Manchester United V Tottenham ESPN 5:30

BERBA

lordgoat wrote: »

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

seriously though where would ye get that kinda money to buy those 2? Wasnt that why rooooo wanted out coz no purchases in the pipeline

Fuhrer

BERBA wrote: »

roll on tomorrow night against the european champions

Some take pride in being the best, others seem to take pride in seeing the best...

roosh

BERBA wrote: »

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

I can completely understand the point of view. And initially I agreed with it on Spurs Community, but after listening to other posters and giving it some consideration, I changed my mind.

The thing about it is, it comes down entirely to a judgement call on the referees behalf, in which there is ultimately no objective right or wrong, as there is no law of the game which legislates for this incident.

I just believe he made a wrong judgement, based on the fact that he claims he was playing advantage, when no actual advantage had accrued, when all was said and done.

And I'll argue against that til the cows come home




because I'm an argumentative ****

BERBA

Fuhrer wrote: »

Some take pride in being the best, others seem to take pride in seeing the best...

Barcelona , stadio olimpico springs to mind

kryogen

The linesman didnt flag for about 5 seconds after Nani scored, his flag would have gone up straight away had he actually been concerned by the handball

The ref never blew for a free to Spurs, never implied they were getting a free or being given advantage, Nani did nothing wrong in putting the ball in the net

Hardly an earth shattering event tbh.

Fuhrer

BERBA wrote: »

Barcelona , stadio olimpico springs to mind

Nothing springs to mind when I think of Spurs and the Champions League, funny that.

niallo27

kryogen wrote: »

The linesman didnt flag for about 5 seconds after Nani scored, his flag would have gone up straight away had he actually been concerned by the handball

The ref never blew for a free to Spurs, never implied they were getting a free or being given advantage, Nani did nothing wrong in putting the ball in the net

Hardly an earth shattering event tbh.

well im sure the linesman though it was a free kick, if he was not concerned by the handball, why didnt he run back to the half way line, why did he put his flag up

#15

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

There's always the risk that they'd shrink at a big club though.

You just never know how players from small teams will adapt to the big stage.

BERBA

kryogen wrote: »

The linesman didnt flag for about 5 seconds after Nani scored, his flag would have gone up straight away had he actually been concerned by the handball

The ref never blew for a free to Spurs, never implied they were getting a free or being given advantage, Nani did nothing wrong in putting the ball in the net

Hardly an earth shattering event tbh.

you think he'd have allowed it at the other end? - no chance.

flahavaj

Fuhrer wrote: »

Nothing springs to mind when I think of Spurs and the Champions League, funny that.

Lasagne is the best I can come up with. Lasagne and diarrhoea.

roosh

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.

Have better things to do than troll

I think we probably only disagree over what [personal] judgement the ref should have made. I think it came down entirely to his own discretion, because there is no rule that governs exactly what to do in that situation.

I personally believe that when all was said and done, he should have asked himself if Spurs had acquired the advantage he was playing. I don't think they did, although I understand the case about Gomes having the ball in his hands.

It would all have been avoided if Gomes had played the ball from his hands, and he should have, but even Nani stopped to see the ref's reaction, so it wasn't abundantly clear, but he obviously thought he was within his rights - which he was.

Again, when he consulted the linesman, he should have asked if an advantage had been accrued. When all was said and done, I think the answer was no.

BERBA

#15 wrote: »

There's always the risk that they'd shrink at a big club though.

You just never know how players from small teams will adapt to the big stage.

look at carrick , 18.6 million reasons for me to smile.

flahavaj

BERBA wrote: »

you think he'd have allowed it at the other end? - no chance.

Wouldn't have happened in the first place - United's keeper wouldn't have made such a schoolboy error and I doubt any Spurs players would have the brains to pull it off tbh.;)

Fuhrer

BERBA wrote: »

look at carrick , 18.6 million reasons for me to smile.

Id imagine his Champions League and Premier League medals make him smile more then you.

BERBA

flahavaj wrote: »

Wouldn't have happened in the first place - United's keeper wouldn't have made such a schoolboy error and I doubt any Spurs players would have the brains to pull it off tbh.;)

you crack me up flah , same schoolboy error that got west brom a point at OT

flahavaj

BERBA wrote: »

look at carrick , 18.6 million reasons for me to smile.

Not sure whats funny about players outgrowing you tbh. He has four or five reasons to make him smile, shiny things he wouldn't have had a hope of winning at Spurs.

#15

BERBA wrote: »

look at carrick , 18.6 million reasons for me to smile.

OMG it's Mr Levy

BERBA

#15 wrote: »

OMG it's Mr Levy

My cover is blown

flahavaj

BERBA wrote: »

you crack me up flah , same schoolboy error that got west brom a point at OT

Whats rare is wonderful. A misjudgement. What Gomes did was pure brainless, you'd be laughed off the 5-aside pitch for doing it. Lets not get into comparing errors made by our clubs' respective keepers. Hilarious Gormless won't come out of it lookng too good.

BERBA

flahavaj wrote: »

Whats rare is wonderful. A misjudgement. What Gomes did was pure brainless, you'd be laughed off the 5-aside pitch for doing it. Lets not get into comparing errors made by our clubs' respective keepers. Hilarious Gormless won't come out of it lookng too good.

you wont see me knockin the Gomes , super keeper prone to the odd error. love the bloke tbh

Fuhrer

flahavaj wrote: »

Whats rare is wonderful. A misjudgement. What Gomes did was pure brainless, you'd be laughed off the 5-aside pitch for doing it. Lets not get into comparing errors made by our clubs' respective keepers. Hilarious Gormless won't come out of it lookng too good.

Also, Gomes cost more money than Van Der Sar which undoubtedly infuriates BERBA

kryogen

BERBA wrote: »

look at carrick , 18.6 million reasons for me to smile.

Does it make you happy how successful he became after he left the spuds??

Very sporting of you

roosh

Mitch Connor wrote: »

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?

because in the time leading up to his discussion with linesman, and during it, it should have became clear that there was confusion directly as a result of the incident, and his own poor communication.

At this point he can ask himself, did spurs get the advantage that he was playing, at the end of it all, I think the answer is no. The issue is that, to the letter of the law, it should have been a free-kick, because he decided it was not a penalty, but adjudged it to have been handball - hence "playing advantage". So he used his discretion not to award a free-kick.

After Nani put the ball in the net, he awarded the goal and walked towards the centre circle - thinking Gomes had messed up, which he had. However, his linesman then signals to talk to him. At this point he is free to use his own discretion again, as he did in not awarding the free-kick.

He can ask himself, did an advantage for spurs materialise. Yes, so he thought by allowing Gomes to play on with the ball in his hands, but no because he did not clearly communicate that he was playing advantage.

When all was said and done, did allowing Gomes to take the ball in his hands, amount to a sufficient advantage for tottenham, considering they conceded directly as a result of the incident?

roosh

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.

He does this only after Gomes places the ball for the "free". He didn't communicate at the time of the incident that he was playing advantage, he simply mirrored Gomes' querying gesture.

The incident doesn't end there though, there is the subsequent discussion with the linesman, when he can pose the question, at the end of it all, did spurs accrue an advantage?

He is free to use his discretion again at that point.

BERBA

mangaroosh wrote: »

I can completely understand the point of view. And initially I agreed with it on Spurs Community, but after listening to other posters and giving it some consideration, I changed my mind.

The thing about it is, it comes down entirely to a judgement call on the referees behalf, in which there is ultimately no objective right or wrong, as there is no law of the game which legislates for this incident.

I just believe he made a wrong judgement, based on the fact that he claims he was playing advantage, when no actual advantage had accrued, when all was said and done.

And I'll argue against that til the cows come home




because I'm an argumentative ****

I'm on your side , you see the red side have never heard or don't believe in the spirit of the game just like our friend Nani.

Fuhrer

BERBA wrote: »

I'm on your side , you see the red side have never heard or don't believe in the spirit of the game just like our friend Nani.

The spirit of the game is cry relentlessly for days after on the internet over a goal that didnt even change the result of a game?

CR 7

Van der sar - 40 reasons to smile.

flahavaj

BERBA wrote: »

I'm on your side , you see the red side have never heard or don't believe in the spirit of the game just like our friend Nani.

Just like Hilarious has never heard of a whistle.

roosh

kryogen wrote: »

The linesman didnt flag for about 5 seconds after Nani scored, his flag would have gone up straight away had he actually been concerned by the handball

The ref never blew for a free to Spurs, never implied they were getting a free or being given advantage, Nani did nothing wrong in putting the ball in the net

Hardly an earth shattering event tbh.

Ultimately the ref used his discretion in not giving a free, and "playing advantage", when he had the time to consult the linesman, he had the opportunity to exercise his discretion again, and decide if the advantage he was playing had accrued. Conceding a goal surely amounts to a resounding no.

Not an earth shattering event, but rather a questionably regular occurence in that fixture.

BERBA

Fuhrer wrote: »

The spirit of the game is cry relentlessly for days after on the internet over a goal that didnt even change the result of a game?

again missing the point , how many games have utd thrown away leads in last 10 mins this season?

by giving utd the goal he game them a comfortable last 10 minutes , i'm not saying we would have got anything out of the game but ref made it an easy ending for the reds.

Fuhrer

BERBA wrote: »

again missing the point , how many games have utd thrown away leads in last 10 mins this season?

by giving utd the goal he game them a comfortable last 10 minutes , i'm not saying we would have got anything out of the game but ref made it an easy ending for the reds.

Gomes made it easy.


You're incompetent players are to blame, no the officials.

kryogen

You claim not to like Nani yet call him a friend

Nani plays to win, like most footballers, losers tend to harp on about the spirit of the game while winners enjoy the glory

flahavaj

Fuhrer wrote: »

Gomes made it easy.


You're incompetent players are to blame, no the officials.

It was easy second half anyway tbh. The so called big stars in the Spurs team faded badly.

roosh

Fuhrer wrote: »

The spirit of the game is cry relentlessly for days after on the internet over a goal that didnt even change the result of a game?

technically it did change the result!

roosh

BERBA wrote: »

I'm on your side

I know, apologies if the tone came across any differently

BERBA wrote: »

you see the red side have never heard or don't believe in the spirit of the game just like our friend Nani.

I'm losing faith in the "spirit of the game" myself.

Le King

Technically the decision was correct. I don't see Spurs fans complaining about the offside goal they got a couple of weeks ago. "The spirit of the game" always comes into the fore when a decision goes against your team.

All this seems to be hiding the fact that Spurs got beat by performance and goals on Saturday. Also Gomes is a very stupid boy. As a young boy you always play to the whistle. There was none, yet Gomes took it upon himself to call a free kick. Absolutely ridiculous.

Also I love some of the people who are posting in here with their agendas, I find all this hilarious. It makes Nani's goal more sweeter. Also what was with that dim chap that called Nani out for celebrating the goal. Unbelievable.

roosh

Le King wrote: »

Technically the decision was correct.

Technically it wasn't, because to the letter of the law, a free-kick should have been awarded for a deliberate handball

Le King wrote: »

I don't see Spurs fans complaining about the offside goal they got a couple of weeks ago. "The spirit of the game" always comes into the fore when a decision goes against your team.

Gallas wasn't interfering with play, that's why the goal was awarded after having been flagged for offside.

Le King wrote: »

All this seems to be hiding the fact that Spurs got beat by performance and goals on Saturday.

the teams were fairly evenly matched, and if it was 1-0 going into the last 5 mins, there was a possibility that Spurs could have equalised.

Le King wrote: »

Also Gomes is a very stupid boy. As a young boy you always play to the whistle. There was none, yet Gomes took it upon himself to call a free kick. Absolutely ridiculous.

When you're playing as a boy it generally isn't in front of 60 odd thousand, with professional referees, and professional assistants. Also, when playing as a boy, deliberate handball is usually penalised with a free-kick. When playing as a boy, I don't think conceding a goal ever constituted an advantage.

I agree though that he should have played to the whistle, but the ref should still have disallowed the goal.

Le King wrote: »

Also I love some of the people who are posting in here with their agendas, I find all this hilarious. It makes Nani's goal more sweeter. Also what was with that dim chap that called Nani out for celebrating the goal. Unbelievable.

Do people really post here with agendas?

Le King

mangaroosh wrote: »

because in the time leading up to his discussion with linesman, and during it, it should have became clear that there was confusion directly as a result of the incident, and his own poor communication.

At this point he can ask himself, did spurs get the advantage that he was playing, at the end of it all, I think the answer is no. The issue is that, to the letter of the law, it should have been a free-kick, because he decided it was not a penalty, but adjudged it to have been handball - hence "playing advantage". So he used his discretion not to award a free-kick.

After Nani put the ball in the net, he awarded the goal and walked towards the centre circle - thinking Gomes had messed up, which he had. However, his linesman then signals to talk to him. At this point he is free to use his own discretion again, as he did in not awarding the free-kick.

He can ask himself, did an advantage for spurs materialise. Yes, so he thought by allowing Gomes to play on with the ball in his hands, but no because he did not clearly communicate that he was playing advantage.

When all was said and done, did allowing Gomes to take the ball in his hands, amount to a sufficient advantage for tottenham, considering they conceded directly as a result of the incident?

Advantage was played at the discretion of the referee. If the whistle wasn't blown what the hell do you think happened? United were out of position, the referee was giving Gomes the chance to kick the ball up the field while 5/6 United players were in or around the Spurs box. Spurs would of then had a numerical advantage going forward. It took about 10 seconds for Gomes to wake up, all this during the advantage period. The referee was 100% correct here.

What do you want? Forty odd passes before the advantage was over. What if this happened in the middle of the pitch. Do you think the referee is going to allow a player that long before he decides what to do with the ball? Absolutely not. While your complaining about this what about that offside goal your lot scored a couple of weeks ago? Where is the big deal there?

Your keeper isn't very bright. Deal with it. Nothing to do with refereeing here.

kryogen

Nani is unpopular, people are always gonna look to take a pop at him, the level of consistency with certain posters and cheap shots say more about them then their target tbh

Le King

mangaroosh wrote: »

Technically it wasn't, because to the letter of the law, a free-kick should have been awarded for a deliberate handball

Obviously we will never really find out what the referee actually played advantage for but I imagine there was some communication through the mics to the ref from the linesman, no way in a million years could of Clattenberg saw that hand ball.

You Spuds fans are posting as if ye were robbed. You lost to the better team.

Gomes isn't a very bright man. Move on.

kryogen

This is a fact, United were the better team on the day, no there wasnt as much in it as usual but tbf, the spuds team is playing very well while we are still stuttering into gear so they should have gotten close to us

For all the talk of how Bale was going to tear us to shreds and how VDV was gonna split the defence and all that, i didnt see much of them after the first 10 minutes. Simply put Spurs got put in their place, which is below us

Liam O

The thing that makes me LMAO is that the United players were shouting and pointing at the ball to Nani and Gomes didn't realise anything was going on. How thick do you have to be?

CR 7

Liam O wrote: »

The thing that makes me LMAO is that the United players were shouting and pointing at the ball to Nani and Gomes didn't realise anything was going on. How thick do you have to be?

And scholes was sprinting straight at the ball almost before anyone else even reacted.

lordgoat

BERBA wrote: »

look at carrick , 18.6 million reasons for me to smile.

A spurs fan more concerned with money than success? Why I never :rolleyes:

Also i find it quite amusing that you don't mention Berbatov, how much did you make out of him? Plus he hasn't been nearly as successful as Carrick now has he??

mangaroosh wrote: »

He does this only after Gomes places the ball for the "free". He didn't communicate at the time of the incident that he was playing advantage, he simply mirrored Gomes' querying gesture.

The incident doesn't end there though, there is the subsequent discussion with the linesman, when he can pose the question, at the end of it all, did spurs accrue an advantage?

He is free to use his discretion again at that point.

As with everyone else Clattenburg is probably thinking wtf is this clown doing? Why is he throwing the ball into open play? The more i watch it the funnier it is.

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

And scholes was sprinting straight at the ball almost before anyone else even reacted.

The fact is nearly all the united players twigged what Gomes did instantly. Gomes was looking around him and should never have dropped the ball. After he did i think he paniced...

All in all, funny stuff.

Nalz

BERBA wrote: »

look at carrick , 18.6 million reasons for me to smile.

Lol...united don't win the league in 3 years, dunphy is loving every second of it so he can waffle on about how Ferguson has lost the Plot etc...

United sign one outfield player that summer and win the league, guess who?

Blitzkrieger

Kiith wrote: »

whats the point of interviewing a manager after a match if he isnt allowed to give his opinion.

In principle I agree but I can't see the FA backing down - managers would feel they can say anything then.

Ordinary man wrote: »

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

You can't call him that!

flahavaj wrote: »

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

I wish we were allowed to insult people here

IMO the whole SKY experience would be enhanced if he had a ball-gag in his mouth permanently. He adds nothing to any discussion and is a rabid ABU. I thought he was going to physically attack Ruud Guillet that time Ronaldo got sent off for handball. He wasn't even playing (red) devil's advocate - he was just trying to be calm and reasonable. The man's a disgrace.

mars bar wrote: »

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

He's not the only one - this discussion is going around in circles

cournioni

I'm only posting this once because I have to vent at some of the Spurs fans, but moreso the two faced commentators and pundits, some of the Spurs players and their manager.

I'm fed up with the rubbish coming from all of the above. The game was 1-0 to United, Spurs were not denied a goalscoring opportunity, therefore it wasn't a forgone conclusion that the match would have ended as a draw or a Spurs win. The way Mr Redknapp, Gomes and co. have reacted you would think they were denied a certain victory. Get over it, you were beaten by the better team on the day.

As for some of the pundits up in arms about Nani kicking the ball into the empty net... They were the very same lads that were lauding Torres for doing the same a few weeks back when a free was given. Then again I shouldn't really be too surprised by what some of these numpties come out with regarding United. Impartial they are not.

Finally to that goal... Personally, I thought it could have been given as a penalty as there was contact with Nani in the penalty area. The same way as it could have been given as a handball when Nani went down on top of the ball. No whistle was blown, and no free was given for either incident. Gomes took it upon himself to throw the ball on the ground without the referees whistle blown and no free given in favour of Spurs.

As the famous saying goes "assumption is the mother of all f*ck ups". Nani took full advantage of this assumption. If Spurs fans are looking for someone to blame it should be their clown of a goalkeeper. He didn't play to the whistle and he took the rules of the game into his own hands. It cost him and Spurs a goal, and any possibility of an equaliser.

Ush1

Just so people know, there is a huge difference between not giving a free kick and playing advantage.

Spurs did not get a whistle however the ref did not make clear to the players he was playing advantage.

This is bad reffing, he said so himself. It's his fault. Not Nani's or Gomes'.

Mitch Connor

Ush1 wrote: »

Just so people know, there is a huge difference between not giving a free kick and playing advantage.

Spurs did not get a whistle however the ref did not make clear to the players he was playing advantage.

This is bad reffing, he said so himself. It's his fault. Not Nani's or Gomes'.

The ref is partially at fault.

Gomes is certainly partially at fault (simple fact - the whistle was not blown, no free was given, Gomes was an idiot for placing the ball down)

Nani was not at fault.

greendom

cournioni wrote: »

I'

Finally to that goal... Personally, I thought it could have been given as a penalty as there was contact with Nani in the penalty area. The same way as it could have been given as a handball when Nani went down on top of the ball. No whistle was blown, and no free was given for either incident. Gomes took it upon himself to throw the ball on the ground without the referees whistle blown and no free given in favour of Spurs.

Major difference between the 2 was that the penalty incident wasn't clear cut. They have been given for that but they have been denied also. Nani had his hands all over the ball and there was absolutely no doubt that a free-kick for hand ball should have been given (once the penalty had been denied)

As the famous saying goes "assumption is the mother of all f*ck ups". Nani took full advantage of this assumption. If Spurs fans are looking for someone to blame it should be their clown of a goalkeeper. He didn't play to the whistle and he took the rules of the game into his own hands. It cost him and Spurs a goal, and any possibility of an equaliser.

The ref has to take the blame as much if not more than the keeper. For me it was principally an issue of communication. Gomes had more than 15,000 people directly behind him and 70,000 all around him, the vast majority baying for a penalty. If the ref had blown, it's possible that Gomez wouldn't have heard it. He made an assumption based on the normal rules of the game, that a free kick had been awarded. If the ref had been a bit clearer with regard to what was going on, Gomes would have been delighted to boot the ball away with his hands.