That's not pitying us. It was a clear foul which he simply states to make an argument. Just like it should have been a penalty today when Saka was tripped. We are being ****ed over by the refs again. They might change the rules from season to season, but trust us to be ****ed!Here's Klopp pitying us
Asd it to the list.
James cuts in front of Saka causing Saka to be tripped by his leg. With your logic a straight leg trip is fine as long as it isn't an active kick. Really weird way to view it, but guess on the internets everything goes...It wasn't a soft one, it simply wasn't a penalty.
I'm shocked it's being compared to this Premier League Soccer: Manchester City vs. Norwich City | USA or to the Luiz one, the difference is so obvious.
Whoever arrives second is causing the foul is that simple, if this was anything, it would be a foul on James, not on Saka.
It’s an opponent cutting across the line, which the attacking player is running and they collide. So yes!This?
Yeah exactly the same, sure