1 minute ago, StevieH said:

 

no they didn't. :D

Not bothered then Stevie about people's idea of the city of Liverpool and LFC?  

 

We were predicting on here weeks ago what was going to happen. It happened.

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

They are hardly going to say that it effected them , otherwise it may become a regular occurrence .

   The bus getting attacked probably did unsettle them and three early goals conceded my not just be coincidental .

City players have said it didn't affect them. Whether it did or didn't we will never know. By stating that they have inferred that they were beaten by a better team on the night. Think that's fair enough.

8 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Not bothered then Stevie about people's idea of the city of Liverpool and LFC?  

 

We were predicting on here weeks ago what was going to happen. It happened.

 

not bothered about your idea BB really no.

 

what happened by the way? a few drunk idiots threw a few things at a big bus? 

15 minutes ago, StevieH said:

 

not bothered about your idea BB really no.

 

what happened by the way? a few drunk idiots threw a few things at a big bus? 

Seems to happen quite often on European nights.

 

Seem to remember a few seasons back City being very upset after a minibus of 'normal' fans was attacked there.

 

Hoping no City idiots do anything stupid in retaliation. 

 

Edited April 5, 20188 yr by Bredbury Blue

42 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

^Ozzieboy, the only stat that matters is Liverpool scored the only goals (3) of the game.
 

agreed. now hope u stick your stats.(which 99% of the time give a distortioned view of what actually happens in a match etc etc)                   right up your jumper!!"

29 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

City players have said it didn't affect them. Whether it did or didn't we will never know. By stating that they have inferred that they were beaten by a better team on the night. Think that's fair enough.

Yes, but did the pre match disturbance contribute to City playing below par?

7 hours ago, StevieH said:

 

 

 

what happened by the way? a few drunk idiots threw a few things at a big bus? 

 

7 hours ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Seems to happen quite often on European nights.

 

Seem to remember a few seasons back City being very upset after a minibus of 'normal' fans was attacked there.

 

 

 

What,s in the probability that "a few drunk idiots" then went on to unfurl there "justice for the......" banner o the terraces afterwards.......

7 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Yes, but did the pre match disturbance contribute to City playing below par?

Why would it?  Ain't like they were ever in any danger.  Coppers everywhere. Talk about storm in a tea cup.

32 minutes ago, carmine said:

Why would it?  Ain't like they were ever in any danger.  Coppers everywhere. Talk about storm in a tea cup.

 

  Seems like it was "mob rule" and the Police were not in control .

The bus ended up being undriveable and a replacement needed to be called for, for the drive home .

   With all the recent terror attacks and the bombing of the Dortmund team bus last year , it must have been at the least, unsettling for the Man City players

Edited April 5, 20188 yr by sanemax
addition

22 minutes ago, carmine said:

Why would it?  Ain't like they were ever in any danger.  Coppers everywhere. Talk about storm in a tea cup.

The players (Kompany and KdB) said it didn't affect them from which we should conclude, it didn't affect them.

 

No excuses being made by City or by me. A combination of City being very poor on the night and Liverpool being excellent on the night resulted in the final score.

1 hour ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Seems to happen quite often on European nights.

 

Seem to remember a few seasons back City being very upset after a minibus of 'normal' fans was attacked there.

 

Hoping no City idiots do anything stupid in retaliation. 

 

 

that's just called an atmosphere BB. this one last night doesn't seem like much of an incident. nobody was taken to hospital and it seems like a bit of nothing much really. 

1 hour ago, StevieH said:

 

 

 

what happened by the way? a few drunk idiots threw a few things at a big bus? 

 

 

You make it sound like a normal event....

 

 

I agree it is a storm in a teacup, and the press will no doubt still make a meal out of it....... deplorable nonetheless.

A flame has been removed

52 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

You make it sound like a normal event....

 

 

I agree it is a storm in a teacup, and the press will no doubt still make a meal out of it....... deplorable nonetheless.

As will one or two TV posters....And yes, deplorable but could and should have been avoided by Plod (as I suggested before the game). Had the coaches come via different routes, LFC fans (probably including the idiots) would have congregated outside the King Harry to welcome our coach as is the norm on these nights. City could then have come via Arkles Lane undisturbed (The Arkles normally acknowledged as an Away fans pub).

 

Still.....fair to say we ruined two coaches in one night

6 hours ago, petermik said:

Disgusting and downright dangerous,after what has happened in Liverpool,s past (not the fans fault...of course ) you would have thought the police and LFC  (who had been warned beforehand) would have controlled things better.....more shameful behavior by an element of so called scouse fans.

"you have to wonder how much were the City players affected" exactly what the attack was meant to cause  

Kinell yeah a few bottles against a bus window would shit up any grown men. Big girls blouse. 

 

5 hours ago, petermik said:

 

What,s in the probability that "a few drunk idiots" then went on to unfurl there "justice for the......" banner o the terraces afterwards.......

bitter much Peter, go back to watching the murder of football, and admiring trophies won doing so

Captain Vincent Kompany said it "had no effect on us" and that it was something they have experienced before, while midfielder Kevin De Bruyne said there was "nothing wrong with it".

"It was OK," the Belgian said. "I don't mind supporters doing that - I've had it a couple of times for my team and it's a nice feeling. 

"I am fine with it as long as no one gets hurt. It doesn't change anything [for the players]. As long as you keep the violence down, there's nothing wrong with it."

 

At least they were not using it as an excuse. Good to see. 

8 hours ago, jellydog said:

Fully agreed with that !!

Not getting the away goal was huge for us. City will need to attack in the second leg and I don't see LFC not scoring in those circumstances. 

Last night was a welcome party which was uncalled for but really not too bad... interesting to see what City fans come up with in the return leg.

 

Throwing bricks at ambulances carrying badly injured players, however.........

Edited April 5, 20188 yr by RickG16

27 minutes ago, BangrakBob said:

Not getting the away goal was huge for us. 

That last night was one of the reasons I am totally for VAR. We should have had that away goal. He was onside. Nobody can tell me that decision will even itself out (nor the first goal where Salah was offside)

3 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

That last night was one of the reasons I am totally for VAR. We should have had that away goal. He was onside. Nobody can tell me that decision will even itself out (nor the first goal where Salah was offside)

Yep, didn't need to VAR to see Sterling was 3 metres onside when he scored at the Etihad in 2103/14, but that wasn't given and we came second in the league to the team that got the benefit from that decision.

 

 

2 minutes ago, BangrakBob said:

Yep, didn't need to VAR to see Sterling was 3 metres onside when he scored at the Etihad in 2103/14, but that wasn't given and we came second in the league to the team that got the benefit from that decision.

 

Exactly. We can all name times when bad decisions are made for and against us and that's why I don't understand those against VAR. AT the end of the day I just want correct decisions to be made.

22 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

 

Exactly. We can all name times when bad decisions are made for and against us and that's why I don't understand those against VAR. AT the end of the day I just want correct decisions to be made.

Correct the decisions at the expense of the game's flow.

 

If you agree that decisions even themselves out over a long period of time, then without VAR is still a level playing field. 

1 minute ago, RickG16 said:

Correct the decisions at the expense of the game's flow.

 

If you agree that decisions even themselves out over a long period of time, then without VAR is still a level playing field. 

But I don't believe they do even themselves out and don't believe there is any evidence to suggest they do. A decision should be correct at the time, in the game you are playing IMO and if it adds a little time on so be it. 

44 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

 

We can all name times when bad decisions are made for and against us.

 

+

 

16 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

 I don't believe they do even themselves out 

 

Seem to be contradicting yourself a little.....

 

 

I am a big cricket fan, and because Test match / ODI cricket is fairly slow paced, having a video review doesn't interput the flow. If anything it can add to the excitement after a period of sparse action.... but football is completely different. The last thing a fast paced PL game needs is waiting around for a TV ref. Trust me, it will completely ruin the experience of watching a game! 

7 minutes ago, RickG16 said:

Seem to be contradicting yourself a little.....

No I'm not. This is what I said but you left the last bit out "We can all name times when bad decisions are made for and against us and that's why I don't understand those against VAR. AT the end of the day I just want correct decisions to be made." 

 

For clarity, we can all name times when decisions go for and against us but that doesn't mean any of those decisions even themselves out. You might have key decisions go against you and minor decisions go for you or the other way around or a mix of the two. How can that possibly even out is beyond me.

1 hour ago, RickG16 said:

Last night was a welcome party which was uncalled for but really not too bad... interesting to see what City fans come up with in the return leg.

 

 

Flares no doubt!

 

1 hour ago, mrbojangles said:

That last night was one of the reasons I am totally for VAR. We should have had that away goal. He was onside. Nobody can tell me that decision will even itself out (nor the first goal where Salah was offside)

Fair Dinkum  still Complaining , or a better word would be Whinging ,  No,   Crying like a baby  would be Ideal,  L/pool were clearly the better team across the park ,  get real Mr B/J,  and  except defeat  accordingly and graciously  cobber,    a nice nite to all

22 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

. You might have key decisions go against you and minor decisions go for you or the other way around or a mix of the two. 

 

Isn't that part of what makes sport exciting though? The fact that you know things can go for and against you.... it isn't always fair, but neither is life ^__^

 

 

7 minutes ago, evenstevens said:

Fair Dinkum  still Complaining , or a better word would be Whinging ,  No,   Crying like a baby  would be Ideal

And you are still trying to be antagonistic. Why you can't be civil is beyond me.

 

I have mentioned our disallowed goal twice today. Once in reply to stevie in which he said we didn't have a shot on target. And the other was to Bob who said he was glad we didn't get an away goal. That disallowed goal would have sorted out both of those posts. If that's whinging, crying or complaining then we have a different definition