- Slot shares verdict on Munoz goal
- Why the right decision was made
- Glasner suggest own goal
Crystal Palace lost 3-1 at Anfield to the reigning Premier League Champions on Saturday, with Daniel Munoz scoring what amounted to be a consolation for Palace. The goal was showered in controversy and there has been mass debate around whether it should have stood.
Liverpool goalkeeper and lifelong Palace fan Freddie Woodman made an excellent one v one save to deny Ismaila Sarr, a save which injured Woodman and left him down. The ball rebounded to Munoz on the edge of the box, and with no pressure from any players in red, he simply lobbed the ball into the back of the net.
Liverpool fans were outraged, and persisted to boo Munoz for the remaining 25 minutes, as well as throwing projectiles at him from the stands.
Arne Slot does not share outrage
Liverpool manager Arne Slot expressed his understanding of Munoz’s decision making. When asked about the incident in his post-match interview, the Dutch manager who has almost orchestrated Liverpool to Champions League qualification had this to say.
“I think it’s a 50/50. There are maybe players in that moment of time that see a player on the floor…some players would maybe stop, some players would score.”
“I don’t blame him for that, as much as I would have wanted the referee to stop the game.”
There was some doubt in Slot’s mind that Munoz was entirely unaware of the injury to Woodman. “He knew [about the injury], because otherwise you don’t chip into the goal, it’s not a position you usually shoot from.”
“Are you going to shoot on goal the way he did if you don’t know? That doesn’t make sense to me. Either you cross from that position, or you shoot harder if you think there’s a goalkeeper.”
Whilst his viewpoint is correct, and Munoz clearly did look to the goal and lob the ball in when he saw it was left unattended, there was no obligation for the game to stop.
“I don’t blame him [Munoz]for that, as much as I would have wanted the referee to stop the game. Another game, another refereeing decision that didn’t go in our favour, but it didn’t hurt us, we still won the game.” – Arne Slot
Potentially unsportsmanlike, but certainly not ‘cheating’
The general consensus from Liverpool fans both at the game on Saturday and on social media is that Daniel Munoz cheated and that there was a clear misuse of the rules. The reality is that there simply was not.
Oliver Glasner did admit that had Woodman’s injury been severe enough to require withdrawal from the pitch he would have instructed his side to score an own goal.
However, it was not. Woodman played the remaining 25 minutes. The injury was not severe by any definition, it was not a head injury and therefore there was no reason for the game to be stopped.
The only accusation which would carry any validity is that Munoz’s decision was unsportsmanlike. Some players may have turned to kick the ball out and allow treatment to be provided, but there is no requirement to do so.
Liverpool’s players simply did not play to the whistle, assuming the decision would go their way, as it often does at Anfield. Both Virgil Van Dijk and Ibrahim Konate failed to cover the goal line as their ‘keeper was down, and therefore the finger should really be pointed at the defending players who simply stopped playing.
Feigning injury has plagued the game, and whilst Woodman wasn’t doing that on this particular occasion, there’s a feeling that this decision, or lack thereof was a response to the outcry towards consistent stoppages for no good reason.
Ultimately, the decision and goal had no impact on the result of the game, and so the reaction is as unnecessary as it is dramatic.
