05 Nov 2026 20:48:04
{Ed's Note - Ed001 has posted a new article entitled, Liverpool v Arsenal - A Quick Liverpool Perspective

1.) 06 Nov 2026
06 Nov 2026 02:28:43
Good analysis Ed001. I enjoyed the match, it was a good, high intensity game with Liverpool showing their press and attacking intent, although with little end product, and Arsenal excellent defending. I am impressed with how well drilled Arsenal are, not only against Liverpool but against Bayern etc. Their ability to shoot a game down is second to none. I liked Liverpool too, for large part of the game you were the best team, although part of this is Arsenal giving you the ball and trying to defend.
The part i disagree is about stats from Opta, and the stats in general. There are going to be some mistakes maybe, but they don't lie as you say. McAlister's shoot i am not sure it was a shoot, it seems nore of a very bad pass than a shoot to me.

The way he had his body and the weight he tried to put in the pass, suggest that he tried to loop the ball over the last defender, to find Isak who did (half) a move. Then Van Dijks header I am not sure if he tried to make a pass with his head or even if his header was going outside. In this one i am not sure because in our channel we had no replay.
Opta do make mistakes, some times make mistakes and after one hour make correction. For example counting a shoot as 0, 30 xg instead of 0, 25, they will reassess after the match and make the correction. I think in no way they lie.

{Ed001's Note - they 100% lie. I am sure of it for the betting markets. They were 100% shots. Mac Allister's was certainly not a pass, it was a weak shot but it was defo a shot. I am sorry but Opta are bullshit artists. Van Dijk's header was saved but Raya was listed as making no saves, that can't even be argued that Raya saved it. Those stats are not mistakes, they were outright wrong and it is clear to see so no reason to not correct them, but they haven't.}

2.) 06 Nov 2026
06 Nov 2026 11:47:01
Mac Allister had a great chance to score with his head.

Watching here in the US I saw that shirt pull and was astonished that it wasn't called. The commentary team missed it until much later. The only explanation I can think of is that maybe it was so weak. that Isak himself didn't notice it and was unaffected by it, or why else didn't he complain? Did any other Liverpool player.

Good game though. Although Arsenal's lack of enterprise in the second half, made that period less enjoyable. A draw would have been a fairer result.

{Ed001's Note - Isak did notice and turned and had a go at Timber at the time. I am astonished he never said anything to the ref though. It clearly did affect him, it pulled him back, you can see it when you watch it that his forward momentum is arrested and then he ends up missing the ball.}

3.) 06 Nov 2026
06 Nov 2026 12:27:37
I've maintained for a while that one of the biggest reasons players go to ground so easily is because, if they stay on their feet, they often don't get the foul. This Isak incident is a perfect example of that.

It's exactly why VAR was introduced, or at least should be used, to distinguish between genuine contact and players going down to win a penalty. The irony is that VAR seems to have reinforced the very behaviour it's supposed to discourage. Players are almost being told to believe that unless they hit the deck, they won't get the decision. Stay on your feet and play through the contact, and you risk getting absolutely nothing. We're effectively rewarding players for going down rather than rewarding them for trying to stay on their feet.

{Ed001's Note - it is very sad and very much to the detriment of the game.}

4.) 06 Nov 2026
06 Nov 2026 13:00:34
One sometimes wonder whether the VAR team are not paying any attention whatsoever.

The reality is that where humans are involved errors will be made. VAR can't fix that.

{Ed001's Note - no, but nobody minds errors that are understandable, like missing something in real time. Footie was better without VAR.}