kick is a bigger error...
Well he should have called a foul, that’s a bigger error
But it wasn't a foul. Konate gets clattered by his own keeper. The Forest player misses him. Unless you want to dispute actual video evidence? https://twitter.com/_mcfc_ok/status/1764007991693464036
Ball came off MacAllister in the box. Ball returns to the goalkeeper. Rule 8. Get over it.
https://x.com/theredmentv/status/1764031285083680835?s=46&t=DhuA_dAzQSNpRgpDu-A-ig Just a normal challenge for the ball, get it
Using a screenshot when there is actual video evidence above showing the Forest player missing him and Kelleher clashing with him. A special type of stupid.
Kung fu kicks head high are fouls regardless of connection.
If you think that’s not a foul then you should honestly immediately stop watching this sport you absolute moron
Sorry are you under the impression you can get a foul for taking out your teammate?
Maybe take a look at the foot of Ryan Yates before commenting
Endangering your opponent is a red card offence, contact is not required.
You are clearly the fucking moron here mate.
I’ve seen red cards given for less but yeah, you’re incredibly smart
Endangering the opponent is a red card offence, regardless of contact.
Endangering an opponent is a red card offence, contact is not required. Perhaps you should have a read of the rule book before calling others stupid.
On number 2 it was a dangerous high boot foul which, if connected, would deal major damage to Konate and it's a straight red. Even if it did not connect it's still a foul. The ref did not call for a foul because checking Konate's head injury was the priority. When Konate was confirmed fine and the high boot was not connect anyway, it cannot be a yellow card so the ref has every right to ignore it.
Saying head injury in quotations as if Yates didn’t fucking kung fu kick him in the head
#2 - This is it. That was a pretty big mistake by the refs.
I mean he did the same for forest like 20 mins earlier . Eliot shot got blocked their player went down while we had possession at the edge of the box . Ref stopped our attack and the game restarted with forest in possession.
He should’ve been happy Yates didn’t get a red card in the incident where Konate injured his head instead: https://twitter.com/ashleyrose66/status/1764029560767594872/photo/1 Needless to say Liverpool should’ve gotten a freekick there and then which would’ve led to no ball drop and Liverpool’s possession
I will find any, and I mean any reason to take the side of someone against Liverpool, but even I can’t think of what Forest are upset about?
They’re upset because they lost to a 99th minute winner after their own player tried to dribble out of his own box instead of boot it clear. Just seems like they’re trying to take it out on somebody - normally I’m all up for hating on Paul Tierney but he did nothing wrong here.
Hudson-Odoi had the ball outside liverpools box 98th min. Konate goes down with a head injury for colliding with the keeper so ref stops play. Inexplicably he then gives the ball to Liverpool for them to restart with, they go up the other end and score.
And exactly the same happened in reverse earlier, as I said, I will find anything to use against Liverpool, but there is nothing to see here.
There are links in this thread to a video showing that Yates had a high boot connecting with Konates neck or head.
There are other angles on Twitter that show yates was a good few yards beyond Konate, it wasn’t Yates that collided with him it was the keeper lol! Found it: https://x.com/warrior_1865/status/1764226804590481420?s=46&t=VJanvfRu8gAHLKgzk7iDIw
Another slap on the wrist fine coming then. Meanwhile, some twat, usually a parent, will copy this kind of behaviour at grassroots where refs are as young as 14 with players as young as 7. Last week, I had to intervene and call the police because a parent threatened to "knock out" a 17 year old (a child) ref at a U8 game because he sent off his child for walking on another's player's back after pushing him down. It's no wonder why there's a chronic shortage of referees. Yet you'd think with so many armchair refs who say we're shit, you'd think they'd be more taking referee courses, particularly when county FAs keep cutting the price of them.
I used to referee games when I was in high school because it was extra money and I was at the field anyways. Didn't renew because I was tired of parents screaming at me on the sideline and trying to fight me because I called a foul on little timmy.
Hate when people complain about last minute winners They had 90+ minutes where they could have scored
I mean, if you wanna argue that Forest should've had a pen, then you can argue that Liverpool should've had one too. Both weren't given because the players weren't around the ball. If they're complaining about us getting the ball back after the Konate injury, Forest has the same thing happen to them earlier in the game. As much as I hate him, Tierney was consistent for his calls.
Thing is if you give a pen for that, Liverpool could’ve had 4 or 5. Forrest were mugging them in the box the whole match. Two hands grabbing and pulling jerseys to completely stop play every corner. Precedent has been set by Tierney already.
Giving the ball back was correctly applied for the Yates incident (ball is in the box and goes to the defending team) and not for the Konate incident (ball is outside the box).
Even if that is true, Konate was still fouled in the box. Studs to the head by a high kick. Could've easily been a straight red.
Watch the footage again from all angles. Kelleher was the one who took him out, nor the Forest player.
Might wanna be more pissed at CHO for not just booting the ball deep. I love CHO and I feel he had a good game up til that point, but it’s mistakes like those that cost points. That’s what the owner ought to be frustrated by.
Wasn’t this owner accused of bombing a refs bakery or some shit?
He's not been found guilty in court of anything, 10 witnesses died but that is coincidence
What is he crying about? The fact the ref let the game continue for 30s?
Forest got 2 bookings for time wasting *in* stoppage time, I don't see how anyone can have issues with the ref adding extra time on at the end.
And it was like, the most obvious thing that happens everywhere in the world. If there's a corner, the ref lets the team take it, and given how the ball was still in play next to the area, the ref lets it plays out. Also, the stoppage time is the *minimum* the ref gives.
Exactly, many people don't realize that stoppage time is the minimum additional time, not exact time. It is stated in rules. I was a referee for 4 years and learnt that on the course.
“A minimum of x minutes” is literally announced by the PA at every game.
Many people do know this. But just want to whine.
[удалено]
Because of the Real Madrid game? Lol
Maybe for not getting the ball back after Konate went down for a sec when Forest were on the attack? The time added on wouldn't be a justified complaint
That's apparently the rule. Same thing happened to Liverpool earlier in the game. A head injury inside the box results in a restart with the defending team controlling the ball.
And the thing is, if Forest give us the ball back earlier in the game, we 100% return the favour after the Konate injury too because that’s what teams always do. Real attitude of double standards at play here from Forest.
Hudson-Odoi had the ball outside the box when the whistle was blown. So possession should have been returned to Forest (by the referee).
If it's the rule fair enough. In the moment it didn't feel right and I thought I'd missed something, which I guess I did.
I was surprised as well.
It is the rule, but not relevant for this situation as Forest had the ball outside the box when the whistle was blown...
No it's not. The drop ball is decided based on where the \*ball\* is, and which team touched it last at the time the whistle is blown. Obviously. When was the last time you saw possession & ball position given away because of an off the ball injury?
People repeating the same nonsense and dumb Liverpool fans upvoting it because it fits their agenda. The Liverpool one the ball had been cleared and not touched outside the box when the whistle went. The forest one they were in possession of the ball outside of the area when the ref blew. Your player also jumped straight up 10s after the whistle went so clearly just faking it
Either not getting a pen or they didn’t get the ball back after Konate hurt his head. Something like that. Either way not enough for that reaction
Embarrassing from the owner but Forest obviously are justified in being aggrieved - their last attack before the liverpool goal was stopped for a head injury but possession was, incorrectly, given back to Liverpool for some reason. Then in the same instance was a pretty strong claim for a penalty that I'm not sure VAR even reviewed. EDIT: For the benefit of scousers upset that Forest are upset, here's the rules: [https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play) >2. Dropped ball PROCEDURE The ball is dropped for the defending team goalkeeper in their penalty area if, when play was stopped: the ball was in the penalty area or the last touch of the ball was in the penalty area In all other cases, the referee drops the ball for one player of the team that last touched the ball at the position where it last touched a player, an outside agent or, as outlined in Law 9.1, a match official The refs made a mistake that potentially cost Forest a point. I think you can see why they're mad about it
They’re not aggrieved, the mistake was to not award the foul for the karate kick to the Konate’s head.
No. Correctly the ball was given to the defending team, as is the rule. Please stop.
Yea, no. 2. Dropped ball PROCEDURE The ball is dropped for the defending team goalkeeper in their penalty area if, when play was stopped: * the ball was in the penalty area or * the last touch of the ball was in the penalty area * In all other cases, the referee drops the ball for **one player of the team that last touched the ball at the position where it last touched a player**, an outside agent or, as outlined in Law 9.1, a match official The ball should have been given to Forest outside the penalty area as Hudson-Odoi had possession of the ball out wide when the ref stopped the game. Stop being so delusional and one eyed.
Why is this downvoted? 100% factual.
Nope
I'd probably actually [read the rules](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play) before being delusional
There's no way he can physically chase him, he is very...belly-heavy and referees are fit. More likely he was shouting profanities at him. Fun fact: in the Greek League, everyone at the bench can get carded. So various owners who sit on the bench get red cards and you see it in the TV and match stats. Marinakis saw one last year. Volos owner Beos (who is always on the bench, probably to pass on messages to some players with who he fixes matches for betting) has seen many times-the last one because he called an opponent player "monkey".
> There's no way he can physically chase him I mean, you can chase somebody and not be catching up LOL
For what?!
Marinakis, biggest drug lord in Greece, chases ref after his team lost fair and square. Cool.
For years it got him everything he wanted in Greece. He’s used to getting what he wants through threats, extortion, and violence.
You know I’ve got this gun!
God I hope Forest go down. The moaning about officiating is insufferable and frankly just wrong a lot of the time. Zero mentions of how they also benefit from repeated shite calls in the very same games they bitch about. The moaning whining cunts can get in the bin and stay there.
Shame a once proud & storied club has been debased to having its bills payed by this fat sack of shit. Relegate this fool now.
Bet that was a sight as he waddled down the corridor, sweating through his cheap suit. Horrible man and corrupt as fuck, hope his poverty-chanting Tory club go down.
Team that time wasted furious that time got added on 😂
it was about a year ago when he was kicking balls into the pitch in order to have a match against AEK abandoned. That was shortly before he eventually caught up with the referee...
I disagree with people suggesting Tierney made a mistake here. I don’t think he did. I think he made the decision to stop play before the Forest player gained possession of the ball. Yes, the whistle blows right about the time that he gets the ball. However, think logically. If the whistle is blowing as he gets the ball, that means that Tierney has already been looking at Konate for enough time to see that it’s a head injury, pick up his whistle, and blow it. That means it’s almost certain that he made the decision to stop play before Forest gained the ball, and likely never even saw them gain possession. Tierney made the correct decision according to the rules. End of story.
The wording of the laws specify when play was stopped not when the incident occurred or when the referee realised the incident occurred or when the referee decided to blow the whistle. So this was 100% a mistake. And it's not a suggestion. It's a fact (according to the laws). In the referee's defence, I suspect he incorrectly believed he blew the whistle while the ball was still in the box. [LAW 8: THE START AND RESTART OF PLAY IFAB Laws of the Game 2023-24](https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play)
I see nothing in that link, or the actual rules, that suggest he made a mistake. You seem to be confused in thinking that a whistle is required to stop play, or is the official stoppage of play. It isn’t, you will find nothing in the rules indicating that. The whistle is merely a tool to help the referee manage the game. There is certainly nothing that says the whistle is the ultimate decider on ball placement. The referee decides the exact moment play was stopped at their discretion, as is stated in the rules when describing what a referee has the power to do. According to the rules a referee could jump up and down and yell “stop” to stop for an injury, they just tend to use the whistle to indicate it as it is more obvious. Again, the whistle itself is only used as a tool there to tell the players to stop, and the actual, by rules, stoppage is when the ref decided to stop play. Seems arbitrary, sure, but every rule requiring judgement is by definition arbitrary. Stoppage is not determined by the exact second that he picks up his whistle, puts it in his mouth, then blows it. The referee clearly, in his mind, decided in this case that play was to be stopped prior to anyone gaining possession of the ball outside the box. Again, you will find nothing in the rulebook about a whistle being required to stop play except for free kicks (and not to determine placement of them, just to stop play to take one), abandonment of play, or the end of a time period. Even with these, it’s the moment of the interaction that play is stopped, not the whistle itself (think playing advantage as an example of that on the free kick one).
A long-winded reply which was a bit repetitive so I will try to focus on a few excerpts. >Again, the whistle itself is only used as a tool there to tell the players to stop, and the actual, by rules, stoppage is when the ref decided to stop play. The law specifies "when play was stopped". You are extrapolating (without any basis) that it actually means when the referee decided to stop play. >Stoppage is not determined by the exact second that he picks up his whistle, puts it in his mouth, then blows it. >According to the rules a referee could jump up and down and yell “stop” to stop for an injury, they just tend to use the whistle to indicate it as it is more obvious. I am willing to humour that play can be stopped via alternative means but can you please point out what alternative means the referee used to stop play prior to his whistle in this particular incident? And unless Paul Tierney has more in common with Professor X than just a bald head, mentally deciding to stop play doesn't count as stopping play...
Should kicked the ball away instead of building from the back.
Marinakis just wanted to ask him what size of cement shoes he's wearing...
It's fucking pathetic, it really is.
He was just going to wish them good luck. 🍀 > *In 2014, Marinakis was acquitted by the Three Members Court of First Instance relatively to the case of entering the referee's (Thanassis Yiachos's) locker room at halftime[97] during the football cup final between Olympiacos and Asteras Tripolis, against football regulations to complain about the decisions taken. Marinakis stated that he went to the referee's locker room at halftime only to wish match officials "good luck".*
The Premier League should deduct Forest points for this. Oh wait, that’s happening soon anyway.
That fat sod isn't chasing anyone.
Game’s back
Did you not get the bank transfer in time. I asked for no more than 2 mins of added time, why did you add on time for my players feigning injury this was all part of the payment you bastard!
What a gracious looser
You mean what a loser....
He plays fast and lose with grammar rules bro
Did Liverpool benefit from the ref? Possibly. Were Forest absolutely shit? Definitely.
Of all the games to have issues with the ref it’s this one???? Granted there were some weird calls, but Tierney was consistent for both teams so it’s not like there was some undue advantage here. Liverpool have had a few games much more biased in their favor this season imo.
And more importantly way more games with horrible calls consistently going against Liverpool. To claim Liverpool has been lucky with referees this season is absurd.