|
Post by Ned on Oct 31, 2010 16:00:27 GMT 1
Not seen another thread about it, what are people's thoughts on the goal?
IMO, the right decision was made. Yes, Nani handled the ball, but the referee played advantage. No free kick was given, so why shoudn't the goal be given?
Even if there was a free kick given, why did Gomes think he could take the free kick several yards forward from where the handball was?
|
|
|
Post by OswestrySalopian on Oct 31, 2010 16:03:19 GMT 1
Bit like the Kuyt goal vs Sunderland earlier in the season, techinclly there is nothing illegal about that goal, it's just the sportsmanship that is dissapointing.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 31, 2010 16:11:39 GMT 1
it should have been a penalty
if it wasnt a penalty it should have been a free kick
the keeper should have taken the free kick from where there ball was handled
as the ref hadnt given anything the ball was in play and the goal must stand
the fact the ref and lino were both clueless idiots didnt help the situation
justice was done in hindsight i think
|
|
|
Post by Bordershrew on Oct 31, 2010 16:34:56 GMT 1
Not seen another thread about it, what are people's thoughts on the goal? IMO, the right decision was made. Yes, Nani handled the ball, but the referee played advantage. No free kick was given, so why shoudn't the goal be given? Even if there was a free kick given, why did Gomes think he could take the free kick several yards forward from where the handball was? There was no advantage though? So how could Clattenburg have played it? A complete mess up by the officials yet again.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 31, 2010 16:42:44 GMT 1
but he did play an advantage it should have been a penalty he allowed the goal
decent reffing ;-)
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 31, 2010 16:43:30 GMT 1
Nothing wrong with the goal whatsoever.
It is technically in the same mold as Henrys against Ireland.
Thought the Ref called it correctly, not saying it wasn't a pen - free kick or direct free kick against Nani for deliberate handball those equations are all made irrelevant by the fact that Clattenburg didn't blow his whistle.
On a different note I thought that Ferdinand was invited to a three way discussion on whether the goal should stand, not quite sure way as the Spurs players had been told to go away.
Then again it's not the first time Mr Clattenburg has been favourable with Manchester United is it.
Play to the whistle lads, that's the key.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2010 17:02:59 GMT 1
Nani went down in the box, maybe a penalty, but not given. He thought it was a foul, so handled the ball, bigtime. Gomez complained and Clattenburg seemed to indicate play on, indicisively. Throughout the game all play on decisions were given clearly, but not this one. The linesman got caught out and flagged way too late. Gomez made his own decision, wrongly, and Nani tried his luck. You can't blame Nani, blame Gomez for not getting clarification or the linesman for being way too late. The communication from the ref on this issue to the players was non existant. In fact everyone in the crowd did not know what was going on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2010 17:05:32 GMT 1
Noticed the same thing about Ferdinand. Spurs players were told to go away but it was ok for Ferdinand to run over and get involved in the conversation
Not sure of Clattenberg has come out and said what happened but Id imagine a couple of scenarios
1) Nani goes down appeals for a penalty and grabs the ball. Clattenberg says no pen, sees it was handball but as Spurs have the ball says play on. If thats the case then the ball is in play so no problem with the goal but could you argue that Nani could have had two bookings, one for a dive (assuming Clattenberg thought it was dive as didnt give a penalty) and then another for a deliberate handball
2) Nani goes down appeals for a penalty and grabs the ball. Clattenberg says no pen but doesnt see Nani grab the ball so think the ball is just in play. If thats the case then the ball is in play so no problem with the goal, however some refs would have stopped the play and booked Nani for diving (again assuming Clattenberg thought it was dive as didnt give a penalty)
Ive always wondered when a player goes down but the ref doesnt give a penalty, when does he book them for diving? Is there some sort of standard of diving (ie 2 rolls) that warrant a yellow card?
On a similar handball related conversation, anyone else think it was strange during our game when their player appealed for a foul, decided to catch it out of mid-air and then the ref decided to blow up for a free-kick to them? Did he just give it to save the embarrasment of the bloke who caught it? From where I was (18) there didnt look to be any sort of foul.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 31, 2010 17:17:46 GMT 1
why do some many people think a player should be booked for going to ground When i played up front I spent most of the game on my arse but never once dived
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2010 17:28:12 GMT 1
why do some many people think a player should be booked for going to ground When i played up front I spent most of the game on my arse but never once dived Tumbling with a bloke and ending up on the floor, no problem Going to the floor when there is no contact in order to win a free-kick/penalty then its cheating, simple as that. For the record I havent actually seen the challenge for which Nani went down so cant say for certain it was a penalty/dive. Im just going by the fact that Nani went down, grabbed the ball for a penalty but Clattenberg decided it wasnt one.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Oct 31, 2010 17:33:12 GMT 1
Just a complete mess alround for me... No idea whether it were a peno but thats by the by. The lad went down and held onto the ball. So he knew he handled it. And from that I really don't appreciate the player then going on to score and celebrate the way he did. Call me old fashioned but I think thats wrong, big time. Where is sportsmanship? Professional courtesy? And I know where both have been shoved, both being rhetorical questions. But once again just everything wrong in the game today for me. Then there is the ref. He saw what went on and if he did indeed know that the chap had handled and he had played advantage then he should have brought it back. I thought refs have it their power to play advantage and if no is gained, bring the play back. Just don’t see how Spurs gained advantage from what came about?!?! So he should have stopped play and given the free kick. Now if he didn’t see the hand ball it was clear from lip reading the linesman did, so he should have brought it back for a free kick given the info from his linesman. So what the officials were doing were beyond me. However, the funniest thing for me were the way the ref waved away all the Spurs players but then allowed the Manchester lad to stand and interject into the conversation the ref were having with the linesman. Highly amusing that... Both the lad who scored and the ref didn’t come out of it very well for me…by a fair way…sure they won't lose any sleep about that though...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2010 17:35:22 GMT 1
1)If the ref see's Nani handle the ball, then he should not have given the play on decision. Surely a deliberate hand ball is a bookable offence, with a free kick to Spurs.
2)Probably the correct interpretation. In both instances the linesman was at fault for not signalling early enough what had happened. Nani did not need to be booked if the Ref thought it was a tackle or collision which did not warrant a penalty.
Overall it was a great game, well ref'd until the very end which somehow overshadowed the previous 85 mins. Strange how Assou-Ekotto acted as peacemaker, pulling his team mates away to let the ref and linesman, hopefully, come to what he was sure was going to be a decision in Spurs' favour. The ref signalled for the players to go away, apart from Ferdinand who was allowed to stick his beak in. Its actions like this that go a long way in cementing the idea that Man U. are a "favoured" team. Who can blame fans if they believe this? Overall a good match, well ref'd apart from the last 5 mins. I still think that Man U would have held on for a 1-0 win, but you can never tell.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 31, 2010 17:40:45 GMT 1
What about the keeper trying to cheat and gain 10 yards on where he knew the free kick should have been taken from ?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Oct 31, 2010 17:45:49 GMT 1
this that go a long way in cementing the idea that Man U. are a "favoured" team. Who can blame fans if they believe this? Its not just Manchester though is it...its all the so called big four. I just see things happen against these clubs and you do think that if the roles were reversed then goals would not have stood. The Liverpool goal against Blackpool where the home side had a helping hand, the goal yesterday for Manchester. Stoke fans seem up in arms about a tackle the other week against Manchester (one I admit I haven't seen but most seem to think was a yellow card). Said it before and I'll say it again...just seems that some refs think these top sides don't need to foul, and cheat in order to win games, that they are too good a player to miss time a tackle. And so on. Which of course is complete bolloxs...
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Oct 31, 2010 17:47:44 GMT 1
What about the keeper trying to cheat and gain 10 yards on where he knew the free kick should have been taken from ? What?!?! Errrm...I think the ref should have stepped in and asked him to replace the ball and take the free kick...
|
|
|
Post by eclipsechaser on Oct 31, 2010 17:48:20 GMT 1
it should have been a penalty if it wasn't a penalty it should have been a free kick the keeper should have taken the free kick from where there ball was handled as the ref hadn't given anything the ball was in play and the goal must stand the fact the ref and lino were both clueless idiots didn't help the situation justice was done in hindsight i think Wrong Right Right Right Wrong The fact that there was a complete lack of sportsmanship , gentlemanly conduct not just by Nani but by Ferdinand too shows emphatically all that is wrong in the game and in society in general . Think of the reputation that could of been gained by Manc. U and Ferdinand if he had let Spurs go down the other end and score a goal unopposed to even up the balance . Once again ethics and morals go out of the window . Appalling !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2010 18:22:34 GMT 1
The thing that got me was, if Gomes thought a free kick was given, why did he run to very nearly the edge of the area before putting the ball down, when Nani handled it right next to the touchline? That wasnt just stealing a few yards, it was like 15 yards, so how could he be surprised that when he put the ball down, Nani played on.
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Oct 31, 2010 18:36:12 GMT 1
What would people be saying if the Town had scored that goal?
For me, although it morally shouldn't have been a goal, legally it was, and therefore should stand.
And that is how I would feel if it was in favour of the Town too.
Had it been against us, I am sure I would be seething at the time, but once having had time to analyse it, would come to the same conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by shrewblue on Oct 31, 2010 18:38:46 GMT 1
Most sensible decision would have been for the ref after consulting the assistant referee to award the free kick for the original hand ball by Nani and restart the game again, then there would be no fuss at all!
The fact the assistant ref flagged and Clattenberg awarded the goal after consultation appears to be an overrule on Clattenbergs behalf and makes him look a little misguided in hindsight...all that apart as someone has already said the goal being given is not in the spirit of the game whatever you viewpoint on the laws of the game.....
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 31, 2010 19:01:29 GMT 1
so here is the moral
if you like united it should have been a penalty, the ref missed the handball, the keeper tried to gain a false advantage and the ball was in play, rio did no different than the spurs players
if you hate united
book nani for falling over send him off for handling get the ball out of the net and give spurs a free kick book nani a 3rd time for kicking it into the net book rio for doing the same as the spurs players did book nani again for celebrating send fergie to the stand burn down old trafford
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Oct 31, 2010 19:01:32 GMT 1
Nani may have felt a hand on the back or whatever, but his tumble was embarassing. Clattenburg and the Kevin Mc linesman messed up. Clattenburg didn't do his "advantage" sign and can't you bring play back if an immeadiate advantage is not forthcoming? I think you could tell from his reaction when Nani scored, the way he turned and pointed to the centre circle, it was the look of a man who thought "Oh ****, I've got myself in a bit of a situation here" Rio's a prat, ad Clattenburg and Kevin Mc just pandered to him and let him on the convo. It's one of those where you don't see the problem when you're team scores it, but you're furious if your team concedes it. And I'm happy, Nani was my captain on fantasy footy
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 31, 2010 19:02:32 GMT 1
cheers feedo for proving my point ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Oct 31, 2010 19:12:19 GMT 1
cheers feedo for proving my point ;-) That's about as diplomatic as I'll be on the issue. The blame lies with Clattenburg and Kevin Mc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2010 19:19:25 GMT 1
so here is the moral if you like united it should have been a penalty, the ref missed the handball, the keeper tried to gain a false advantage and the ball was in play, rio did no different than the spurs players if you hate united book nani for falling over send him off for handling get the ball out of the net and give spurs a free kick book nani a 3rd time for kicking it into the net book rio for doing the same as the spurs players did book nani again for celebrating send fergie to the stand burn down old trafford Pilch, get off the "everyone hates United" complex. Believe it or not when people offer an opinion that isnt in Uniteds favour, then it isnt always because they hate them. Fact is it was a controversial goal that happened to be scored by Man United, its bound to cause debate. I As for the "book rio for doing the same as the spurs players did" comment, I know its said in jest and your right that Rio was doing exactly what the Spurs lot were doing in confronting the linesman/ref. The difference was the Spurs lot were told to go away whereas Rio was allowed to stand there and join in the conversation. Why?
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 31, 2010 19:24:33 GMT 1
Pilch is a tad teechy today as the mighty Scousers have cranked up the pressure with a Brazil like display to thrash Bolton.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Oct 31, 2010 19:27:45 GMT 1
so here is the moral if you like united it should have been a penalty, the ref missed the handball, the keeper tried to gain a false advantage and the ball was in play, rio did no different than the spurs players if you hate united book nani for falling over send him off for handling get the ball out of the net and give spurs a free kick book nani a 3rd time for kicking it into the net book rio for doing the same as the spurs players did book nani again for celebrating send fergie to the stand burn down old trafford Oh dear...
|
|
|
Post by Ned on Oct 31, 2010 19:53:53 GMT 1
Clattenburg did nothing wrong.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Oct 31, 2010 21:07:14 GMT 1
I think Clattenberg's cover story that he was 'playing advantage' is a bit unconvincing to say the least.
Deep inside your own penalty area is a strange place to have an advantage played, to put it mildly.
If he'd decided not to award a penalty then saw Nani handle the ball, surely he should have booked Nani for deliberate handball.
True Gomez took played the ball from nowhere near the byline where the offence was committed but, as Stuttgartershrew says, this should have resulted in a freekick being re-taken from the correct spot.
Can't 100% blame Clattenberg as the linesman should have given him a bit more help.
Total mess all round - and very poor to wave away the Spurs players but allow Rio in on his little chat with the lino.
|
|
|
Post by SteveHayesFanClub on Oct 31, 2010 21:20:55 GMT 1
so here is the moral if you like united it should have been a penalty, the ref missed the handball, the keeper tried to gain a false advantage and the ball was in play, rio did no different than the spurs players if you hate united book nani for falling over send him off for handling get the ball out of the net and give spurs a free kick book nani a 3rd time for kicking it into the net book rio for doing the same as the spurs players did book nani again for celebrating send fergie to the stand burn down old trafford Your also missing Scoles red card for grabbing the referee after the initial penalty claim was turned down - Yellow card minimum.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 31, 2010 22:27:10 GMT 1
so here is the moral if you like united it should have been a penalty, the ref missed the handball, the keeper tried to gain a false advantage and the ball was in play, rio did no different than the spurs players if you hate united book nani for falling over send him off for handling get the ball out of the net and give spurs a free kick book nani a 3rd time for kicking it into the net book rio for doing the same as the spurs players did book nani again for celebrating send fergie to the stand burn down old trafford Pilch, get off the "everyone hates United" complex. Believe it or not when people offer an opinion that isnt in Uniteds favour, then it isnt always because they hate them. Fact is it was a controversial goal that happened to be scored by Man United, its bound to cause debate. I As for the "book rio for doing the same as the spurs players did" comment, I know its said in jest and your right that Rio was doing exactly what the Spurs lot were doing in confronting the linesman/ref. The difference was the Spurs lot were told to go away whereas Rio was allowed to stand there and join in the conversation. Why? But doesn't that always happen ? The ref without fail orders players away on his way to speak to the Lino And then without fail, once he is talking to the Lino players turn up again and are ignored Rio was not part of the conversation at all The officials ignored him You make it sound like the Lino had his other hand around rios back Whereas the spurs players had already been in talks with the Lino
|
|