Manchester United V Tottenham ESPN 5:30

Fuhrer

mangaroosh wrote: »

If he was playing advantage, it became abundantly clear that no advantage had been accrued, so he should have brought play back for the free-kick, or the penalty, but seeing as how he adjudged it not to have been a penalty, but by his own admission adjudged it to have been handball (hence the "advantage") it should have been a free-kick to spurs.

He did have the advantage, he had the ball in his hands. How many advantages does he get before his safety net kicks in?

Ush1

Fuhrer wrote: »

He did inform the players, if it was a Free Kick he would have blown his whistle. He didnt so they should have played on.

He then went to the linesman and didn't make it clear he was playing advantage.

He basically said as much, how can you argue with that?

Paleface

I just watched this again and for me when Gomes is looking at Clattenburg trying to get an indication of what's going all he gets as a response is a shrug of the shoulders. That's not good refereeing. He should be waving play on. His decision shouldn't be a secret to anyone.

Ush1

Paleface wrote: »

I just watched this again and for me when Gomes is looking at Clattenburg trying to get an indication of what's going all he gets as a response is a shrug of the shoulders. That's not good refereeing. He should be waving play on. His decision shouldn't be a secret to anyone.

The referee is 100% to blame and knows it himself.

roosh

Mitch Connor wrote: »

How do you come to that conclusion - the linesman provided no new information to the ref, so why would he change his decision - this isn't the Scottish League...

Having initially awarded the goal, it was only really after talking to the linesman that he could have overruled his own initial decision - realistically

roosh

Fuhrer wrote: »

He did have the advantage, he had the ball in his hands. How many advantages does he get before his safety net kicks in?

It subsequently became obvious that he believed it was a free-kick, this was in no small part due to the referees lack of communication. So while he had the ball in his hands he had a perceived advantage, but because he thought it was a free, there was no actual advantage accrued.

The goal was awarded, which Clattenburg thought was fair, because he possibly did not realise that Gomes thought it was a free.

After talking to the linesman, he then had a choice, disallow the goal, because no advantage accrued, or award it, because he had not blown for a free.

If he was, as he claimed, playing advantage, then at that point, when it was clear no actual advantage had been gained, he should have brought it back for a free-kick.


It is entirely a question of the referees personal opinion. Does he think that Spurs got an advantage? Initially he may have thought yes, but when it was clear that they hadn't it should have been a free.

roosh

Paleface wrote: »

I just watched this again and for me when Gomes is looking at Clattenburg trying to get an indication of what's going all he gets as a response is a shrug of the shoulders. That's not good refereeing. He should be waving play on. His decision shouldn't be a secret to anyone.

I think the problem is that, in Clattenburgs mind he hadn't blown for the free, so he was allowing play to continue, when Gomes looked to him for a signal, Clattenburg was wondering what he was looking for. Which is fair enough, but he should still have indicated clearly.

The problem arises when he consults the linesman. He claims that he was playing advantage. At that point he can ask the question, was an advantage gained? The answer is no. So he should have brought it back for a free.

jonnyfingers

To me it looks like Gomez wanted to kick the ball out but hesitated because no Spurs player was making themself available to him. Then he decided to take a free kick, which he's not really in his right to make that decision. And even when Nani stood over the ball and looked around to see what he should do next, Gomez should have just hopped on the ball.

This was a freak situation that could have been avoided if Gomez had just kicked the ball out.

Personally, as a United fan, I have no problem with the validity of the goal, but I would prefer for it not to have been given just to avoid all this stupid arguing. It has taken away from what was a pretty good game.

lordgoat

jonnyfingers wrote: »

To me it looks like Gomez wanted to kick the ball out but hesitated because no Spurs player was making themself available to him. Then he decided to take a free kick, which he's not really in his right to make that decision. And even when Nani stood over the ball and looked around to see what he should do next, Gomez should have just hopped on the ball.
This was a freak situation that could have been avoided if Gomez had just kicked the ball out.

Personally, as a United fan, I have no problem with the validity of the goal, but I would prefer for it not to have been given just to avoid all this stupid arguing. It has taken away from what was a pretty good game.

Yep, 100 % agree.

I'm not bothered about the controversy, it'll always happen. I can't wait for a winning goal that is actually unjust. SF meltdown!

Wile E. Coyote

mangaroosh wrote: »

He claims that he was playing advantage. At that point he can ask the question, was an advantage gained? The answer is no. So he should have brought it back for a free.

The advantage Gomez received was being allowed to clear the ball and counter attack without the game being held up. Do the team have to string together a few passes and move 40 yards up the field before it's deemed they have received an advantage?

L'prof

lordgoat wrote: »

Yep, 100 % agree.

I'm not bothered about the controversy, it'll always happen. I can't wait for a winning goal that is actually unjust. SF meltdown!

There's been plenty such cases, nothing is impossible where refereeing is concerned!

SuprSi

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

The advantage Gomez received was being allowed to clear the ball and counter attack without the game being held up. Do the team have to string together a few passes and move 40 yards up the field before it's deemed they have received an advantage?

But he didn't clear the ball because the referee didn't signal to him that he was playing advantage. Yes, he should have played the whistle, especially with Nani around, but he assumed that the handball had been called and that Nani couldn't touch the ball (or that if he did, Gomes would get the advantage) so he put it down for a free kick.

There was too much ambiguity in the whole passage of play that surely, when it boils down to it, Spurs should have been able to take more than a conceeded goal away from it seeing as the offence was committed against them?

Again this is all a little pointless anyway as it wouldn't have made much of a difference - Spurs were unlikely to score at that point.

Nalz

I dunno if its been posted before or old news but the spurs fans song to nani was funny - your just a shiit Michael Jackson

Mitch Connor

Results for the Spurs match....

Man United fan and Overall Man of the Match

1. Nani
2. Rafael.
3. Vidic

Non-United fan Man of the Match

1. Nani.
2. Fletcher
3. Rafael and Vidic.

Nalz

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Results for the Spurs match....

Man United fan and Overall Man of the Match

1. Nani
2. Rafael.
3. Vidic

Non-United fan Man of the Match

1. Nani.
2. Fletcher
3. Rafael and Vidic.

Spot on, though modric and van Der vaart had equally as good games.

Kiith

May have been posted already, but Harry says he will refuse to talk to reporters after the match if he is punished for his comments after the match.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/9145368.stm

As a Spurs fan, i agree with him 100%. Not becuase i agree with the goal or not, but whats the point of interviewing a manager after a match if he isnt allowed to give his opinion. He wasnt insulting, in fact he complemented the ref for usually doing a great job, but criticised a very controversial goal.

The Muppet

everdead.ie wrote: »

The free Gomes thought we had gotten if he thinks it's a free he can't take it from his hands

You have a serious problem if you keeper is imagining frees that have not been awarded. Harry should get him checked out.

gosplan

Good point made in the guardian about this today. The only person concerned who didn't make a mistake was Nani.

Iago

We'll do what we want, We'll do what we want

We're Man United, We'll do what we want!!

Nalz

Iago wrote: »

We'll do what we want, We'll do what we want

We're Man United, We'll do what we want!!

On the tram back to eccles that was sung over and over again. Some little girl started crying so the sang in a low voice " she cries if she wants, shes man utd she'll cry if she wants

Ordinary man

Harry threating a media blackout - LOL- he couldn't keep his opinions to himself for 1 day, he'd explode. Cockney wheeler-dealer:D:P

BERBA

here's hoping we take it out on rafa's lot tomorrow night

kryogen

Kold wrote: »

We're finally gonna beat United at OT today. Yay.

Bale and VDV will be the two best players on the pitch by a mile. Happy to see Sandro starting, he played fantastic when he came on against Everton. Our weakness is once again our centre backs but hopefully Sandro will provide a lot of cover.

Hopefully Lennon finally turns it on today. Would like to see better out of Modric too. I think we have a realistic chance of getting something out of today if we properly go for it.

2-3

just saw this post and it made me happy, especially the bolded bits

flahavaj

Kiith wrote: »

May have been posted already, but Harry says he will refuse to talk to reporters after the match if he is punished for his comments after the match.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/9145368.stm

As a Spurs fan, i agree with him 100%. Not becuase i agree with the goal or not, but whats the point of interviewing a manager after a match if he isnt allowed to give his opinion. He wasnt insulting, in fact he complemented the ref for usually doing a great job, but criticised a very controversial goal.

Hopefully he sticks to his word. And if his son cares to join him in solidarity I won't lose any sleep either.

roosh

jonnyfingers wrote: »

To me it looks like Gomez wanted to kick the ball out but hesitated because no Spurs player was making themself available to him. Then he decided to take a free kick, which he's not really in his right to make that decision. And even when Nani stood over the ball and looked around to see what he should do next, Gomez should have just hopped on the ball.

This was a freak situation that could have been avoided if Gomez had just kicked the ball out.

Personally, as a United fan, I have no problem with the validity of the goal, but I would prefer for it not to have been given just to avoid all this stupid arguing. It has taken away from what was a pretty good game.

Gomes looks at Nani however, after he has placed the ball and doesn't seem to think Nani standing behind/beside him is a cause for concern.

If Clattenburg was playing advantage, then after going to his linesmane, when the confusion became obvious, he should have realised that no advantage had been gained, and awarded the free.

Fuhrer

mangaroosh wrote: »

Gomes looks at Nani however, after he has placed the ball and doesn't seem to think Nani standing behind/beside him is a cause for concern.

If Clattenburg was playing advantage, then after going to his linesmane, when the confusion became obvious, he should have realised that no advantage had been gained, and awarded the free.

This rubbish again.


The advantage was having the ball in his hands rather then having to kick it off the ground.

roosh

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

The advantage Gomez received was being allowed to clear the ball and counter attack without the game being held up. Do the team have to string together a few passes and move 40 yards up the field before it's deemed they have received an advantage?

Indeed, that is what Clattenburg believed at the time, but after discussing with his linesman, when it was clear that no advantage had been gained, he should then have awarded the free.

I don't think there is anyway to look at it, where conceding a goal directly from the incident in question constitutes an advantage, other than to the team who scores the goal.

Mars Bar

mangaroosh wrote: »

Indeed, that is what Clattenburg believed at the time, but after discussing with his linesman, when it was clear that no advantage had been gained, he should then have awarded the free.

I don't think there is anyway to look at it, where conceding a goal directly from the incident in question constitutes an advantage, other than to the team who scores the goal.

You sir, are possibly the most persistent poster in here in a long while!

roosh

Trilla wrote: »

I dunno if its been posted before or old news but the spurs fans song to nani was funny - your just a shiit Michael Jackson

roosh

gosplan wrote: »

Good point made in the guardian about this today. The only person concerned who didn't make a mistake was Nani.

very true

roosh

Fuhrer wrote: »

This rubbish again.

The advantage was having the ball in his hands rather then having to kick it off the ground.

In the mind of the referee yes, before he realised Gomes thought it was a free. When it became clear that there was confusion over the incident, caused by the blatant handling of the ball on the ground, it should have been realised that having the ball in the hands was not an advantage, and conceding a goal certainly wasn't.

If Clattenburg had ordered the game to be re-started directly after the goal, the point is valid, but the fact that he talks to the linesman, means that it becomes obvious that no advantage was gained, directly due to the confusion caused by the incident, and the refs own poor communication.

If he hadn't consulted the linesman, he could have gone on in blissful ignorance as to what had happened. But he said he was playing advantage, after consulting the linesman, it was clear that no actual advantage had been gained, in fact a disadvantage was incurred.

Hence, free-kick should have been awarded.

roosh

mars bar wrote: »

You sir, are possibly the most persistent poster in here in a long while!

I'm clearly just an argumentative ****

BERBA

mangaroosh wrote: »

In the mind of the referee yes, before he realised Gomes thought it was a free. When it became clear that there was confusion over the incident, caused by the blatant handling of the ball on the ground, it should have been realised that having the ball in the hands was not an advantage, and conceding a goal certainly wasn't.

If Clattenburg had ordered the game to be re-started directly after the goal, the point is valid, but the fact that he talks to the linesman, means that it becomes obvious that no advantage was gained, directly due to the confusion caused by the incident, and the refs own poor communication.

If he hadn't consulted the linesman, he could have gone on in blissful ignorance as to what had happened. But he said he was playing advantage, after consulting the linesman, it was clear that no actual advantage had been gained, in fact a disadvantage was incurred.

Hence, free-kick should have been awarded.

your arguing the point with utd monopoly , they only see red.

Mitch Connor

mangaroosh wrote: »

If he hadn't consulted the linesman, he could have gone on in blissful ignorance as to what had happened. But he said he was playing advantage, after consulting the linesman, it was clear that no actual advantage had been gained, in fact a disadvantage was incurred.

Again you make this weird comment regarding the convo with the linesman.

The lino told the ref nothing new, informed him of nothing he didn't already know, so what are you talking about? Why are you saying the conversation with the lino should have led the ref to changing his decision?

Fuhrer

BERBA wrote: »

wah wah wah wah wah

FYP

CR 7

mangaroosh wrote: »

I'm clearly just an argumentative ****

:pac:
At first i just thought you were trolling, but it's just a different reading of events. Nothing wrong with that. Properly reasoned arguments are exactly what forums need.

I still think the ref just went over to the linesman to confirm they both saw the same thing. The ref already acted or maybe decided he didn't need to act, and he had to check the linesman wasn't flagging something else.

niallo27

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

:pac:
At first i just thought you were trolling, but it's just a different reading of events. Nothing wrong with that. Properly reasoned arguments are exactly what forums need.

I still think the ref just went over to the linesman to confirm they both saw the same thing. The ref already acted or maybe decided he didn't need to act, and he had to check the linesman wasn't flagging something else.

Yes but did clattenburg signal the advantage, was he going to give a free kick

flahavaj

BERBA wrote: »

your arguing the point with utd monopoly , they only see red.

And yet you continue to do so with monotonous regularity.:rolleyes:

Mars Bar

you write the word troll and niallo is promptly on board.

CR 7

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but did clattenburg signal the advantage, was he going to give a free kick

I've seen almost all available videos, none show him put both hands up to signal advantage, just putting both outwards by his side, which to me is just 'play on', i.e. No foul.

BERBA

flahavaj wrote: »

And yet you continue to do so with monotonous regularity.:rolleyes:

roll on tomorrow night against the european champions

lordgoat

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

I've seen almost all available videos, none show him put both hands up to signal advantage, just putting both outwards by his side, which to me is just 'play on', i.e. No foul.

To me it's "WTF are you doing? Why are you not kicking the ball out?";)

niallo27

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

I've seen almost all available videos, none show him put both hands up to signal advantage, just putting both outwards by his side, which to me is just 'play on', i.e. No foul.

Yes i agree with you, so does common sense not say that when the linesman called him over and said he saw the handball, he could have given a free kick.
Common sense would have prevailed and i dont think many utd supporters would have being too upset.

flahavaj

BERBA wrote: »

roll on tomorrow night against the european champions

LOUL. Gonna be funny alright. Sammy Eto's gonna rape ye.

lordgoat

flahavaj wrote: »

LOUL. Gonna be funny alright. Sammy Eto's gonna rape ye.

I don't know flah if another of their decent players scores a consolation hat trick, that'll be them and Bale gone in the summer. Could be handy?

BERBA

flahavaj wrote: »

LOUL. Gonna be funny alright. Sammy Eto's gonna rape ye.

thankfully Pedro Mendes won't be reffin it tomorrow night

BERBA

lordgoat wrote: »

I don't know flah if another of their decent players scores a consolation hat trick, that'll be them and Bale gone in the summer. Could be handy?

loved the ol fergie sniffin around the modric and bale before we arrived at the top table last may

wouldnt ye just love the both of em , don't think ye have the bobs though coz ye gave it all to the scouser.

Nalz

BERBA wrote: »

loved the ol fergie sniffin around the modric and bale before we arrived at the top table last may

wouldnt ye just love the both of em , don't think ye have the bobs though coz ye gave it all to the scouser.

Bale - Naa, modric yes.

lordgoat

BERBA wrote: »

loved the ol fergie sniffin around the modric and bale before we arrived at the top table last may

wouldnt ye just love the both of em , don't think ye have the bobs though coz ye gave it all to the scouser.

We'll see... I'd take Bale and Tom H off ye tomorrow but i might have to wait for the summer.

I can see ye selling Bale, Modric, VDV and a few others if the money is right...

Just don't call 'Arry a ****ing Wheeler Dealer!

flahavaj

BERBA wrote: »

loved the ol fergie sniffin around the modric and bale before we arrived at the top table last may

wouldnt ye just love the both of em , don't think ye have the bobs though coz ye gave it all to the scouser.

They'll be gone when they outgrow ye. £150 mill in cash reserves says United have a pound or two don't worry.