Seemed questionable at the time.
That Nani red card against Real Madrid
- Thread starter VorZakone
- Start date
Really got me. Never cared as much about a football game after this one 
And no, I don't think it was a red. Plus, either Varane or Ramos got away with a blatant last man foul away too...
And no, I don't think it was a red. Plus, either Varane or Ramos got away with a blatant last man foul away too...
It's refreshing seeing the pundits making a point of showing the replay in real time to show what the referee would've seen, that's a higher standard of fairness than when refs today are shown innocent challenges that look brutal in slow motion.
If it was a red there would be at least 1 red every game for a high foot.
I remember at the time being absolutely shocked and livid at the decision.
But by today's standards, it's a definite red.
But by today's standards, it's a definite red.
No, it wasn't and isn't a red. Plus, we were bashing them up until that game-changing card.
I will never get over this decision. That was our night.
Still a red. Always a red.
Still a red. Always a red.
Wasn't a red then. Definitely a red now.
It seemed unfair then. It was unlucky, put it that way.
Was there really that big a difference in the reffing standards for handing out cards back then? Obviously, VAR has changed the game entirely now in some ways, but, with the occasional exception like Netherlands being somehow allowed to go all 1970s at the 2010 World Cup, we were already into the "games gone soft" low physical contact years by then. I remember constant online debates along the lines of "Barca/Spain wouldn't be able to play their possession football five/ten years ago".
Anyway, it was definitely harsh. A yellow would have been fair, but it is the sort of clumsy collision that can look worse in real time, and isn't too hard in that context to be taken for being more deliberate or dangerous than it really was. I'd prefer to see a slightly longer clip that gives a better idea of how aware Nani was that an opponent had started a sprint at him. It's the sort of situation where maybe seven/eight times out of ten a ref will just go for the yellow, but if you're playing Real Madrid in a big European game/Brazil at the World Cup/Juve or Berlu's Milan in a vital Serie A game?....best not miss and give any excuses.
Anyway, it was definitely harsh. A yellow would have been fair, but it is the sort of clumsy collision that can look worse in real time, and isn't too hard in that context to be taken for being more deliberate or dangerous than it really was. I'd prefer to see a slightly longer clip that gives a better idea of how aware Nani was that an opponent had started a sprint at him. It's the sort of situation where maybe seven/eight times out of ten a ref will just go for the yellow, but if you're playing Real Madrid in a big European game/Brazil at the World Cup/Juve or Berlu's Milan in a vital Serie A game?....best not miss and give any excuses.
It's a clear and fair red. If he got to the ball first or even touched the ball, he may have a case. For some reason at the time I thought it was a bad call but it seems like a red now.
That was the 12/13 season. There is no way United would beat Bayern that season. They were a level above everybody that season.
According to the letter of the law, probably a red. But as I've said with many of these discussions, common sense indicates that the law's an ass. People jump with their leg out like this to bring the ball down all the time; if Abeloa doesn't time his jump at that exact moment, not only is there no red card, but there's no foul. Should an entire game really hinge on that kind if chance? Obviously not, and the fact that the law isn't applied consistently on this type of foul tells you everything you need to know.
These days it'd be a red and I wouldn't complain about it.
Back then it shouldn't have been.
Back then it shouldn't have been.
Thanks for bringing all the trauma back to the surface, OP. I firmly believe that was our last real chance to win the CL and we should have. We went toe to toe with a very strong Real and embarrassed them at times. The way he who shall not be named reached for a red right away just felt so odd.
That was the era of obvious cheating by refs - Ovrebo v Chelsea, that cnut who gave van Persie a red v Barca, that cnut who didn't give a red and penalty for Kuyt's insanely blatant foul on Hleb (cnut ref was Kuyt's childhood friend, as it transpired).
It was never a red then. It would be MORE likely to be red today. But certainly not a given. For everyone saying it would DEFINITELY be a red with VAR nowadays. Rewatch the Doku kick into McAllister's chest that didn't result in a penalty and I'm not so sure.
In my 25 years of supporting United, this is the one incident that I am the most bitter about. (With Agueroooooo a close second).
We absolutely had Madrid on the ropes at Old Trafford. It was our game and our year. Sir Alex had got his tactics absolutely spot on.
And then the referee comes up with an absolutely shambolic decision. Anyone who’s ever played football should know it’s never a red. He’s tried to control the ball. He cannot see the oncoming player behind him. The action is neither deliberate nor forceful. It could never cause the Madrid player any real harm.
Completely changed the game and the tie.
We absolutely had Madrid on the ropes at Old Trafford. It was our game and our year. Sir Alex had got his tactics absolutely spot on.
And then the referee comes up with an absolutely shambolic decision. Anyone who’s ever played football should know it’s never a red. He’s tried to control the ball. He cannot see the oncoming player behind him. The action is neither deliberate nor forceful. It could never cause the Madrid player any real harm.
Completely changed the game and the tie.
They barely got past frickin Dortmund in the final who has more shots on goal and on target than them.
Same Dortmund side that dismantled Real Madrid 4-1 to be fair.
They were excellent in the CL that season.
We were also excellent in that game up until the red card. Stranger things have happened in football than us beating Bayern Munich in a final.
True.
We'd be underdogs, but I think knocking out Real in the CL always gives sides confidence. We'll never know what would have happened had we progressed(we likely would have until the red).
The red card was given for violent conduct. The referees these days have tried to templatize violent conduct. Some of it rightly, such as hand on face, two feet off the ground etc. But every such challenge needs a subjective view point as well to ascertain that it has been violent or reckless conduct.
For Nani to be sent off for that, it was either straight up violent, which it definitely wasn't. Or it was reckless and endangering the opponent, which entails that his foot shouldn't have been in that position. An argument can be made against it since he's quite high, it was in the reckless category. But given that it's a very normal movement for players to control the ball in, and he CLEARLY had eyes only on the ball, it shouldn't have been a red card anyway.
At the time, it was an absolute shock. In today's time, it would still be incorrect but would be less shocking.
For Nani to be sent off for that, it was either straight up violent, which it definitely wasn't. Or it was reckless and endangering the opponent, which entails that his foot shouldn't have been in that position. An argument can be made against it since he's quite high, it was in the reckless category. But given that it's a very normal movement for players to control the ball in, and he CLEARLY had eyes only on the ball, it shouldn't have been a red card anyway.
At the time, it was an absolute shock. In today's time, it would still be incorrect but would be less shocking.
Strange thing to still be obsessed with this foul a decade after it has happened.
It was a red card back then and it's a red card now. Not the "100%, has to be given, cannot be yellow" sort of red card. But also entirely justifyable and in line with the rules and general interpretation of the rules, both back then and now.
I only found the FIFA rulebook from the 14/15 season, but close enough, eh? A red card is to be given for, amongst other things, serious foul play. Serious foul play is, in turn, defined as "A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play. A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play", something which Nani's challenge definitely did, and further states: "A player who is guilty of serious foul play should be sent off and play is restarted with a direct free kick from the position where the offence occurred". I don't think that there can be any discussion about whether or not Nani's challenge for the ball did endanger the opponent - not with an outstretched sole that high in the air, catching the opponent in the side of the ribcage.
Sure, I too do think that there was no malice in the foul, that Nani didn't see him and certainly did not intend to hit him. But that doesn't matter for the rules, there is no distinction between accidentially endangering your opponent or intentionally doing so. It is a red card either way. Intent or no intent will matter for the duration of the following ban, but it has no bearing on the pitch. The commentators in the clip posted should know that and be better than harping on about Nani no having seen Arbeola.
The British view on the rules always seemed to me like they were fundamentally skewed to be much more lenient compared to how the rest of the world played the game. The game was just being played way more roughly in the PL than elsewhere, and English referees officiating international games were known to on average let a lot more slide than their colleagues. I certainly have seen British fans complain about the "harsh" referee decisions from the rest of the world for as long as I have been watching football, at least for the past thirty years. And when some people here talk about the game having been "going soft" in the EPL in more recent times, all I see is EPL referees becoming more aligned to how it has always been in other leagues and international tournaments.
It was a red card back then and it's a red card now. Not the "100%, has to be given, cannot be yellow" sort of red card. But also entirely justifyable and in line with the rules and general interpretation of the rules, both back then and now.
I only found the FIFA rulebook from the 14/15 season, but close enough, eh? A red card is to be given for, amongst other things, serious foul play. Serious foul play is, in turn, defined as "A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play. A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play", something which Nani's challenge definitely did, and further states: "A player who is guilty of serious foul play should be sent off and play is restarted with a direct free kick from the position where the offence occurred". I don't think that there can be any discussion about whether or not Nani's challenge for the ball did endanger the opponent - not with an outstretched sole that high in the air, catching the opponent in the side of the ribcage.
Sure, I too do think that there was no malice in the foul, that Nani didn't see him and certainly did not intend to hit him. But that doesn't matter for the rules, there is no distinction between accidentially endangering your opponent or intentionally doing so. It is a red card either way. Intent or no intent will matter for the duration of the following ban, but it has no bearing on the pitch. The commentators in the clip posted should know that and be better than harping on about Nani no having seen Arbeola.
The British view on the rules always seemed to me like they were fundamentally skewed to be much more lenient compared to how the rest of the world played the game. The game was just being played way more roughly in the PL than elsewhere, and English referees officiating international games were known to on average let a lot more slide than their colleagues. I certainly have seen British fans complain about the "harsh" referee decisions from the rest of the world for as long as I have been watching football, at least for the past thirty years. And when some people here talk about the game having been "going soft" in the EPL in more recent times, all I see is EPL referees becoming more aligned to how it has always been in other leagues and international tournaments.
Nah, I was watching for pure schadenfreude and I still thought that was a stupid ass decision. Never should've been a red then. In fact, still waiting for this ref to be arrested in a Guatemalan airport smuggling drugs like the Paraguayan Italy-Korea legend.
The atmosphere were brilliant that night I was in the Stretford End and then the ref did that. I said it at the time if it was an English ref no way would have it been a red. Fecking European refs
Nani only had eyes on the ball, he was trying to control it with his laces, if anything the defender ran into him.
Not a red for me then and still isn't now with me.
Not a red for me then and still isn't now with me.
Never a red. Then, now, whenever.
It wouldnt. Look at the match yesterday.
Wasn't a red at the time, but I can't say I've given much recent thought to a red card given 11 years ago.
We wouldn't have won the CL that year anyway. Nobody was stopping Bayern. They bitched Pep's Barca 7-0 on agg. They would have turned us over too.
We wouldn't have won the CL that year anyway. Nobody was stopping Bayern. They bitched Pep's Barca 7-0 on agg. They would have turned us over too.
Yeah, I'm also much more angry about that one. Not least because it was so fecking obviously onside. Like, it wasn't even close to offside. Two separate Porto players played him on!
A level above yet only won it through a goal in the dying minutes against a Dortmund side that scraped through the same Madrid side we outplayed home and away.
Yes, they were good, and if the hypothetical match up plays out 10 times, we would probably lose 6 or 7 times considering the strengthon paper, but to make it out like they were this indomitable force like Barca 09-11 is just plain wrong.
And yes, Cakir was and is a Cvnt.
Ecuadorian. Good old Byron Moreno.
Although I maintain that while the Italy game is more infamous from that World Cup, Spain had more reasons to feel aggrieved: they had two perfectly good goals chalked off for no adequate reason against South Korea.
Pep left after 11/12, Barca’s manager that season was Tito Villanova iirc, and he was out halfway through the season with cancer.
It's much closer to the Mane on Ederson challenge a few years ago than it is to the Doku challenge yesterday. And the Caf basically unanimously thought the Mane one was a red.
Can't say I even remember the Nani challenge, but back then football rules were completely different so pretty pointless to compare it to today's laws. I think no one could complain right now if a red is shown for such a challenge. Back in the days, probably a harsh one (and an outlier, given that e.g. De Jong on Alonso wasn't a red although it should've been).
Let’s also ban bicycle kicks while we are at it.
What a way to miss the point.
Let's blow the whistle when you kick someone in the head while attempting a bicycle kick.
So when someone is going for a bicycle kick, get some body part in the way and weep. Gotcha.
Good post.
Some of the comments here are really amazing. "Never a red", "Nani was unaware", etc.
Yes, it's a Manchester United forum, we can be upset about it, but for Christ sake, it was a dangerous play, high studs to chest, player's on relatively high speed. It was a rulebook red.
If RvP had his finishing boots on, we'd have closed the game in the first leg itself.