Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:36 pmwas a goal, garcia did it for us. cant beleive they added 6 mins on the end. we trough and thats all that matters right now. AC Milan or PSV here we come. 
Liverpool FC Forum
Liverpool Football Club Discussion
https://www.liverpoolfc-newkit.co.uk/
Was it a goal? - Be honest
https://www.liverpoolfc-newkit.co.uk/football-related-polls/was-it-a-goal-be-honest-t10674-30.html
Page 3 of 4
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:36 pmPosted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:49 pmThe ref was a t*at, proving once again that Sh*tski's roubles reach further than players. I'm certain that even though it was a goal, the foul by Cech was a red card. The refs let us have the advantage, but surely he should have sent cech off after awarding the goal. Or does this mean now that JC can break Rooneys leg without punishment so long as Man U score in the same move? How tempting a scenario THAT is!!!! How many times do refs book/send off a player even after advantage has been gained!?! Sh*t loads, thats how many. Up the 'pool!
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:55 pmi honestly do not know if it is a goal. happened so fast, with limited view. what i know is that it is a blatant penalty and send off for cech, which probably would mean liverpool 3 chelsea 0 at the end of 90 minutes and liverpool 5 chelsea 0 at the end of 96 minutes.
thank your lucky star for certain embarassment, the frozen one.
thank your lucky star for certain embarassment, the frozen one.
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 3:25 pmivor_the_injun wrote:Like I've said, if you'd have stopped play when the "goal" went in and asked Mourinho whether he'd prefer:
a) His keeper to be sent off and a penalty to Liverpool to be awarded
or
b) The goal to be given and no action to be taken against Cech
...he'd definitely have taken the option to play 86 minutes with 11 men. It didn't change their objective one bit - they still needed to score 1 goal to go through. If they can only muster 2 shots on goal in something like 195 minutes (adding in all the injury time) of football, that's their own hard luck.
And for the record, I thought it was a goal at the time, but the more I see replays the less I'm sure that the ball went all the way over. Not arsed one bit though - if it had happened in the 90th minute I'd maybe have a little sympathy for Chelsea, but the bottom line is that they just weren't good enough across the two legs. And if they're that poor without Duff and Robben fit and on fire, next season could be very, very interesting.
You couldn't have explained it better. I fully agree.
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 4:25 pmicliv.
Chelsea should be relieved the goal stood. The alternative was a red card for Cech and a Liverpool penalty which, presumably, would have led to the same conclusion.
Chelsea should be relieved the goal stood. The alternative was a red card for Cech and a Liverpool penalty which, presumably, would have led to the same conclusion.
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 4:26 pmI don't know if it was a goal or not but one thing's for sure... I'd have been sick had it been given against us
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 4:43 pmEven if it weren't a goal the ref sed penalty and a sendin off but still should of sent im off
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 4:52 pmThe Chelsea defender had his left foot on the goal line ,he cleared the ball with his right foot which was AT LEAST 9-12 inches over the line ,watch it again in slo mo. Allied to this the chelsea players themselves hardly made any fuss about the decision they KNEW it had crossed the line . Finally the Ref said it was a goal ,so it must have been 
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:04 pmHi
Im a liverpool fan from London and everyone i know is a chelsea fan and theyre all goin on about how it wasnt i goal, i dont know if it was but the linesman who made the decision said today he was 100% sure it was a goal in an interview, and anyway whenever you tell the chelsea fans that the alternative to the goal was a red card and a penalty they shut up anyway
Im a liverpool fan from London and everyone i know is a chelsea fan and theyre all goin on about how it wasnt i goal, i dont know if it was but the linesman who made the decision said today he was 100% sure it was a goal in an interview, and anyway whenever you tell the chelsea fans that the alternative to the goal was a red card and a penalty they shut up anyway
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:19 pmAm I think I'm right in thinking that if it had of been a red card and a pen ,no sub would have been allowed until after the free kick (penalty ) had been taken ? Which means an outfield player would have had to face the penalty .
A goal,whichever decision was made.
Bloody Chelsea , whingers with no class. Loved the thought of them crying all the way home last night .
A goal,whichever decision was made.
Bloody Chelsea , whingers with no class. Loved the thought of them crying all the way home last night .
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:34 pmLondon_Red wrote:Hi
Im a liverpool fan from London and everyone i know is a chelsea fan and theyre all goin on about how it wasnt i goal, i dont know if it was but the linesman who made the decision said today he was 100% sure it was a goal in an interview, and anyway whenever you tell the chelsea fans that the alternative to the goal was a red card and a penalty they shut up anyway
ya right...it is not supposed to be a goal, maybe it is only a 50% goal (as told by Jose), the linesman scored it, Chelsea are the better team, they deserved to be in the final and Maurinho is the "special one"...but you know what...
WE ARE GOING TO ISTANBUL and THEY ARE F*UCK*ED!!!
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:35 pmOf course it doesn't matter what anybody thinks, but my suspicion is it was over the line. I tend to use the same method as Woof and Gallas's standinfg foot was just about on the line so the angle he approached it at means it was probably in. Plus, I feel sure Chelsea would have protested a little more had they felt it wasn't over.
Shame for old Eidur, I felt really sorry for the poor fella at the end. I'm sure if he asks Xabi nicely he'll give him a ring after the game and talk him through what its like to play in a CL final.
Shame for old Eidur, I felt really sorry for the poor fella at the end. I'm sure if he asks Xabi nicely he'll give him a ring after the game and talk him through what its like to play in a CL final.
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:37 pmwoof woof ! wrote:Am I think I'm right in thinking that if it had of been a red card and a pen ,no sub would have been allowed until after the free kick (penalty ) had been taken ? Which means an outfield player would have had to face the penalty .
I've seen many goalkeepers being send off before and they always allowed a substitution to take place prior to the penalty kick. I'm not basing this on any rule books, just my observation.
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:51 pmAnfield rapper wrote:Your poll should have a 'couldnt care less' option.
everyone would vote for that, this makes it interesting. Personally, i couldn't give a sh1t if garcia grabbed the ball and threw into the net as long as it was given
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:56 pmI think it was a goal, heres my theory why. If you look at the defender clearing the ball off the line, you can see that his standing foot is on the goal line, his right foot in which he his hooking the ball away with was behind his standing foot and therefore nehind the line. In saying that, I'm pretty sure the whole of the ball didn't cross, whats the rule with that? Anyway, who gives a flying f*ck, we're in the final and Chelski aren't...