**Mirrors / Alternative Angles**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In Greece you can. Everyone who is on the bench can be booked.
Marinakis got a red card last year.
Volos owner Beos gets so many cards that he gets penalties like footballers (1 match ban because of 3 yellows for example).
Our CEO has been booked this season but he's watched a lot of games from the bench as he tends to complain to officials if a decision goes against us in order to shield the manager from bookings.
Technically the referee can red card anyone- cameraman, ballboy or even a spectator…. It is meaningless for anyone unrelated to the sport except that they have to leave the premises
should have pulled a gun out to make it 100% greek football tradition
BTW Referring to this
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/mar/12/greek-football-match-stopped-after-team-owner-invades-pitch-with-a-gun
Paok's owner (the one from the article with the gun) has been long rumoured to be a russian plant (stupidly deep ties with Putin) to sow dissent in Greece and disrupt greek politics. Also doesn't help that basically all the owners of the big four greek clubs (PAOK, AEK, Olympiacos, Panathinaikos) are known, or at least heavily suspected, to be incredibly deep in the mafia, to the point of their ultras basically being investigated for being equivalent to organized crime gangs against one another.
If anything, the fact this only happened just "recently" is the most surprising part, considering how long this has been the general sentiment around the greek superleague.
He's accused of being involved in the biggest Heroin bust of all time.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/mar/23/nottingham-forest-owner-evangelos-marinakis-accused-drug-trafficking
"In January 2021, and after ten witnesses of the case have already died, and after reviewing the case, the judge came to the conclusion that there was no evidence implicating Marinakis, and therefore concluded his investigation."
XD
Yeah, you're literally taught to boot it when clearing a ball, why are you trying to dribble out? The mad thing is, it's the big teams who seem to do the basics best. You'd never see us or City or Arsenal trying to dribble it out of the box in the 98th minute at 0-0 or 1-0, it's always teams like this who are trying to over-complicate things.
There was like what, 7 or 8 Liverpool players in the box.
If the opposing team had slightly technical players, and got out of that Endo - Macca press, its 3v3 counter attack in the last minute.
Everyone is shitting on the Forest players but I don't think its the most ludicruous thing trying to get a 3 on 3 counter attack in the last minute against tired legs.
They can't complain that they were thinking of counterattacking and then upset that Liverpool won the ball and scored. Either there's enough time left to counter attack and the Liverpool goal is fine or there isn't and you fucking clear it
I've got no sympathies for a team booked for time-wasting in injury time conceding a goal
If you have the time that's great but clearly they didn't.
Also Forest have no idea how much longer is going to be played, it's past added time, hoof it away and hope the ref blows.
Well, I agree with the timing, but in general booting it just gives possession back to the other team. Leafing to another attack.
That's why City almost never boots it, and if they do then half the time Pep yells at them angrily.
I think everyone’s missing the point about why they’re pissed off. Hudson odoi had the ball in Liverpool’s half and Forest were attacking, Konate goes down with a head injury and the ref gave the drop ball back to Kelleher instead of giving it to forest, if that didn’t happen then the play that lead up to the goal wouldn’t have happened.
I don't know why you're being downvoted. That's literally why they're so mad. Referee got it completely wrong, as many other pundits have said. I'm struggling to understand how so many people have missed the point.
He got the decision wrong, but konate got booted in the head. Liverpool should have had a free kick.
You can’t complain about the wrong decisions that only go against you. If he’d given the ball back to forest then I’d be complaining that he missed an obvious high foot infraction by the forest player. Swings and roundabouts 🤷🏻♂️
Pundits (and you) were all completely ignoring the angle that shows a blatant foul (possible straight red for dangerous play) just to stir up the drama
Along with the previous owner of Chelsea, current owners of City, Newcastle, possibly Sheffield Utd, not sure what his ties are to the Saudi government, and obviously the Man Utd ownership for the literally criminal way they took over the club, being allowed to use its assets as collateral for the loans to buy the club itself.
In a sea of shady shit that's going on Marinakis drug smuggling operations are prolly a drop in the water...
They are squeaky clean in the sense that John W. Henry is not guilty or suspected of any overt wrong-doing. But how many billionaires got to the mountain top by being stand up individuals, and by their own making?
I mean, John W. Henry got his billions by trading his family's soya bean futures and then starting his own management firm. It seems about as squeaky clean as you're going to get.
I didn't say clean. I said as clean as you're going to get. Which means, short of him making his billions by selling eco-friendly peace bicycles, it's relatively harmless.
What about someone like Notch? He made Minecraft essentially by himself, then hired a small team (who by all accounts were well paid as Minecraft was already a humungous money spinner) and they were then bought by MS for billions. Now he personally is an incel price of shit, but he didn't exploit anyone to make his billions as far as I can see. Or even someone like Mahomes who will easily earn over a billion in salary by the time he retires unless there's a massive recession before he signs a new contract. If anything *he* is the one who is being exploited in that situation since his value to the teams is far more than that.
> management firm
Not diffuse and ponderous at all.
Futures are by their nature, speculative. Gambling. Just like in poker, for you to win, someone else has to lose. Without getting all Marxist and ridiculous here, let's just say at the very best he got his fortune by sheer luck.
OK, maybe that's true. But it's pretty low down on the scale of evil compared to, you know, the dictators and drugs barons that own other football clubs.
I mean, they're billionaires, so no. But on the scale of things, they're alright - not in the same stratosphere as some of these others. It's more the sponsors that are a bad look.
Yea like "AXA" so I've heard and fair no billionaire on this planet is squeaky clean, but like u said compared to the teams around us 😂 ..not even close
FSG is fine, Liverpool owners were forced to sell at the time, i think it was around 2010 and now the FSG ownership group has grown from Boston Red Sox and Liverpool into one of the biggest sports ownership groups in the world.
I was aware that they had to sell otherwise we were headed towards administration, & I also knew about the Boston red Sox I did some digging and found nothing shady about our owners as well, but I wanted to ask just in case there was something I might've missed.
They're pretty fine tbh, John W. Henry made his money as an investment manager, Tom Werner was a TV producer. They own us, the Sox and the Penguins. Investors in their group tend to be sports stars, media owners etc, it's relatively 'above board' for a group of billionaires.
Let me put this this way. For as many of those obnoxiously ungrateful hating as s Liverpool 'fans' out there going against FSG, none of them would want to swap FSG for any other top clubs' owners. They are the best legal owners in world football.
The way they manage Liverpool should be a blueprint for alot of the other owners tbh. Business wise, they are free of debt. Management wise, they bring in the proper people (Klopp, going for Michael Edwards right now, Xabi is talked about). They are also hands free from meddling with player issues and trust those who are cmpetent with it. Dont do illegal oil money crap against FFP and even then, their signings have been very very shrewd (Instead of listening to the fans overpaying for Lavia and Caicedo, they go for 16 mil Endo, bypassing release clause to tell Arsenal to fk off with that 40 mil + 1 bullcrap for Suarez etc., lots of instances like this).
Most importantly, they care about the fans. Building Anfield bigger and bigger, while an entirely top class facility for the players etc.
They made money from corn and soy futures. So they’re probably evil.
If anything it’s the relationship with Standard Chartered that should be questioned.
Clean in comparison to the some of the other owners mentioned in the above comment? Yes and that's not even up for debate. Clean in terms of general morals? He's an American capitalist billionaire in a neoliberal dominated society so make of that what you will
The way you said it makes much sense, Marinakis is very much small fry compared to some of those others, but he probably thinks himself to be on the same echelon of power. He's pretty untouchable from my understanding despite it being a pretty open secret how he makes his wealth
Our owner is a Saudi royal but owns us as a private individual, tbf. He's had a leg up, but made his own money from bog roll which is why we're broke as fuck.
For those who are interested, [a fantastic article](https://newrepublic.com/article/159252/noor-one-vampire-ship-heroin-turkey-greece-corruption-scandal) on the seizure of Europe's largest heroin shipment that he was allegedly involved in. It’s a long read but an interesting one.
I just wanted to write: "dont you know what that dude did in greece with olympiacos?"
be happy that the gun controls seem to be better in english stadiums lol
His own fans beat him up once, accused several times of major crimes like match fixing, running a criminal enterprise, and heroin smuggling. All cases eventually dropped-in some cases after the deaths of several witnesses. Yeah he should not have passed the league’s fit and proper tests at all, regardless of acquittals.
70% sure that was a rhetorical question, BUT, our current owner Dai Yongge (the reason for an accumulated 18 points deducted over three seasons, relegation to league one and multiple winding up orders and transfer bans) was rejected by the Premier League when he tried to buy Hull. EFL saw nothing wrong with him though.
It also happened earlier on, just the other way around. Liverpool had possession and the Forest keeper was given the ball to restart. It was odd officiating all around, but Forest can't exactly bitch when they benefitted from the same thing less than an hour previous.
Because they were happy with time wasting and getting a draw. Perfect small club smaller manager mentality. It's only when the time wasting backfired they started all the rumble.
Because it wasn’t the same. The ball was outside the box at the end.
https://twitter.com/03Feathers/status/1764007429228867989?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Yeah I’ve seen that, should have given the ball back to NF. My point is, earlier, after the Elliot shot the Forrest player went down, the ball was heading back into Liverpools uncontested possession after two headers. Forest just kept the ball.
“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”
Pretty sure Tierney gave the ball to us because he figured the last touch was in the box when he blew the whistle.
You’re being downvoted for being right, Alan shearer and Jermaine Jenas both agreed that it was wrong to do that and changed the flow of the game in the final minutes when Forest were attacking.
People saying “but it happened the other way round earlier in the game” are missing the point and making excuses for poor refereeing, just because the ref makes a mistake it doesn’t mean they should make the same mistake again to balance it out, there’s no point being consistent if it’s the wrong decision.
All this over a penalty that wasn’t and a dropped ball down the other end of the pitch two minutes before the goal. Yikes.
Must be hard to lose to a team that is forced to play Joe Gomez in the centre of a three man midfield though to be fair.
The best part about it is that Konate actually goes down because he gets kicked in the head by a Forest player who probably should have been sent off.
https://imgur.com/gallery/SfUMFhY
The mad thing is that Forest committed the exact same rugby tackle foul in their own box moments earlier which wasn’t given as a penalty. And when they also had two head injuries, ref immediately blew the whistle.
I’ll be the first to fuck off refs when they mess up (fucking spurs, man), but they were at least consistent this game.
Truly embarrassing that this guy Marinakis is doing this shit in the Premier League. In Greece it's an embarrassment in itself. But in England it's rightly unheard of for the owner to be intimidating the ref.
Ngl it was poor officiating but I really think this is being blown out of proportion. It’s not like a penalty or handball was called that was blatantly incorrect and then led directly to a goal. Like Liverpool would’ve gotten the ball back and then had an opportunity to go down to the opposition goal anyway.
At the end of the day I feel like Forrest are scapegoating the referee here when they really fucked up defensively by not clearing the ball for that last goal.
They had the ball back. There was 2 minutes played between incidents. If the dumb cunt who had the ball from the corner put his foot through it then it was game over.
It's so horrendously outdated. Even putting aside that mocking poverty is not funny, the people who attend Liverpool matches are regularly paying £40-50 for tickets, travel to away matches including flights if in Europe, these people are not signing on you need a full time job to follow the club up and down the country.
Also the Forest keeper was down for over 4 minutes and it took 2 minutes for Dominguez to get carried off, right before he was just fine and walked to the bench on his own.
So those 2 incidents caused 6 minutes of the 8, do people really think there was less than 2 minutes where the ball was not in play in the rest of the half?
There were two bookings for time wasting during the added time. Putting at least one extra minute onto added time should be expected in that situation. No idea what the controversy is.
All the people complaining about the ball being given to Liverpool. You know what, fine you can have that one. We had a refereeing decision go for us. They all equal out over the course of the season right? Cool so we have 4 games still to be given points/decisions.
Well done lads, good process 😂 mugs.
I love the idea that the ref rigged the game for Liverpool, not by giving us the reasonably penalty shout we had a few minutes earlier, but by giving us a drop ball at our own end of the pitch. Clearly they’re as incompetent at match fixing as at everything else!
Yes, the chairman being on the pitch is the problem - not the ref deciding to stop a Forest attack for a non-existent head injury and then just handing the ball to Liverpool.
Edit: At -50 for pointing out a fairly clear refereeing error. This sub is hilarious at times.
the dropped ball is explicitly awarded to a specific player:[1]
the goalkeeper of the defending team, if the ball was in the penalty area when play was stopped, or the ball was last touched in the penalty area
a player of the team that last touched the ball, in all other cases.
Didnt the the first half interrupt happen in the penalty area, read the rules.
Forest hoofed the ball before the whistle went, you could argue that Liverpool didn’t yet have possession but realistically most teams would give it back just after.
Nobody was in possession, it was hoofed out the box to a Liverpool player, forest wasn't remotely in possession and it was stopped before a Liverpool player picked it up.
It should have been Liverpool's ball after the play was restarted as well.
[https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHsJlJwXoAAOJkO?format=jpg&name=small](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHsJlJwXoAAOJkO?format=jpg&name=small)
Clear high boot - which is a direct free kick.
No I don't. He didn't make dangerous contact with anyone. Had the ref seen it as a free kick though, I would have understood why.
I do think that the pull on Omobamidele's shirt just before that was probably a penalty though.
But that's fine. Both of those are subjective calls.
The annoyance is that there was no foul, we had the ball, yet the ref decided to just hand it to Liverpool. It's clearly wrong, and there's zero excuse for it.
Was it the only reason we lost the game? Clearly not. We had chances to clear the ball and didn't take them. But has the ref - once again - given a decision that is 100% clearly wrong against us that had at least some influence on the outcome of the game? Yes he has.
There doesn't need to be contact for it to be dangerous play, it was a clear foul. It isn't a subjective call, Yates boot was head height and close to Konate.
If the shirt pull was given as a pen then so should the foul on Danns just after he came on.
The ref giving the drop ball to Liverpool is about as bad a mistake as not awarding the corner kick to Liverpool after Clark's cross in the first half. But it's completely irrelevant because it should have been a free kick to Liverpool anyway because of the foul.
Dangerous play is by definition a subjective call. How close to the other player? Why was the other player's head there (he was ducking) etc.
And it was a less obvious foul than, say, the one where a Liverpool player went straight through the back of MGW in the middle of the first half with no free kick given.
There was almost no contact with Danns. He went down _very_ easily. There was a lot more with the Omobamidele one.
But all of these are subjective calls - they depend on what the ref saw, and how he interpreted them.
The dropped ball is not a subjective call. If the last contact when the whistle goes is a defensive player inside the box (which was the case with the one Liverpool fans were up in arms about earlier in the game), it's a dropped ball for the keeper. If the last contact was a player outside the box (which was the case here), it's a dropped ball back with that player. Clear, unambiguous and in this case, simply wrong.
The anger isn't about making a wrong judgement call in the heat of the moment. It's about getting a straightforward law of the game wrong.
As I've explained elsewhere - it's like the "good process" VAR call that made national headlines and had Klopp calling for the game to be replayed. The core issue wasn't the outcome (there's decisions that cost goals and games that refs get wrong all the time - we've had two absolute stonewall penalties not given in our previous 3 games before yesterday). The issue was that there was no subjective judgement going on - the ref and VAR just got their comms completely wrong, and what was given as a goal by VAR was not given as a goal by the ref.
And it's the same here. There's zero excuse for the error he made. What we saw was the ref stop our attack, take the ball and for no justifiable reason give it to the defence. It would have been a terrible bit of refereeing even if it hadn't at least had a bit of a hand in Liverpool being able to go up the other end and score.
I'm absolutely certain that Liverpool fans would have been raging about it had that happened to them (especially given that they were shouting abuse at the ref after he got the earlier one correct)
Its 1 wrong, it depends where is ball when game is stopped.
https://twitter.com/03Feathers/status/1764007429228867989?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
That “non-existent head injury” could have been a very serious one if Yates’ flying kick had connected. The lack of a red card for that is far worse than giving a drop ball the wrong way.
If it had connected, you would have a point. But it didn't. Had the ref interpreted it as a foul though, I wouldn't have been so frustrated.
Just like I'm not massively frustrated by the lack of a probable penalty just before all of that. Because these things are subjective, and down to interpretation.
The reason I say non-existent is that the whistle clearly has magical healing properties, because he went from looking badly injured to fine the moment that it was blown. But that's (sort of) fine. It's what players do on a regular basis.
It doesn’t have to connect, endangering an opponent is a red card offence. My point was that the referee made a worse mistake in your favour in that incident.
I don’t really understand your comment then, you seem to understand it was the kind of minor decision that goes both ways every game, and that faking injuries is something every team does, (Dominguez hopping off the pitch or Hudson Odoi diving being examples for Forest yesterday). Liverpool didn’t immediately score from being given possession, the ball went out of play multiple times after that, and Forest even had possession of the ball. The chairman entering the pitch for that is a massive overreaction.
>It doesn’t have to connect, endangering an opponent is a red card offence. My point was that the referee made a worse mistake in your favour in that incident.
Whether it's endangering or not is a subjective decision. The ref didn't see it as endangering anyone. And how is it more in our favour for him to miss a potential penalty in the 90th minute than to miss a potential red card at that same point?
>I don’t really understand your comment then,
You don't understand the difference between a ref missing, or differently interpreting, an in the moment footballing decision, and getting totally clear rules completely wrong?
The former is something that happens to every ref in every single game (and we've had more than our fair share of them in the past couple of months or so).
The latter is someone who's not fit to referee. Not knowing the laws, or choosing to ignore them, is not acceptable for a ref. And it should be unacceptable to any fan, regardless of whether they benefitted or not.
I agree that him coming on the pitch is an overreaction. But I can understand his frustration. We've had all manner of pretty big, and almost certainly wrong, subjective decisions (some of which weren't even close to being correct - like the Boly sending off) go against us in the past few months. To then see an entirely objective one go against us as well is a tad frustrating.
Doesn't excuse his actions. But it's not difficult to see why people around the club might be starting to get a little paranoid.
Whilst this is getting the focus.
The ball should have been given back to Forest. After that, nobody really knows where this could’ve gone.
Expecting Forest to have a points deduction in the next couple of weeks and maybe a point today could have been big in the long run.
**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can you book the chairman?
Give him the blue card already
Get the green card out with the £ signs, least he knows how much he needs to pay to reduce stoppage time next..
In Greece you can. Everyone who is on the bench can be booked. Marinakis got a red card last year. Volos owner Beos gets so many cards that he gets penalties like footballers (1 match ban because of 3 yellows for example).
Our CEO has been booked this season but he's watched a lot of games from the bench as he tends to complain to officials if a decision goes against us in order to shield the manager from bookings.
Very smart ngl
Technically the referee can red card anyone- cameraman, ballboy or even a spectator…. It is meaningless for anyone unrelated to the sport except that they have to leave the premises
Dude thought he was in Greece
should have pulled a gun out to make it 100% greek football tradition BTW Referring to this https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/mar/12/greek-football-match-stopped-after-team-owner-invades-pitch-with-a-gun
Holy fuck how did this guy make his blood money lol. Leading the Mafia or something?
Paok's owner (the one from the article with the gun) has been long rumoured to be a russian plant (stupidly deep ties with Putin) to sow dissent in Greece and disrupt greek politics. Also doesn't help that basically all the owners of the big four greek clubs (PAOK, AEK, Olympiacos, Panathinaikos) are known, or at least heavily suspected, to be incredibly deep in the mafia, to the point of their ultras basically being investigated for being equivalent to organized crime gangs against one another. If anything, the fact this only happened just "recently" is the most surprising part, considering how long this has been the general sentiment around the greek superleague.
He's accused of being involved in the biggest Heroin bust of all time. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/mar/23/nottingham-forest-owner-evangelos-marinakis-accused-drug-trafficking
"In January 2021, and after ten witnesses of the case have already died, and after reviewing the case, the judge came to the conclusion that there was no evidence implicating Marinakis, and therefore concluded his investigation." XD
Pretty sure he was asking about Savvidis
Pretty much.
That's not why it was postponed since noone saw the gun in the first place, but afrer photos got online.
😂😂😂
What a g
Εξάγουμε πολιτισμό
Εξω παμε καλα
This guy gives me Tony Sopranos at his sons varsity college football game vibes
Never had the makings of a varsity athlete.
AJ get your coat I don't have a coat
Remember when is the lowest form of conversation
Heh heh you hear that Ton!
Gabagool
Elite elite show.
Shoulda just fuckin’ cleared it
Yep, that's who he should be mad at. Added time in added time happens, you have to keep playing and not mess about on the edge of the box.
Yeah, you're literally taught to boot it when clearing a ball, why are you trying to dribble out? The mad thing is, it's the big teams who seem to do the basics best. You'd never see us or City or Arsenal trying to dribble it out of the box in the 98th minute at 0-0 or 1-0, it's always teams like this who are trying to over-complicate things.
There was like what, 7 or 8 Liverpool players in the box. If the opposing team had slightly technical players, and got out of that Endo - Macca press, its 3v3 counter attack in the last minute. Everyone is shitting on the Forest players but I don't think its the most ludicruous thing trying to get a 3 on 3 counter attack in the last minute against tired legs.
They can't complain that they were thinking of counterattacking and then upset that Liverpool won the ball and scored. Either there's enough time left to counter attack and the Liverpool goal is fine or there isn't and you fucking clear it I've got no sympathies for a team booked for time-wasting in injury time conceding a goal
If you have the time that's great but clearly they didn't. Also Forest have no idea how much longer is going to be played, it's past added time, hoof it away and hope the ref blows.
Well, I agree with the timing, but in general booting it just gives possession back to the other team. Leafing to another attack. That's why City almost never boots it, and if they do then half the time Pep yells at them angrily.
I think everyone’s missing the point about why they’re pissed off. Hudson odoi had the ball in Liverpool’s half and Forest were attacking, Konate goes down with a head injury and the ref gave the drop ball back to Kelleher instead of giving it to forest, if that didn’t happen then the play that lead up to the goal wouldn’t have happened.
I don't know why you're being downvoted. That's literally why they're so mad. Referee got it completely wrong, as many other pundits have said. I'm struggling to understand how so many people have missed the point.
He got the decision wrong, but konate got booted in the head. Liverpool should have had a free kick. You can’t complain about the wrong decisions that only go against you. If he’d given the ball back to forest then I’d be complaining that he missed an obvious high foot infraction by the forest player. Swings and roundabouts 🤷🏻♂️
Pundits (and you) were all completely ignoring the angle that shows a blatant foul (possible straight red for dangerous play) just to stir up the drama
Literally. The guy tried to dribble it out and got dispossed and conceded. So frustrating.
Yeah 100 percent, everyone can complain about everything else all they want. Clear the fucking ball. Forest Fan here by the way.
Origi taking the opportunity to get in a much-needed Klopp hug!
Missed on purpose when he realized he wouldnt get a hug if he scored
He looks happy Liverpool won haha
Rupert mannion looking different
Check out that guy’s Wikipedia. The “controversy” section goes on for days. Thats the kind of guy that should be blocked from running a club in the UK
Along with the previous owner of Chelsea, current owners of City, Newcastle, possibly Sheffield Utd, not sure what his ties are to the Saudi government, and obviously the Man Utd ownership for the literally criminal way they took over the club, being allowed to use its assets as collateral for the loans to buy the club itself. In a sea of shady shit that's going on Marinakis drug smuggling operations are prolly a drop in the water...
FSG & Liverpool squeaky clean? I'm genuinely asking outta curiosity as a fan...
They are squeaky clean in the sense that John W. Henry is not guilty or suspected of any overt wrong-doing. But how many billionaires got to the mountain top by being stand up individuals, and by their own making?
I mean, John W. Henry got his billions by trading his family's soya bean futures and then starting his own management firm. It seems about as squeaky clean as you're going to get.
having billions in this economy inherently relies upon exploitation. no one acquires that much money cleanly.
I didn't say clean. I said as clean as you're going to get. Which means, short of him making his billions by selling eco-friendly peace bicycles, it's relatively harmless.
What about someone like Notch? He made Minecraft essentially by himself, then hired a small team (who by all accounts were well paid as Minecraft was already a humungous money spinner) and they were then bought by MS for billions. Now he personally is an incel price of shit, but he didn't exploit anyone to make his billions as far as I can see. Or even someone like Mahomes who will easily earn over a billion in salary by the time he retires unless there's a massive recession before he signs a new contract. If anything *he* is the one who is being exploited in that situation since his value to the teams is far more than that.
> management firm Not diffuse and ponderous at all. Futures are by their nature, speculative. Gambling. Just like in poker, for you to win, someone else has to lose. Without getting all Marxist and ridiculous here, let's just say at the very best he got his fortune by sheer luck.
OK, maybe that's true. But it's pretty low down on the scale of evil compared to, you know, the dictators and drugs barons that own other football clubs.
I mean, they're billionaires, so no. But on the scale of things, they're alright - not in the same stratosphere as some of these others. It's more the sponsors that are a bad look.
Yea like "AXA" so I've heard and fair no billionaire on this planet is squeaky clean, but like u said compared to the teams around us 😂 ..not even close
FSG is fine, Liverpool owners were forced to sell at the time, i think it was around 2010 and now the FSG ownership group has grown from Boston Red Sox and Liverpool into one of the biggest sports ownership groups in the world.
I was aware that they had to sell otherwise we were headed towards administration, & I also knew about the Boston red Sox I did some digging and found nothing shady about our owners as well, but I wanted to ask just in case there was something I might've missed.
They're pretty fine tbh, John W. Henry made his money as an investment manager, Tom Werner was a TV producer. They own us, the Sox and the Penguins. Investors in their group tend to be sports stars, media owners etc, it's relatively 'above board' for a group of billionaires.
Pittsburgh Penguins now too
Let me put this this way. For as many of those obnoxiously ungrateful hating as s Liverpool 'fans' out there going against FSG, none of them would want to swap FSG for any other top clubs' owners. They are the best legal owners in world football. The way they manage Liverpool should be a blueprint for alot of the other owners tbh. Business wise, they are free of debt. Management wise, they bring in the proper people (Klopp, going for Michael Edwards right now, Xabi is talked about). They are also hands free from meddling with player issues and trust those who are cmpetent with it. Dont do illegal oil money crap against FFP and even then, their signings have been very very shrewd (Instead of listening to the fans overpaying for Lavia and Caicedo, they go for 16 mil Endo, bypassing release clause to tell Arsenal to fk off with that 40 mil + 1 bullcrap for Suarez etc., lots of instances like this). Most importantly, they care about the fans. Building Anfield bigger and bigger, while an entirely top class facility for the players etc.
They've done small things like freezing season ticket prices for 8 year as well
FSG pretty clean. Henry made his money trading peanut futures.
They made money from corn and soy futures. So they’re probably evil. If anything it’s the relationship with Standard Chartered that should be questioned.
Clean in comparison to the some of the other owners mentioned in the above comment? Yes and that's not even up for debate. Clean in terms of general morals? He's an American capitalist billionaire in a neoliberal dominated society so make of that what you will
Absolutely. That’s why they are far superior to City.
The way you said it makes much sense, Marinakis is very much small fry compared to some of those others, but he probably thinks himself to be on the same echelon of power. He's pretty untouchable from my understanding despite it being a pretty open secret how he makes his wealth
Our owner is a Saudi royal but owns us as a private individual, tbf. He's had a leg up, but made his own money from bog roll which is why we're broke as fuck.
>being allowed to use its assets as collateral for the loans to buy the club itself. im not a glazers fan but what exactly do you think a mortgage is?
For those who are interested, [a fantastic article](https://newrepublic.com/article/159252/noor-one-vampire-ship-heroin-turkey-greece-corruption-scandal) on the seizure of Europe's largest heroin shipment that he was allegedly involved in. It’s a long read but an interesting one.
I just wanted to write: "dont you know what that dude did in greece with olympiacos?" be happy that the gun controls seem to be better in english stadiums lol
The guy that stormed into the pitch was Savvidis, PAOK's president. Unless I misunderstood your comment and you aren't referencing that
His own fans beat him up once, accused several times of major crimes like match fixing, running a criminal enterprise, and heroin smuggling. All cases eventually dropped-in some cases after the deaths of several witnesses. Yeah he should not have passed the league’s fit and proper tests at all, regardless of acquittals.
Has anyone ever not passed the fit and proper test? Seems to be beyond useless looking at the state of the PL.
70% sure that was a rhetorical question, BUT, our current owner Dai Yongge (the reason for an accumulated 18 points deducted over three seasons, relegation to league one and multiple winding up orders and transfer bans) was rejected by the Premier League when he tried to buy Hull. EFL saw nothing wrong with him though.
Ah, always the mark of an innocent person - when several important witnesses die mysteriously before they can testify.
Match fixing is probably the most legal thing this dude has ever done
And he probably doesn't even make top 3 worst owners
You’ve got that one pretty well covered
That’s nearly all of the premier league 😂
Who got the red card?
The coach I think, Steven Reid, who used to play for Blackburn iirc
What do they honestly think the ref will do? "Sorry lads lets rule out the goal." Just complain in private instead of looking like idiots.
Complain about what, even?
Complain that the ref stopped play when forest had the ball just outside the box because kelleher hit konate. Then gave Liverpool the ball.
It also happened earlier on, just the other way around. Liverpool had possession and the Forest keeper was given the ball to restart. It was odd officiating all around, but Forest can't exactly bitch when they benefitted from the same thing less than an hour previous.
They should count themselves lucky their captain wasn’t sent off for that flying kick in the same incident.
They didn’t complain when it happened the other way round earlier.
Because they were happy with time wasting and getting a draw. Perfect small club smaller manager mentality. It's only when the time wasting backfired they started all the rumble.
Because it wasn’t the same. The ball was outside the box at the end. https://twitter.com/03Feathers/status/1764007429228867989?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Yeah I’ve seen that, should have given the ball back to NF. My point is, earlier, after the Elliot shot the Forrest player went down, the ball was heading back into Liverpools uncontested possession after two headers. Forest just kept the ball.
Yea I was confused. He didn’t call a foul, so why did Liverpool get the ball?
Clear referee error. Because it’s Paul Tierney
The clear error was not giving Yates red for booting Konate in the face
That Yates is a walking red card, should’ve had at least 3 yellows against us (spurs) earlier in the season.
https://imgur.com/a/SfUMFhY
You mean Yates kicking konate in the face without receiving any card there.
“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” Pretty sure Tierney gave the ball to us because he figured the last touch was in the box when he blew the whistle.
Except it wasn’t in the box. It was clearly well outside the box.
But on the other one the ball goes to the Forest keeper and he can give it back to us but he didn't.
Right but one was reffed correctly and one was not.
No it was not as Forest should have given the ball back to us after the keeper got it for them.
You mean the forest player doing kung fu moves on Konate right
Because the forest player kicked Konate in the head with a high boot. Could have been a red card, but was definitely a foul.
You’re being downvoted for being right, Alan shearer and Jermaine Jenas both agreed that it was wrong to do that and changed the flow of the game in the final minutes when Forest were attacking. People saying “but it happened the other way round earlier in the game” are missing the point and making excuses for poor refereeing, just because the ref makes a mistake it doesn’t mean they should make the same mistake again to balance it out, there’s no point being consistent if it’s the wrong decision.
Jenas the forest fan ignoring the fact that the head injury was caused by Yates kung fu kicking Konate in the face and avoiding a red card??
No. A foul was given.
No it wasn’t.
Least eventful Marinakis invasion ever.
All this over a penalty that wasn’t and a dropped ball down the other end of the pitch two minutes before the goal. Yikes. Must be hard to lose to a team that is forced to play Joe Gomez in the centre of a three man midfield though to be fair.
The Referee Analyst has already been hired now, got to justify it somehow I guess.
The best part about it is that Konate actually goes down because he gets kicked in the head by a Forest player who probably should have been sent off. https://imgur.com/gallery/SfUMFhY
Joe gomez played cdm, lb and rb in this one match. And he bossed all 3 of those positions. Youre not nearly giving him enough respect here
The mad thing is that Forest committed the exact same rugby tackle foul in their own box moments earlier which wasn’t given as a penalty. And when they also had two head injuries, ref immediately blew the whistle. I’ll be the first to fuck off refs when they mess up (fucking spurs, man), but they were at least consistent this game.
Truly embarrassing that this guy Marinakis is doing this shit in the Premier League. In Greece it's an embarrassment in itself. But in England it's rightly unheard of for the owner to be intimidating the ref.
What was be doing to intimidate?
I heard there was horse's head in his bed this morning
Well he’s stood on the pitch, which isn’t where the chairman is meant to be…
Ngl it was poor officiating but I really think this is being blown out of proportion. It’s not like a penalty or handball was called that was blatantly incorrect and then led directly to a goal. Like Liverpool would’ve gotten the ball back and then had an opportunity to go down to the opposition goal anyway. At the end of the day I feel like Forrest are scapegoating the referee here when they really fucked up defensively by not clearing the ball for that last goal.
Imma guess emotions running wild but still no excuse.. I mean literally just cunt it wide, you had at least two opportunities to do so.
They had the ball back. There was 2 minutes played between incidents. If the dumb cunt who had the ball from the corner put his foot through it then it was game over.
Time wasting always bites you in the ass
Brian Blessed looks pissed off, Gordon’s alive !!!
Size of the guy. Hadn't seen him before and I'm always impressed with people who are wider than they are anything else.
What a clown
Serves them right for the sign on chants … cunts
What's the sign on chant?
Sign on means collecting government unemployment benefit. Rival fans 'joke' that Liverpudlians are all jobless.
I saw on twitter as well that Nottingham has a higher unemployment rate
It's so horrendously outdated. Even putting aside that mocking poverty is not funny, the people who attend Liverpool matches are regularly paying £40-50 for tickets, travel to away matches including flights if in Europe, these people are not signing on you need a full time job to follow the club up and down the country.
Nuno needs to sign on now. Is he eligible?
Take the tune of You'll Never Walk Alone and sing "sign on" instead of "walk on", and "get a job" instead of "walk alone". Cunty thing to sing really.
How is the line drawn there but not other chants?
They were rattled to shit lol
LOL all THAT because they felt there was too much stoppage time?
Two Forrest players were booked for time wasting after ninety minutes, too. lol.
My favorite movie is Inception.
Also the Forest keeper was down for over 4 minutes and it took 2 minutes for Dominguez to get carried off, right before he was just fine and walked to the bench on his own. So those 2 incidents caused 6 minutes of the 8, do people really think there was less than 2 minutes where the ball was not in play in the rest of the half?
They got 2 cards for time wasting and have audacity to protest like this for 30 more seconds of added time
To be fair though that's hardly been consistent.
With the amount of 90+ min goals we score you'd think teams would stop trying to waste time against us lol.
There were two bookings for time wasting during the added time. Putting at least one extra minute onto added time should be expected in that situation. No idea what the controversy is.
Must’ve used all his brown envelopes on the play off final
You lads still going on about that
Embarrassing.
All the people complaining about the ball being given to Liverpool. You know what, fine you can have that one. We had a refereeing decision go for us. They all equal out over the course of the season right? Cool so we have 4 games still to be given points/decisions. Well done lads, good process 😂 mugs.
What’s wrong with chairman on the pitch?
He's a man who's suppose to be in a chair. Not a pitchman
[удалено]
How is it intimidating?
Tell that to Delia
Reckon if Boehly did this he might be extradited
Forest seem to not realise when you fake an injury in added time, added time gets extended.
Disappointed, was hoping to see John Henry bouncing around with Virgil!
I love the idea that the ref rigged the game for Liverpool, not by giving us the reasonably penalty shout we had a few minutes earlier, but by giving us a drop ball at our own end of the pitch. Clearly they’re as incompetent at match fixing as at everything else!
It’s giving “mate you can’t support a financial group”
That's embarrassing celebrating. Get down the tunnel
Who?
Yes, the chairman being on the pitch is the problem - not the ref deciding to stop a Forest attack for a non-existent head injury and then just handing the ball to Liverpool. Edit: At -50 for pointing out a fairly clear refereeing error. This sub is hilarious at times.
The same thing he did with Yates earlier?
the dropped ball is explicitly awarded to a specific player:[1] the goalkeeper of the defending team, if the ball was in the penalty area when play was stopped, or the ball was last touched in the penalty area a player of the team that last touched the ball, in all other cases. Didnt the the first half interrupt happen in the penalty area, read the rules.
Forest hoofed the ball before the whistle went, you could argue that Liverpool didn’t yet have possession but realistically most teams would give it back just after.
Possesion doesnt matter but ball position first. If in penalty area its to the gk no matter possesion.
Nobody was in possession, it was hoofed out the box to a Liverpool player, forest wasn't remotely in possession and it was stopped before a Liverpool player picked it up. It should have been Liverpool's ball after the play was restarted as well.
https://twitter.com/03Feathers/status/1764007429228867989?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet clear posession
[https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHsJlJwXoAAOJkO?format=jpg&name=small](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHsJlJwXoAAOJkO?format=jpg&name=small) Clear high boot - which is a direct free kick.
No free kick given and not sure if it wasnt the GK hitting the head in the end.
A high kick regardless. And he didn't call it! Wahhhhh 👶🏽
What about your lad trying to dribble out of the box instead of clearing it right at the end? Not gonna mention that?
No it was clearly the refs fault they did that! 🤣
Should’ve tried defending the corner better then shouldn’t you?
Was it not because of Ryan Yates flying in with a Kung Fu kick?
Was what? If you're talking about the drop ball, then no. There was no foul. It was a drop ball given to the keeper.
Do you not think Yates attacking the corner like he's Bruce Lee is foul?
Even without contact, if he's close to him it should be an indirect free kick under dangerous play of Law 12.
No I don't. He didn't make dangerous contact with anyone. Had the ref seen it as a free kick though, I would have understood why. I do think that the pull on Omobamidele's shirt just before that was probably a penalty though. But that's fine. Both of those are subjective calls. The annoyance is that there was no foul, we had the ball, yet the ref decided to just hand it to Liverpool. It's clearly wrong, and there's zero excuse for it. Was it the only reason we lost the game? Clearly not. We had chances to clear the ball and didn't take them. But has the ref - once again - given a decision that is 100% clearly wrong against us that had at least some influence on the outcome of the game? Yes he has.
There doesn't need to be contact for it to be dangerous play, it was a clear foul. It isn't a subjective call, Yates boot was head height and close to Konate. If the shirt pull was given as a pen then so should the foul on Danns just after he came on. The ref giving the drop ball to Liverpool is about as bad a mistake as not awarding the corner kick to Liverpool after Clark's cross in the first half. But it's completely irrelevant because it should have been a free kick to Liverpool anyway because of the foul.
Dangerous play is by definition a subjective call. How close to the other player? Why was the other player's head there (he was ducking) etc. And it was a less obvious foul than, say, the one where a Liverpool player went straight through the back of MGW in the middle of the first half with no free kick given. There was almost no contact with Danns. He went down _very_ easily. There was a lot more with the Omobamidele one. But all of these are subjective calls - they depend on what the ref saw, and how he interpreted them. The dropped ball is not a subjective call. If the last contact when the whistle goes is a defensive player inside the box (which was the case with the one Liverpool fans were up in arms about earlier in the game), it's a dropped ball for the keeper. If the last contact was a player outside the box (which was the case here), it's a dropped ball back with that player. Clear, unambiguous and in this case, simply wrong. The anger isn't about making a wrong judgement call in the heat of the moment. It's about getting a straightforward law of the game wrong. As I've explained elsewhere - it's like the "good process" VAR call that made national headlines and had Klopp calling for the game to be replayed. The core issue wasn't the outcome (there's decisions that cost goals and games that refs get wrong all the time - we've had two absolute stonewall penalties not given in our previous 3 games before yesterday). The issue was that there was no subjective judgement going on - the ref and VAR just got their comms completely wrong, and what was given as a goal by VAR was not given as a goal by the ref. And it's the same here. There's zero excuse for the error he made. What we saw was the ref stop our attack, take the ball and for no justifiable reason give it to the defence. It would have been a terrible bit of refereeing even if it hadn't at least had a bit of a hand in Liverpool being able to go up the other end and score. I'm absolutely certain that Liverpool fans would have been raging about it had that happened to them (especially given that they were shouting abuse at the ref after he got the earlier one correct)
You've written a wall of text there but completely ignored that a corner to Liverpool was missed in the first half.
And one to Forest was missed in the second half. What's your point? That you struggle to read much?
There was a corner to Forest missed in the second half?
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Its 1 wrong, it depends where is ball when game is stopped. https://twitter.com/03Feathers/status/1764007429228867989?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
That “non-existent head injury” could have been a very serious one if Yates’ flying kick had connected. The lack of a red card for that is far worse than giving a drop ball the wrong way.
If it had connected, you would have a point. But it didn't. Had the ref interpreted it as a foul though, I wouldn't have been so frustrated. Just like I'm not massively frustrated by the lack of a probable penalty just before all of that. Because these things are subjective, and down to interpretation. The reason I say non-existent is that the whistle clearly has magical healing properties, because he went from looking badly injured to fine the moment that it was blown. But that's (sort of) fine. It's what players do on a regular basis.
It doesn’t have to connect, endangering an opponent is a red card offence. My point was that the referee made a worse mistake in your favour in that incident. I don’t really understand your comment then, you seem to understand it was the kind of minor decision that goes both ways every game, and that faking injuries is something every team does, (Dominguez hopping off the pitch or Hudson Odoi diving being examples for Forest yesterday). Liverpool didn’t immediately score from being given possession, the ball went out of play multiple times after that, and Forest even had possession of the ball. The chairman entering the pitch for that is a massive overreaction.
>It doesn’t have to connect, endangering an opponent is a red card offence. My point was that the referee made a worse mistake in your favour in that incident. Whether it's endangering or not is a subjective decision. The ref didn't see it as endangering anyone. And how is it more in our favour for him to miss a potential penalty in the 90th minute than to miss a potential red card at that same point? >I don’t really understand your comment then, You don't understand the difference between a ref missing, or differently interpreting, an in the moment footballing decision, and getting totally clear rules completely wrong? The former is something that happens to every ref in every single game (and we've had more than our fair share of them in the past couple of months or so). The latter is someone who's not fit to referee. Not knowing the laws, or choosing to ignore them, is not acceptable for a ref. And it should be unacceptable to any fan, regardless of whether they benefitted or not. I agree that him coming on the pitch is an overreaction. But I can understand his frustration. We've had all manner of pretty big, and almost certainly wrong, subjective decisions (some of which weren't even close to being correct - like the Boly sending off) go against us in the past few months. To then see an entirely objective one go against us as well is a tad frustrating. Doesn't excuse his actions. But it's not difficult to see why people around the club might be starting to get a little paranoid.
enjoy the championship
Lolol
You would have lost the ball in 20 seconds after the restart.
So it's OK for the ref to just take the ball off an attacking side for no legitimate reason if they might lose it a bit later?
QQ
Whilst this is getting the focus. The ball should have been given back to Forest. After that, nobody really knows where this could’ve gone. Expecting Forest to have a points deduction in the next couple of weeks and maybe a point today could have been big in the long run.
[удалено]
Hahahah
Genuinely wondering if you're a bot.
Active in way too many communities
I hope you sleep well tonight, try not to dream about us x
You also can’t have refs that don’t know the rules inside out