Meh he fouled Pepe anyways, if he was stood onside he wouldn't have been in a position to tackle Pepe in the first place, gaining an advantage from being stood in an offside position, flag rightly goes up, despite what that idiot Dermot Gallagher claims.

Disgusting SKY though, we deservedly win a game and can they let us have it? Nahhhhh they have to go interviewing all the managers and show all the ones that agree with them, that is was a goal. Don't these managers have enough to do without having to respond to yet more Anti-Liverpool SKY turd? There wasn't even that much questioning of managers when Sunderland "scored" from the beachball incident. Not even subtle, almost as bad as The Guardians love in with United.

Give me a break, in fact no carry on, makes it even better .

Creating even more of a siege mentality, love it

Although the BBC are also doing their bit, if anybody is interested this was "expert" Johnathon Pearce (Not even an expert on frigging robots)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/8462199.stm

To be honest I had to stop reading half way through, it really was that bad.

He was stood miles away when your defender passed it back to Reina and then tackled him fairly, how long does a player have to stay away from the ball to be considered onside again? Your player had plenty of time to do with it what he wanted and Defoe only then went for the ball once it was passed to Reina...



If it was a Sunderland fan that had thrown it onto the pitch then maybe I'd go along with you on that, but when an on-target shot is influenced by something that a Liverpool fan had thrown onto the pitch then it just makes it funnier as well as rightfully left to stand in my eyes. Even though it's Sunderland!

Mine.

Completely immaterial who threw the ball onto the pitch, where the beach ball was on the pitch and where the ball was. I don't even need to say anything about it, not going to go bother with an essay, no debate, goal should not have stood, try reading the rules. My point is that we have not got the benefit with decisions this year, and one goes our way, and as with the other incident - Ngog, we get the win shoved down our throats as if we are unworthy. Good bring it on.

Edited at 02:26 Sat 23/01/10 (GMT)

The beach ball was there for a while, plenty of time for Reina to get rid of it properly, and why should Sunderland have a goal dissallowed because of the actions of the Liverpool fans?

Because its in the rules that any outsider interference should lead to the goal being disallowed...

Exactly :\

I know it is, but it's down to Liverpool that it was there, fair enough if it was Sunderland but they shouldn't be disadvantaged for the actions of the Liverpool fans.

As I said, there is no argument to be had here, its not like an offside which is a judgement call (1st phase, 2nd phase) This is a clear rule, extremely clear, crystal clear.

The laws of the game CLEARLY state that if there's an outside interference the game has to be stopped, the ball was in the box, and actually caused a goal. How much interference do you need? :S Now the rules don't state that if a Liverpool fan throws the bugga on to play on does it?

To finish, the referee - Mike Jones' next match was Peterborough Vs Scunthorpe. Enough said.

Spurs 2-2 Leeds.

Missed fist half due to work, but well pleased with this!!! What an end to the game. If i'm honest, i ain't sure if that was a penalty at the end.

GET INNNNNNNNN

Well done Leeds.
Villa had a narrow escape today against Brighton.
AVFC lucky with the draw in both League and FA cup so far....

BTW: what an awful away (?) shirt of Newcastle....dirty yellow color.....

Well we'll agree to disagree Mike, I know it's in the rules, but I think the referee rightfully made an exception in the fact that it was Liverpool's fault and they disadvantaged because of that.

Anyway, that's just one decision, from what I saw on monday I know that numerous decisions went against us to stop us getting the three points and from what I hear about yesterday there was plenty of vital decisions that went straight in West Brom's favour to give them the win.

The only reason he would have known it was a Liverpool fan throwing it on was because it had a Liverpool badge on it. If the balloon was any other colour style then he wouldn't have known.

You are agreeing with the decision, but the referee did not allow the goal because it was a Liverpool fan who threw it on, he allowed it because he didn't know and understand the rule.

Arsenal are having some decisions there way against Stoke in this game though, Fuller showing the reason so many players go down easily, because otherwise, you don't get the correct decision, definite penalty, and Arsenal just equalised thanks to a very soft free kick.

It might (probably was, knowing what referees are like) have been that he just doesn't know the rules, but it was quite funny

Yeah Fuller was just way to honest there, blatant foul but he's been punished because he tried to play the game as fairly as he could...

Thats why I don't have a problem with going down easily, its fairer really, it was a foul, so should have been a pen, if you get fouled, think you deserve a penalty and the only way you are getting one is to hit the deck, hit the deck.

Like star jump stevie and his prodigy David Ngog

You need for it to be a foul as well for it to be 'fair' to go down easier, so those two arent the best examples

BUT GET IN STOKE!!!! haha

I sense some happy potters on the way

sad times

GLORY GLORY MAN UNITED!!!!