Liverpool hard done by!

[Karl]

The "balloon goal" should not have been. The ref missed applying - drop ball!

[Peter R]

2009-2010 is probably history for 'pool. as the commentator said Rafa will have to concentrate on the Champions league (and FA Cup) if we want hardware.

BTW what happened with the balloon? Only saw the last 30 or so minutes... real agony. The only person who looked likely to score (besides Sunderland) was Johnson...wish he would have taken a couple more shots...

And why was Steve Bruce getting on so on the sidelines?

[Dunny]

Liverpool is a 2 man team,no Gerrard and Torres= heartache for the Pool fans.

[Warlord]

The "balloon goal" should not have been. The ref missed applying - drop ball!

The ref was well positioned on the goal that was scored. He didnt call it.

[Warlord]

And why was Steve Bruce getting on so on the sidelines?

It was because of the injury to Kenwyne Jones

[Assasin]

The way how Pool play today if they continue they might end up right above the relegation zone. There offense needed some tripple A batteries.

[Peter R]

Okay...thanks. I thought he was berating Rafa for talking to the ref about time to add on.

[Paul Marin]

Karl - what is the rule regarding debris on the field? Should that goal by the rule be allowed to stand? I remember from a few years ago the same thing happening with City and Sheffield and that was allowed to stand, so I presume there is precedence, but is there a specific rule governing this sort of thing? Still, Sunderland deserved the win.

[Warlord]

Karl - what is the rule regarding debris on the field? Should that goal by the rule be allowed to stand? I remember from a few years ago the same thing happening with City and Sheffield and that was allowed to stand, so I presume there is precedence, but is there a specific rule governing this sort of thing? Still, Sunderland deserved the win.

Darren Bent has stated that before the goal was scored the Liverpool defenders couldve cleared the baloon from the field moments earlier.

If im not mistaken thre rule book states that if the ball makes contact with any object on the field of play and not any of the 22 players, the game should be re-started with a dropped ball.

[Warlord]

Okay...thanks. I thought he was berating Rafa for talking to the ref about time to add on.

It was the kick to the calf he received from the liverpool defender then he went down. I think he fell a bit awkwardly and looked in serious pain.

On the time added on issue, to be frank 7 mins was a bit ridiculous. It shouldve been 5 mins max. The only stoppages were Cattermole and Jones injuries and that didnt last that long. I dont see where the ref gets 7 mins from

[Peter R]

Tuned in just after Jones was subbed, cannot comment; 7 minutes suggests somebody (or bodies) was down for an extended period.

[Peter R]

From what i read in the Laws of The Game at FIFA.COM what you say is true for an extra BALL on the field. If an extra ball interferes with play then the game must be stopped and re-started with a dropped ball. An extra ball NOT interfering with play should be cleared as soon as possible.

I didn't see anything about extra objects on the field of play. Of course, the "LAWS" is about 150 pages and I just skimmed through.

[Sir X]

As the debate raged over Beach Ball Gate, former Premier League referee Jeff Winter said that, on the evidence available to him, the goal should not have stood. 'By the letter of the law, it is outside interference and a drop-ball should have been where the incident occurred,' he said.
'You have to wonder how the referee and his assistants missed it - even the fourth official should have seen it, although admittedly he is a long way away.'
Winter's reading of the laws of football was confirmed by former FIFA referee Graham Poll, who said the correct decision would have been a drop-ball.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1221201/The-bizarre-goal-But-did-ref-blunder-allowing-goal-Darren-Bent-s-shot-deflected-beach-ball-leave-Liverpool-deflated.html#ixzz0UEqevWMF

[Paul Marin]

If this is true then you have to wonder how the game is allowed to continue without some kind of measure to ensure fairness with so much riding on the outcome. Either way, had the goal been disallowed and the game drew 0-0, then the team that would have been hard done by would have been Sunderland as Liverpool hardly deserved anything from that game.

[Karl]

Darren Bent has stated that before the goal was scored the Liverpool defenders couldve cleared the baloon from the field moments earlier.

If im not mistaken thre rule book states that if the ball makes contact with any object on the field of play and not any of the 22 players, the game should be re-started with a dropped ball.

Not quite right as the goal posts (...cross bars) and the cornerflag posts are consider a part of the field of play...

...but the facts on what occurred - If the balloon interfered with play - the game as per FIFA's "Laws of the Game", must be stopped, the balloon removed and the game then restarted with a dropped ball.

I was walking by my TV and I think the balloon touched the match ball...I also believe even if contact of the ball and the balloon was not made the balloon was interfering with play. Perhaps the ref saw otherwise?