FER BLIMEY
‘I cannot believe it, I don’t know how VAR said no’, says stunned Ferdinand after Liverpool denied stonewall penalty
Fans reacted to the decision on social media
RIO FERDINAND was left stunned after Liverpool were robbed of a clear penalty against RB Leipzig in the Champions League.
The Reds were taking on the German outfit in the League Phase of the tournament at the Red Bull Arena.
4
4
4
Darwin Nunez fired the travelling side into the lead in the 27th minute as he tapped home from close range.
The striker was then in the thick of it again in the 38th minute after he went down in the box.
The Uruguayan was running to the ball and was tripped by defender Willi Orban in the box.
Replays showed that Nunez got to the ball first and was brought down by the Hungarian.
READ MORE ON FOOTBALL
At halftime, Rio Ferdinand was stunned that VAR turned down the decision to give a penalty.
Speaking on TNT Sports, he said: "I do not know how VAR have looked at this and said no.
"VAR would have seen that angle and said no, I cannot believe it."
Co-pundit Steve McManaman agreed as he argued that there should have been a spot-kick.
Most read in Football
CASINO SPECIAL - BEST CASINO WELCOME OFFERS
He added: "Of course it is a penalty.
"There's the contact, Nunez works hard, and made it himself, for what should have been a penalty."
Curtis Jones gives heartwarming interview about becoming new dad after stealing show for Liverpool vs Chelsea
4
The decision was checked by VAR, but despite a second look, Nunez's claim was turned down.
Fans were left fuming on social media that the referee had not pointed to the spot.
One posted: "How is that not a penalty?"
A second wrote: "People who say no need a new pair of glasses."
A third commented: "Stone waller."
A fourth said: "So refs and VAR are incompetent all across Europe huh?"
Another added: "How this isn’t a pen is beyond me."
New Champions League format is a snorefest
By Dan King
UEFA sold the idea of expanding the Champions League from 32 to 36 teams, with each playing eight games instead of six in the opening phase, as a way of creating more competitiveness and excitement.
The biggest clubs would have two matches against their peers, rather than having to wait until the knockout stage to meet.
The smaller clubs would meet teams of a similar level twice and have a chance of tasting victory that was so hard to achieve if you were the bottom seed in a group of four.
Ignoring for a moment the fact that the real motivation was the simple equation of more games = more money, the theory itself already looks flawed.
None of the matches between European giants has delivered a compelling contest yet.
And why would they? At the start of the long season with more matches in it, why would any team with ambitions to win things in the spring, go out all guns blazing in the autumn?
Especially when they know they have six games NOT against big sides to make sure they accrue enough points to qualify at least for the play-off round (and even more games).
There is even less jeopardy than before.
Read the full column on the Champions League format fail and why everyone - including YOU - needs a rethink.
Topics