April 17, 2024

One important takeaway from Everton’s 3-0 loss to Manchester United on Sunday, according to Sean Dyche, is the team’s mindset to never give up.

 

The Blues had 23 attempts on goal, including 14 from inside the opposition penalty area, but were unfortunate not to score on multiple occasions.

 

Eight of those attempts were made during stoppage time, demonstrating the home team’s evident tenacity.

 

Speaking after the game, Dyche stated, “The mentality [is a positive] because it is going to be really, really important,” as cited by the Liverpool ECHO.

“We can all agree that the recent news is unfair, but until the appeal is heard, it remains a fact, so the mindset needs to be correct.

 

“Despite the fact that it is obviously very difficult when the second and third go in, we hit the bar and continued to try to create opportunities. We kept trying to get something out of the game.”

 

“Although it hasn’t paid off for us at home too often this season, I think the chance count is the biggest plus. Once more, the probability count is extremely high.

 

“But we have got to be clinical. It is a tough one for me to call today because I think a lot of the performance was right. The fans were terrific. They are having their own say in what has gone on, but they were terrific, and I think that connection with our fans is going to be really important going forward.”

 

The Everton manager was left disappointed by the decision to award the penalty which led to Manchester United’s second goal.

After 52 minutes, Anthony Martial was initially booked for diving, after going down in the penalty area from an Ashley Young challenge.

However, after a VAR review, referee John Brooks’ decision was overturned, and the visitors converted from the resulting spot-kick.

Reacting after the game, and quoted by the Liverpool World, Dyche would like more clarity on the process for such decisions.

 

He said, “Really, I’m going to try to talk to them and say, ‘Okay, what’s the problem (a glaring mistake)?'” As you are aware, we were informed that the directive called for giving referees greater authority.

“The referee made a very firm ruling, and naturally, that took away his authority. I’ll just have to call the higher ups and ask them to clarify—I’ve already asked, as all managers do, what constitutes a real, glaring mistake—because I have no idea.

 

“You can argue over them endlessly, as each person will ultimately reach a decision. The idea behind VAR, in my opinion, is that they seek out contact, which isn’t the right idea.

“I felt the referee made a wise decision; it was meant to be that they give the referee the authority before declaring contact.” Every position has contact information. It’s difficult to decide. Should it turn out poorly for us, would I be disappointed? No. I could probably understand why that wasn’t punished.

In other news, Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham charged that the Premier League had abused its legal authority by attempting to penalise Everton ten points.

Burnham has written to the chair of the Premier League, Alison Brittain, and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Lucy Frazer, accusing the Premier League of “regulatory malpractice” for seeking to introduce a sanctions policy specific to Everton’s case midway through the disciplinary process.

“The fact that the Premier League sought to introduce a new sanctions policy in the middle of this process amounts, in my view, to an abuse of process,” wrote Burnham. “From my experience of regulation, introducing new rules in the late stages of a process would be regarded as regulatory malpractice.

 

“The question in this situation is, has there been a fair process? Having taken my time to study the judgment and speak to a lot of people this week I have concluded that there has not been a fair process. There has been a highly flawed process and I would go as far to say there has been an abuse of process. And that abuse of process concerns the guideline and framework that was put together in August and submitted to the independent commission.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *