RAWK Goes Into Lockdown 25/26 Shieldless Edition - £500m down the drain, the champions have dropped points again!

Did anyone ever think that £155 million on Writz was a good idea? Who sanctioned the deal? Leverkusen must be laughing all the way to the bank :lol: :lol: :lol:
He looks championship level at best.
 
So is this like our 13/14 season in reverse?

The reverse being we went into the summer expecting Bale, Fabregas, Baines and Thiago and finished with Fellaini, whereas these lot won the title with Klopp’s team, spent half a billion and lost more than they’ve won this season?
 
We should create accounts in RAWK and vote for Slot in. We need him to stay there and destroy the club.
 
We should create accounts in RAWK and vote for Slot in. We need him to stay there and destroy the club.

We should launch an online petition to Keep Raging Arne at Pool (KRAP)
 
Last edited:
Absolutely glorious watching them losing the aura they build over the last decade so soon. I can't wait to see them go from manager to manager circus. It's about time they feel our pain as one signing of one manager gets binned once another manager comes in. I knew they landing title so soon after klopp leaving was an anomaly.

Long may it continue. Now we just play it careful, push on and maintain momentum.
 
:lol: :lol:

"Corrupt" Biggest bunch of crybabies. It's never that they're shite. No it's corruption from the refs. (Ignoring the amount of times the refs bailed them out in the first five games with in the amount of injury time added)
Tbf this is the one instance you can understand that take. It's man city and it's Michael Oliver
 
Tbf this is the one instance you can understand that take. It's man city and it's Michael Oliver
It will always be something. Going back to our glory years it was always Howard Webb and the FA (Ferguson Association) that were responsible for their mediocrity. Its funny as f88k!!!
 
It will always be something. Going back to our glory years it was always Howard Webb and the FA (Ferguson Association) that were responsible for their mediocrity. Its funny as f88k!!!
like the use of 88 there. please check your PMs for an invitation to a secretive redcafe club.
 
It will always be something. Going back to our glory years it was always Howard Webb and the FA (Ferguson Association) that were responsible for their mediocrity. Its funny as f88k!!!
Yeah but that was baseless nonsense and sour grapes. Michael Oliver is or has been provably on the payroll of the Man City owners. There's no way he should be anywhere near their games, especially when you look at some of the calls he's given them in recent years.
 
Tbf this is the one instance you can understand that take. It's man city and it's Michael Oliver
Oliver has screwed us so many times glad it’s happening to someone else especially these lots. Didn’t help this morning when I told all Liverpool fans at work it was the right call :lol:
 
When does not standing in a offfside position 4 yards from goal and ducking out of the way of a goal bound shot not constitute 'interfering with play'? Dippers and the media have conflated 'impeding the GK' with 'interfering with play'.
 
When does not standing in a offfside position 4 yards from goal and ducking out of the way of a goal bound shot not constitute 'interfering with play'? Dippers and the media have conflated 'impeding the GK' with 'interfering with play'.
By the letter of the law, I believe he has to be impeding the vision of the goalkeeper to be interfering with play and therefore be called offside. There's an angle from behind the goal that makes it very hard to argue for him impeding Donnarumma's view of the ball.

I'd be fuming if we had that goal taken away, to be fair. The bigger point is that Liverpool lose that game anyway.
 
By the letter of the law, I believe he has to be impeding the vision of the goalkeeper to be interfering with play and therefore be called offside. There's an angle from behind the goal that makes it very hard to argue for him impeding Donnarumma's view of the ball.

I'd be fuming if we had that goal taken away, to be fair. The bigger point is that Liverpool lose that game anyway.

He doesn't have to impede the vision of the keeper or to be in his eyeline. It's been discussed a fair bit in the VAR thread and the full list of scenarios has been posted a few times in there.
 
By the letter of the law, I believe he has to be impeding the vision of the goalkeeper to be interfering with play and therefore be called offside. There's an angle from behind the goal that makes it very hard to argue for him impeding Donnarumma's view of the ball.

I'd be fuming if we had that goal taken away, to be fair. The bigger point is that Liverpool lose that game anyway.
That’s what makes it funny!
 
By the letter of the law, I believe he has to be impeding the vision of the goalkeeper to be interfering with play and therefore be called offside. There's an angle from behind the goal that makes it very hard to argue for him impeding Donnarumma's view of the ball.

I'd be fuming if we had that goal taken away, to be fair. The bigger point is that Liverpool lose that game anyway.

The letter of the law has a few more bullet points. One of them being

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
  • interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
  • interfering with an opponent by:
    • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
    • challenging an opponent for the ball or
    • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
    • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
You can consider ducking under the ball as one of those things. It's like playing a dummy.
 
We should appreciate this as much as possible because Liverpools board won't wait as long as MUs board did to get rid of their bald fraud.
 
There's so many fecking idiots on the Internet these days
Aren't they just! Imagine if you can being told 57 years ago( when I started following United) that one day lads would broadcast themselves watching games while the ffed and blinded and bitched and moaned like juveniles! And that they would have followers?
Incredible.
That Fester guy is particularly stupid.
 
Aren't they just! Imagine if you can being told 57 years ago( when I started following United) that one day lads would broadcast themselves watching games while the ffed and blinded and bitched and moaned like juveniles! And that they would have followers?
Incredible.
That Fester guy is particularly stupid.
No disrespect, what was the equivalent in your day? There must have been something?
 
Aren't they just! Imagine if you can being told 57 years ago( when I started following United) that one day lads would broadcast themselves watching games while the ffed and blinded and bitched and moaned like juveniles! And that they would have followers?
Incredible.
That Fester guy is particularly stupid.
Apparently, Fester has only been to one Liverpool game in his life, and that was against United a couple of weeks ago.
 
Closest you got in about 1960 was letters to the editor or match reports that included fan viewpoints in newspapers.

Edit: quoted wrong post and no idea how to edit in a different one
 
Last edited:
Apparently, Fester has only been to one Liverpool game in his life, and that was against United a couple of weeks ago.
That's quite normal over here. There are many many liverpool/United/Rangers/Celtic/Other Premier League club supporters in Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland that have supported their clubs all their lives but have never darkened the door of their clubs stadium. That's the great thing about Sky Sports/Other TV broadcasters, they brought the football to everyones living room and you can watch most games now every week and they can support their club through their tvs, which brings in the largest slice of income to premier league clubs. I try to get over to United at least twice a season, but it's difficult with fixtures changing days/times with TV rescheduling and I do 24/7 on call 2 weeks on 2 weeks off so logistically for me personally it can be a nightmare.
 
Closest you got in about 1960 was letters to the editor or match reports that included fan viewpoints in newspapers.
In Irish league terms, this was still the way to voice your opinion to the masses at the turn of the millenium in the 'have a rattle' section of Irelands Saturday Night (it has since been discontinued) but then the Irish League Forums was born and it took over from print. ILF still exists today albeit with a slightly different name.
 
The letter of the law has a few more bullet points. One of them being

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
  • interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
  • interfering with an opponent by:
    • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
    • challenging an opponent for the ball or
    • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
    • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
You can consider ducking under the ball as one of those things. It's like playing a dummy.
How was that interfering with the gk? He could see everything and wasn’t impeded in any way. Similar goals have been allowed, including against us.

There’s nothing wrong with getting out of the way of the ball: it is not an obvious action to influence the gk. Unless you are impeding him or his view of the path of the ball.

I love seeing the scousers done in, but it was the wrong call.