Athletic reporter backs Munoz amid Liverpool controversy | OneFootball

Emotions were still running high after Liverpool’s win over Crystal Palace, but one journalist has offered a very different perspective on the moment that sparked outrage inside Anfield.

DOWNLOAD THE OFFICIAL EMPIRE OF THE KOP APP FOR ALL THE LATEST & BREAKING UPDATES – STRAIGHT TO YOUR PHONE! ON APPLE & GOOGLE PLAY

Daniel Munoz was at the centre of the controversy after scoring while Freddie Woodman was down injured, a moment that led to loud chants from the home crowd and widespread frustration.

Journalist offers different view on Munoz moment

Writing for The Athletic, Matt Woosnam detailed the sequence and the reaction inside the stadium.

“The chants rang around Anfield. ‘Cheat, cheat, cheat, cheat.’ It was loud and clear, the anger felt by Liverpool was unmistakable.”

It certainly felt like an unsporting moment, especially given the context of the game and the fact that our goalkeeper had just made a big save and was clearly struggling.

However, the report tries to make it clear that the situation may not be as straightforward as it first appeared.

Why Munoz has been defended

Woosnam explains that the key decision ultimately rested with the referee, not the Colombian defender.

“Ultimately, whether the decision to award it was the correct one, Munoz did nothing wrong.”

That line will divide opinion, especially among us watching it unfold live, but the reasoning centres around the laws of the game rather than the spirit of it.

The article adds: “Whether he realised Woodman was down is unclear, but he has been given the benefit of the doubt… And there was no foul committed, no serious injury and no head injury.”

That distinction is crucial, because under current rules, play is only stopped automatically for head injuries, something Arne Slot also pointed towards after the game.

Oliver Glasner unsurprisingly was on the side of thinking the goal should stand too, despite the clear unsporting nature of the goal and aftermath.

The conclusion from the Athletic piece is blunt: “The responsibility lies with the referee to stop the game.”

From a Liverpool perspective, that doesn’t remove the frustration around the moment itself, particularly given the circumstances and how it looked in real time.

But it does highlight the grey area between what is technically allowed and what many would still view as the right thing to do on the pitch.