Manchester United V Tottenham ESPN 5:30

A Dub in Glasgo

ntlbell wrote: »

I can only assume the linesman flagged for nani handling the ball.

I then can only assume the ref played on as gomes had possesion of the ball he allowed gomes to play on as in that position of the pitch it doesn't make much of a difference.

The linesman did not flag at all during the initial Nani incident or the handball or the subsequent farce with Gomes. He flagged after Gomes ran towards him after the ref awarded the goal

ntlbell

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The linesman did not flag at all during the initial Nani incident or the handball or the subsequent farce with Gomes. He flagged after Gomes ran towards him after the ref awarded the goal

well then i have no idea wtf he was flagging for, ref obviously felt whatever it was didnt affect it.

stumpypeeps

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Not true, Nani could have slipped or he could have kicked his own ankle or he could have lost his balance from an inoccuous touch. There are more than two reasons why players fall when challenged.

Yes of course. Although judging by Nani's reaction while lying on the ground, handling the ball as if a penalty was imminent, I doubt he thought it was anything but a penalty.

ntlbell

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Yes of course. Although judging by Nani's reaction while lying on the ground, handling the ball as if a penalty was imminent, I doubt he thought it was anything but a penalty.

well he was fouled just before his em loss of balance :pac:

#15

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

Has this ref ever been in charge of a game at Man U before where Spurs were the visitors?

How did that go?

I blame the goalie.

Yeah, this game

roosh

#15 wrote: »

Yeah, this game

Don't forget:
-Mendes scoring from the halfway line not given
-Gomes winning the ball against Carrick penalty given,
-Vidic handling the ball on the line no penalty
- that
- and last night

Mitch Connor

ntlbell wrote: »

I can only assume the linesman flagged for nani handling the ball.

Why would you assume that?

The lino doesn't flag for several seconds AFTER the ball has gone in the net, which is a relatively long time after Nani handled it. From what I have seen the most likely reason for the lino to be flagging is the fact there were a number of Spurs players in his face at the time.

roosh

Never in a million years should the goal have stood. The goal was perfectly legit, until the linesman flagged, at which point Twattenburg should have brought the play back for a free or a penalty.

The linesman clearly told him about the handball, but he might have mentioned the penalty. Either way, the goal should not have stood.

roosh

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Why would you assume that?

The lino doesn't flag for several seconds AFTER the ball has gone in the net, which is a relatively long time after Nani handled it. From what I have seen the most likely reason for the lino to be flagging is the fact there were a number of Spurs players in his face at the time.

and the spurs players clearly say it to the lino about the handball, and leave fairly satisfied that the goal is not going to be given.

#15

mangaroosh wrote: »

Don't forget:
-Mendes scoring from the halfway line not given
-Gomes winning the ball against Carrick penalty given,
-Vidic handling the ball on the line no penalty
- that
- and last night

It's a conspiracy.

Bad decisions never happen in any other games.

Seriously though, it is a bizarre run of incidents, but it's a bit much for people to be looking at sinister undertones. PL refs are just incompetent.

Mitch Connor

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Yes of course. Although judging by Nani's reaction while lying on the ground, handling the ball as if a penalty was imminent, I doubt he thought it was anything but a penalty.

which going by a lot of the people in this thread, is a perfectly legitimate response. After all, Gomes is seemingly allowed to call his own free kicks without any blame for stupidity, so why can't Nani?

Xavi6

#15 wrote: »

LOL, someone comes into the thread calling Utd fans rags and you're getting upset when someone responds to it.

LOL.

You are aware that no one was throwing insults until niallo and karma came into the thread?

Just another reason for Xavi6 to engage in a bit of moral high-horsery about Utd I suppose.:rolleyes:

So if someone calls United fans rags you respond by calling them bitters? You're as bad as them so. Glad we cleared that up.

Do carry on.

roosh

#15 wrote: »

It's a conspiracy.

Bad decisions never happen in any other games.

Seriously though, it is a bizarre run of incidents, but it's a bit much for people to be looking at sinister undertones. PL refs are just incompetent.

I would be interested to see how many bad decisions happen in the exact same fixture, almost on an annual basis.

there is nothing sinister about it, it is, as you say, a simple matter of incompetency, and a clear, perhaps sub-conscious biad towards united.

Mitch Connor

mangaroosh wrote: »

and the spurs players clearly say it to the lino about the handball, and leave fairly satisfied that the goal is not going to be given.

LOL.

Just LOL.

You don't know what was said between the players and the lino.

All we have heard (from Fletcher) is that the ref told Nani to get up and the Spurs players to play on.

stumpypeeps

mangaroosh wrote: »

I would be interested to see how many bad decisions happen in the exact same fixture, almost on an annual basis.

there is nothing sinister about it, it is, as you say, a simple matter of incompetency, and a clear, perhaps sub-conscious biad towards united.

Most refs in fairness are petrified of Ferguson. Which is testament to Fergusons genius, he has them all in his pocket.

roosh

Mitch Connor wrote: »

LOL.

Just LOL.

You don't know what was said between the players and the lino.

All we have heard (from Fletcher) is that the ref told Nani to get up and the Spurs players to play on.

you can clearly see Gomes and Ekotto gesturing that it was a handball, and both walk away looking reasonably satisfied, presumably not at the fact that their concerns haven't been heard, and that the goal is going to be awarded.

Ekotto even stops the other spurs players from approaching the lino.

Also, unless the lino was flagging just so he could have a little chin wag, and get his arms around Twattenburg, then he must've been flagging for something. Gomes wasn't booked, or even talked to by Twat's, and again, the spurs players reaction suggests that the handball at the very least given some consideration.

Xavi6

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Why would you assume that?

The lino doesn't flag for several seconds AFTER the ball has gone in the net, which is a relatively long time after Nani handled it. From what I have seen the most likely reason for the lino to be flagging is the fact there were a number of Spurs players in his face at the time.

Not necessarily.

If the referee indicated play on, which Clattenburg did, and no advantage occurs, the linesman then raised his flag to bring the refs attention to the incident.

Basically the lino f*cked up by not flagging in the first place then tried to make up for it by doing so when confronted by the Spurs players.

It really isn't Clattenburg's fault anyway, despite my destain for the man.

roosh

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Most refs in fairness are petrified of Ferguson. Which is testament to Fergusons genius, he has them all in his pocket.

very true.

it's a shame, bcos the more incidents like this, the more support there is for video reffing.

roosh

Xavi6 wrote: »

Not necessarily.

If the referee indicated play on, which Clattenburg did, and no advantage occurs, the linesman then raised his flag to bring the refs attention to the incident.

Basically the lino f*cked up by not flagging in the first place then tried to make up for it by doing so when confronted by the Spurs players.

It really isn't Clattenburg's fault anyway, despite my destain for the man.

it depends on what was said between the lino and the Twattenburg. If the handball was brought to his attention, then he should have brought it back for a free.

If the penalty claim and the handball were brought to his attention, then he should have awarded one or the other.

Xavi6

mangaroosh wrote: »

it depends on what was said between the lino and the Twattenburg. If the handball was brought to his attention, then he should have brought it back for a free.

If the penalty claim and the handball were brought to his attention, then he should have awarded one or the other.

My guess is that the linesman wasn't sure about either. He missed the peno and also missed the handball, hence his failure to flag at the time.

When Clattenburg spoke to him he admitted he missed both and, as Clattenburg was wrong side of the play, he couldn't give a peno or a free.

ntlbell

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Why would you assume that?

The lino doesn't flag for several seconds AFTER the ball has gone in the net, which is a relatively long time after Nani handled it. From what I have seen the most likely reason for the lino to be flagging is the fact there were a number of Spurs players in his face at the time.

because i didn't realise he didn't flag at the time and it's the only valid/obvious incident to flag about.

crazy i know

Le King

Great result today. Dominated the game. Played very well and I doubt the second goal would of mattered.

Spurs were made look very average yesterday.


Also hi to all the haters in here! You suck.

Fuhrer

mangaroosh wrote: »

very true.

it's a shame, bcos the more incidents like this, the more support there is for video reffing.

What would having Video reffing change about this incident?

L'prof

Actually, yeah...if the ref played advantage, then why didn't he blow it up when no advantage was had, or is that just a rule I made up in my head? Does anybody here no what the rules say about playing advantage?

ntlbell

L'prof wrote: »

Actually, yeah...if the ref played advantage, then why didn't he blow it up when no advantage was had, or is that just a rule I made up in my head? Does anybody here no what the rules say about playing advantage?

no advantage? he tipped the ball a few yards and left it there???

#15

Xavi6 wrote: »

So if someone calls United fans rags you respond by calling them bitters? You're as bad as them so. Glad we cleared that up.

Do carry on.

Yeah, to be honest, I was just winding them up, their outrage is amusing.

At least now you know that it wasn't Utd fans who started throwing the insults first. Selective vision can be troublesome I suppose.

You're as bad as them so.

Not really.

Give the high-horsery a rest. Where's your Rooney sig gone?:rolleyes:

L'prof

ntlbell wrote: »

no advantage? he tipped the ball a few yards and left it there???

He didn't get to play the ball to anyone, where exactly is the advantage?

Fuhrer

L'prof wrote: »

He didn't get to play the ball to anyone, where exactly is the advantage?

The advantage was having the ball in his hands.

Just because he was unmercifully stupid doesnt mean he didnt have an advantage

Essien

L'prof wrote: »

He didn't get to play the ball to anyone, where exactly is the advantage?

I agree with this actually. I've already said he did play advantage, so then why didn't he bring play back when no advantage materialised?

The more I think about it (and watch it here on Goals on Sunday) the more a blame the officials for ****ing it up

ntlbell

L'prof wrote: »

He didn't get to play the ball to anyone, where exactly is the advantage?

he had it in his hands, he could of done anything he wanted with it, it's not the ref's fault he decided to just leave it there!

Essien

Fuhrer wrote: »

Just because he was unmercifully stupid doesnt mean he didnt have an advantage

He was unmercifully stupid with the advantage, that part goes without saying, but ref's always bring play back when, after giving an advantage, the team in question don't immediately gain some benefit, nevermind being brutally punished by the opposing team scoring directly from their advantage.

Fuhrer

Essien wrote: »

I agree with this actually. I've already said he did play advantage, so then why didn't he bring play back when no advantage materialised?

The more I think about it (and watch it here on Goals on Sunday) the more a blame the officials for ****ing it up

He had the advantage when he had the ball in his hands.


Why do people think that playing advantage means letting someone do whatever they want and then taking it back if it doesnt work out?

Essien

Fuhrer wrote: »

He had the advantage when he had the ball in his hands.


Why do people think that playing advantage means letting someone do whatever they want and then taking it back if it doesnt work out?

I'm not saying they should be allowed to do whatever they want. How many times, under normal circumstances, do we see play being brought back after 3 or 4 passes when no advantage materialises? It happens alll the time, why didn't it happen here?

IvySlayer

Controversial goal or not - United still would have won. We were just better than Spurs on the night.

Also, I wish the whingeing and crying would stop. When it happens to Liverpool (vs Sunderland) its all funny, when United get a bit of luck it's a conspiracy.

Nani and Vidic were excellent. Fletcher too. Carrick was half-decent.

L'prof

Ah lads, come on now! How is it any different from say, advantage being played and then losing possession immediately to an intercepted pass? Would play not be brought back there straight away?

lordgoat

mangaroosh wrote: »

I would be interested to see how many bad decisions happen in the exact same fixture, almost on an annual basis.

there is nothing sinister about it, it is, as you say, a simple matter of incompetency, and a clear, perhaps sub-conscious biad towards united.

Yeah it's great isn't it?
:rolleyes:

L'prof wrote: »

Ah lads, come on now! How is it any different from say, advantage being played and then losing possession immediately to an intercepted pass? Would play not be brought back there straight away?

Very rarely in soccer is advantage let go for very long. You often see it breaking down after a few seconds and the ref allowing play to continue.

Fact is if Gomes had launched the ball down the field like he should have as his team are one down with time running out this would not even be an issue.

Gomes is to blame here. The officals got it completely right in my eyes.

I believe the linesman flagged as he saw a horde of players heading towards him.

But all that really matters is 3 points in the bag right?

stumpypeeps

lordgoat wrote: »

Yeah it's great isn't it?
:rolleyes:




Very rarely in soccer is advantage let go for very long. You often see it breaking down after a few seconds and the ref allowing play to continue.

Fact is if Gomes had launched the ball down the field like he should have as his team are one down with time running out this would not even be an issue.

Gomes is to blame here. The officals got it completely right in my eyes.

I believe the linesman flagged as he saw a horde of players heading towards him.

But all that really matters is 3 points in the bag right?

Had no impact on the outcome of the game. Just a bit of a talking point really. Where better to talk about than here.

L'prof

lordgoat wrote: »

But all that really matters is 3 points in the bag right?

Personally, I don't give a crap about the 3 points, or whether or not United would have won the game anyway. In my eyes, the ref made a calamity of errors and that drives me insane, no matter what team benefits from them.

ntlbell

L'prof wrote: »

Ah lads, come on now! How is it any different from say, advantage being played and then losing possession immediately to an intercepted pass? Would play not be brought back there straight away?

because the player is making an attempt to get the ball back in your case in this case the keeper just left the ball there after kicking it??

roosh

Xavi6 wrote: »

My guess is that the linesman wasn't sure about either. He missed the peno and also missed the handball, hence his failure to flag at the time.

When Clattenburg spoke to him he admitted he missed both and, as Clattenburg was wrong side of the play, he couldn't give a peno or a free.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. He was prefectly placed to see the handball, and the reaction of the spurs players after clearly gesturing about a handball, suggests that he was aware of it.

roosh

Le King wrote: »

Great result today. Dominated the game. Played very well and I doubt the second goal would of mattered.

Spurs were made look very average yesterday.


Also hi to all the haters in here! You suck.

Spurs were indeed not great, but United were far from world beaters, and Spurs dominated for long spells, but had nothing up front.

while the second goal may not have ultimately affected the destination of the three points, but going into the last 5-7 mins, with united's propnsity to throw away leads lately, the game was far from a foregone conclusion.

roosh

Fuhrer wrote: »

What would having Video reffing change about this incident?

either the penalty or the free would have been awarded.

an video match official, in a room away from the pressure on the field, and given the potential penalty and blatant handball would have awarded one or the other.

IvySlayer

mangaroosh wrote: »

Spurs were indeed not great, but United were far from world beaters, and Spurs dominated for long spells, but had nothing up front.

while the second goal may not have ultimately affected the destination of the three points, but going into the last 5-7 mins, with united's propnsity to throw away leads lately, the game was far from a foregone conclusion.

Considering the quality Spurs have, I'm pretty happy.

L'prof

ntlbell wrote: »

Ah right, argument ender right there. You should have played that card earlier!

roosh

L'prof wrote: »

Actually, yeah...if the ref played advantage, then why didn't he blow it up when no advantage was had, or is that just a rule I made up in my head? Does anybody here no what the rules say about playing advantage?

think it's entirely at the ref's discretion.

Nani was perfectly entitled to put the ball in the net, but after consulting with the linesman, if the linesman was aware of the handball - and brought it to Twattenburgs attention - then goal should have been disallowed, and play brought back for a free-kcik

herbieflowers

99/100 if a player handles the ball like that in anticipation of a penalty / free-kick he's going to be booked and a free is given to the other side. Did he even see it? If he did then that's poor refereeing.

However, you always play to the whistle and Gomes should've known better. Cheap goal to give away and a little unfortunate.

L'prof

Yes, always play the whistle...just like Henry...oh no I didn't!!!

Warper

Nani is a talented footballer but geez he gets on my nerves. He is like a petulant child always diving. He looks for a free practically everytime and kicks around on the ground when he doesnt get one. The refs need to stamp his crap out and book him.

roosh

Gomes should've played to the whistle, but it is entirely understandable why he didn't.

That is entirely immaterial however, depending on what what the linesman said to the ref. If the ref was made aware of the handball, then despite Gomes not playing to the whistle, the game should still have been brought back, and the goal disallowed.

Fuhrer

mangaroosh wrote: »

Gomes should've played to the whistle, but it is entirely understandable why he didn't.

That is entirely immaterial however, depending on what what the linesman said to the ref. If the ref was made aware of the handball, then despite Gomes not playing to the whistle, the game should still have been brought back, and the goal disallowed.

No