The Tomkins Times - Main Hub

The Tomkins Times - Main Hub

Share this post

The Tomkins Times - Main Hub
The Tomkins Times - Main Hub
Chelsea vs. Liverpool: *Bumper* Post-Match Analysis

Chelsea vs. Liverpool: *Bumper* Post-Match Analysis

Paul Tomkins's avatar
Daniel Rhodes's avatar
Follow Andrew Beasley Football's avatar
Paul Tomkins
,
Daniel Rhodes
, and
Follow Andrew Beasley Football
Aug 13, 2023
∙ Paid
39

Share this post

The Tomkins Times - Main Hub
The Tomkins Times - Main Hub
Chelsea vs. Liverpool: *Bumper* Post-Match Analysis
67
2
Share

Paul Tomkins, Andrew Beasley, Daniel Rhodes and other TTT regulars will give their thoughts on the match for 24 hours after the game, so the article received via email is unlikely to be the final version. There's statistics from the match and videos too.

Post-Match Thoughts

Paul Tomkins

In the end, a good result from a Big Six away game to start the season, against a team trying to buy every player in the eastern Solar System.

In future, this website will be called "should have had a penalty", or "is it a ref from Manchester again?". In fairness, this time the guy only handled it with his full hand, after the ball travelled 40 yards from a corner. (Close to his body, yes, but a clear handball also.)

Players will be booked for holding up imaginary cards (which is the new rule), but in and Diogo Jota's case, for being fouled and then having someone do a quasi-headbutt? How weird was that?

The game hinged on the disallowed Mo Salah goal, and he was fractionally offside, so an easy objective decision once you draw the lines.

But the subjective calls Liverpool get (or don't get) via VAR continues to be beyond a joke. Chelsea had a goal ruled out for an objective offside too. The subjective tallies remain massively skewed against LiVARpool, as does anything involving a Mancunian ref (or a ref from the northwest, with Taylor appointed after I published this piece.)

The Reds haven't had the best preparation for this game in terms of the madness of the past few days and a lack of balance in the middle of the park (partly self-inflicted), but about half the team really shone; others, like Cody Gakpo in an unusual midfield role, looked like they were filling in, while the full-backs were all at sea.

I'll leave Taylor and Darren England, the VAR, there, and focus on the football below. While Chelsea had the better chances, Liverpool wasted so many great positions with just badly-weighted passes or the wrong decision.

The majority of my analysis and the thoughts of the others follow for subscribers only.

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to The Tomkins Times - Main Hub to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 Paul Tomkins
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share