The Nani Goal

B Cantona said:
Erm, watch it again Fred

No one points until Gomes has put the ball down

You're either blind or you're lying, bizarre when the evidence is there for all to see

There's nothing to twist! If this was Van Der Sar and its Robbie Keane tucking the ball home, I'd be criticising Edwin for not playing to the whistle. This sheep argument is boring, and palpably untrue as proven on the many occasions I and many others have clearly shown non tinted perspective on incidents. The goal is legitimate, this has been pointed out over and over
Click to expand...

He's just arguing for the sake of arguing, I think (I hope).

It also gives him the excuse to go on the Grumpy Old Man rant about there being no sportsmanship in the game, unlike back in his day when goalkeepers were bundled into the net in Cup Finals.
 
fishfingers15 said:
There's no need to justify Nani's goal. It's a perfectly good goal, and a major cock up by Gomez. Get over yourself.
Click to expand...

Ok so Nani didn't handle the ball.

You lot better not ever whine like feck when an offence doesnt get spotted and someone scores against us.

The term two faced cnuts springs to mind..

You know as well as I do if that had gone against us you'd all be up in arms screaming like bitches how Clattenberg fecked up..
 
What did Spurs honestly expect Nani to do ? The circumstances were he was given a easy chance to score.Would any of their players have refused to score ? fecking hypocrites
 
Rio apparently said to Gallas that there's no point in protesting blindly, it's not like you would say no to a goal, if Spurs had scored when the ball went out of play and Bale continued playing it.

Funny that, I don't get why Bale didn't tell the ref that the ball went out of play, morally of course.
 
Bearded but no genius said:
He's just arguing for the sake of arguing, I think (I hope).

It also gives him the excuse to go on the Grumpy Old Man rant about there being no sportsmanship in the game, unlike back in his day when goalkeepers were bundled into the net in Cup Finals.
Click to expand...

Seen as how his argument has finally had to resort to the constant assertion 'you'd have been up in arms if it was the other way', an arguement built on zero evidence and pure speculation, I should say so
 
"I've always advised referees to avoid playing advantage in the defensive third of the field of play because of issues like this," said Keith Hackett a couple of weeks ago in response to a hypothetical scenario quite like today's.
 
The thing that gets me is that Spurs fans seem to be confusing the referee missing the freekick with the referee allowing the goal. We didn't score as a direct result of not giving the freekick - we didn't foul someone then poke the ball home, nor did Nani handball it into the net, for example. A freekick wasn't given, and yet it should have been. Clattenburg is at fault.

What followed, however, is a separate issue. The freekick wasn't given, Gomes should have realised the ball was active, but instead he proceeded to have the mother of all brainfarts by assuming something that wasn't the case.
 
fredthered said:
if Clattenberg saw the handball then he was wrong.

If however, as I suggest he didnt see the handball then he was 100% correct.

Given he could clearly be seen on the TV telling Gomez, at the end of the game "I didnt see it " then I would suggest that he was saying he hadn't seen the handball and thus hadn't blown the whistle for that very reason.

Why is everyone having such a problem with the idea that Clattenberg just happened to miss the handball and thus Nani benefitted from him missing it.

It does United fans no favours running around trying to justify what isnt there.

Clattenberg missed the handball. Fair enough. shit happens. We got lucky.

But at least have the sense to realise that we got lucky...
Click to expand...

He didn't miss it at all, he can clearly be seen saying to the linesman 'I saw it, I played advantage' after the linesman told him it was handball.
 
B Cantona said:
Seen as how his argument has finally had to resort to the constant assertion 'you'd have been up in arms if it was the other way', an arguement built on zero evidence and pure speculation, I should say so
Click to expand...

It's a very presumptuous argument. I'm sure there are Spurs fans who rightly blame Gomes and not the officials in this case, and I'm sure if the shoe was on the other foot there would be United supporters who would assess the situation objectively.
 
Here's a question for you lot.

IF Clattenburg has seen the handball and decided to play the advantage to Spurs, is there anything in the laws of the game that allows him to decide (after the goal has been scored) to refuse to allow them to play the advantage as they want to (in this case putting the ball on the ground) and thus disallow the goal they've conceded? Bearing in mind the ball has been live in his mind for around 15 seconds between the time he handles and the time he scores.

This is a genuine question, btw. I get the impression this stuff is often dealt with on the basis of what seems fairest.
 
Brophs said:
Here's a question for you lot.

IF Clattenburg has seen the handball and decided to play the advantage to Spurs, is there anything in the laws of the game that allows him to decide (after the goal has been scored) to refuse to allow them to play the advantage as they want to (in this case putting the ball on the ground) and thus disallow the goal they've conceded? Bearing in mind the ball has been live in his mind for around 15 seconds between the time he handles and the time he scores.

This is a genuine question, btw. I get the impression this stuff is often dealt with on the basis of what seems fairest.
Click to expand...

If he deems that spurs had the advantage for a long enough period of time (i.e. when his arms drop) then he can't call it back, as is what happened here.
 
Chabon said:
If Fred is right then I apologise, but I'm pretty disturbed to learn that, going by his own statements about "the rules of the game being clear," the Football Association has taken to creating their own supplementary laws in secret and subsequently not disclosing them to either the public or FIFA.

If "deliberate handball" is always a cautionable offence, as Fred insists, then the FA has literally rewritten the rules, which should be a worry for anyone who believes in the global game.
Click to expand...
Fred's right in the general sense that there are conventions that accompany the interpretation of the rules. He's wrong about this specific case.
 
Spammy said:
Advantage, in your own penalty area. Righto Mark. Well done.
Click to expand...

Oh come on look at it sensibly. He was letting him just play on with the ball in his hands because there was no danger. Had he launched the ball up field like any other keeper, this argument doesnt happen.

Instead, he put the ball down thinking (wrongly) it was a freekick. Fannied around and Nani too advantage.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Rio apparently said to Gallas that there's no point in protesting blindly, it's not like you would say no to a goal, if Spurs had scored when the ball went out of play and Bale continued playing it.

Funny that, I don't get why Bale didn't tell the ref that the ball went out of play, morally of course.
Click to expand...

Or say no to a goal after your mate handles the ball and you score to take your team to the world cup, morally of course.
 
championo said:
Or say no to a goal after your mate handles the ball and you score to take your team to the world cup, morally of course.
Click to expand...

Only that Paul Mcshane bundled the ball out of play giving the possession back to Ireland and Henry scoring from the resultant corner.

Either way, I'm not pouting it isn't moral bollocks, Fred seems to think Nani should have patted the ball pack to Gomez, I was pointing out that Bale hadn't done the same thing earlier.
 
I still don't get this logic that a blatant handball, which was waved on due to clear advantage to the offended team, is a travesty that half a minute after the advantage was given it should be brought back and changed into a free kick just because the goalkeeper had a brain fart, whereas the perfectly blatant penalty that was missed before is irrelevant even though if it had rightly been awarded there would have been no handball to miss or otherwise. Why in Fred's logic is it OK to dismiss the penalty "because the ref didn't see it" but not the handball "that the ref didn't see"? That's ridiculously inconsistent to be honest.

Fred, just consider this: If the ref had decided to give Spurs a free-kick, wouldn't that be unfair to us as he had ignored our clear penalty claim? Or would you still dismiss that as just one of those things?
 
If that was at the other end of the pitch you would have all gone absolutely mental.

Saying that Gomes should have played to the whistle - even though it was worse than it, it reminds of an FA Cup game you played against West Ham a good ten years back, Barthez thought that Di Canio was offside and was waving to the referee whilst Di Canio cooly slotted it passed him.
 
green demon said:
I still don't get this logic that a blatant handball, which was waved on due to clear advantage to the offended team, is a travesty that half a minute after the advantage was given it should be brought back and changed into a free kick just because the goalkeeper had a brain fart, whereas the perfectly blatant penalty that was missed before is irrelevant even though if it had rightly been awarded there would have been no handball to miss or otherwise. Why in Fred's logic is it OK to dismiss the penalty "because the ref didn't see it" but not the handball "that the ref didn't see"? That's ridiculously inconsistent to be honest.

Fred, just consider this: If the ref had decided to give Spurs a free-kick, wouldn't that be unfair to us as he had ignored our clear penalty claim? Or would you still dismiss that as just one of those things?
Click to expand...

The red DID see the penalty incident and decided it wasnt a free kick.

Thats the point most on here are too dumb to realise.

He saw what happened and felt it wasnt worthy of a penalty kick.

The penalty incident was dubious. The handball wasnt.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Only that Paul Mcshane bundled the ball out of play giving the possession back to Ireland and Henry scoring from the resultant corner.

Either way, I'm not pouting it isn't moral bollocks, Fred seems to think Nani should have patted the ball pack to Gomez, I was pointing out that Bale hadn't done the same thing earlier.
Click to expand...

don't be a dick all your life.

I've said Nani did the right thing under the circumstances, but being a cock suits you, so you ignore it.

If you are proud of that goal and think the way United got it somehow earns us credit then that says more about you than it does me.

As I keep saying, if that incident had gone the other way you'd all be screaming what an injustice it was. The fact you all are saying it was a stonewalled, nailled on, no doubt penalty for a minor shirt tug says it all really.

Red tinted specs isnt the word here.. fecking downright deluded is more appropriate.
 
I loved Nani's face and tongue wagging it was quite amusing
 
It was a penalty and even the ABU commentators said it but, waved play on.

Beck is also the idiot that waved play on when Bale's ball went over the line but, then was quick to try overturn the goal. To say the refs were in our favor is just silly. A penalty that could have been given wasn't and prat Beck tries to hand Spurs the advantage as well on a number of occasions.

Don't see anything wrong with the way we got our second. You don't stop because the other player makes a mistake. You pounce on it. This isn't golf where gentleman rules apply. We did the gentlemanly thing though when VDV goes down on his own when we very well could have carried on. Did Spurs wait for Nani to come back on the field when he went off or did they tell Rio to take his time when Rafael was trying to tie his shoe before a throw in?

This is football, the proper thing is to take advantage of the brain fart by Gomes and then point and laugh at him.
 
Rio’s Very Sensible Advice For Tottenham

With 20 minutes played, Tottenham ran the ball out of play but the linesman somehow missed it. They were awarded a corner as a result, which United cleared.

With the Spurs players going mad that the 2nd goal against them stood, Rio Ferdinand said to William Gallas: “If you had scored when the ball went out in the first half would you say ‘no goal, the ball was out’? No! It was handball by Nani but the ref didn’t blow so how can it be a free kick? If it’s a free kick, why did Gomes put the ball 10 yards away from incident?”

We know they wouldn’t admit the ball was out of play if they went on to score because they quite happily continued on with play, despite knowing they should have conceded a goal kick.

Anyone who thinks Nani shouldn’t have put the ball in the back of the net, when Gomes put the ball on a plate for him, is kidding themselves. Nani knew he had been fouled in the box and no penalty had been awarded. He also knew that he had touched the ball with his hand and no freekick had been given. So, what was he expected to do when Gomes assisted a goal for him?

The fact that Gomes picked the ball up and threw it 10 yards from where the handball had occurred was just a minor detail. As was Rio Ferdinand’s permission to listen in to the referee’s conversation with the linesman, after the ranting Spurs players had been waved away.

But the underlining factor here is that footballers do whatever they think they can get away with to give their team a better chance of winning.

When Younes Kaboul pulled on Nani’s shirt in the box, he did it because he thought he could get away with it (which he did) and because he knew it would give his team a better chance of winning if he fouled Nani in a goalscoring position.

Just like Palacios thought breaking Ronaldo’s leg would put Spurs in a better position to win the game two seasons ago. Fortuntely Ronaldo jumped out of the way, but the player got away without even a booking, let alone the red card his challenge on 6 minutes deserved.

Essentially though, 1-0? 2-0? What difference does it make? Spurs didn’t score a goal whilst United scored two, one fair and square and one in controversial circumstances. Would it have been better if one had been scored from a penalty from a tug of the shirt in the box? It’s irrelevant.

You can’t help but notice that Spurs are becoming the Liverpool of the south though, whining about everything that goes against them and their oblivious stance to everything that goes in their favour.

Shall we get out the black armbands for their next visit?

Rio’s Very Sensible Advice For Tottenham
 
fredthered said:
The red DID see the penalty incident and decided it wasnt a free kick.

Thats the point most on here are too dumb to realise.

He saw what happened and felt it wasnt worthy of a penalty kick.

The penalty incident was dubious. The handball wasnt.
Click to expand...

1. Did he see the penalty incident? I doubt it because even Waddle admitted it was a penalty.

2. The handball was no less dubious than the penalty, but here the ref definitely DID see it as he waved play on as Spurs had a good advantage.

3. To still be claiming what you're claiming is, to use your word above, "dumb"! It was a brain fart by Gomes, he wasn't even taking the kick from anywhere near where the handball happened anyway - he had claimed some 12-15 feet advantage already.
 
:lol: I'd forgotten Rio was on the pitch, I just picture him tweeting from the stands then running on the field after to speak to Gallas.
 
"Play to the whistle" ....You are taught that as a kid!

Mistake by Gomez! Great awareness by Nani to take advantage!

Fred makes a good point by arguing the ref could have called a free kick but at the end of the day Gomes must take his share of the responsibility over that! Clearly no free kick given, yet he decides to put the ball down (mind you 10 yards away from the handball).

Spurs should be looking at him instead of the ref..what was he doing? :lol:

UNITED 2 - 0 SPURS! GET IN THERE!!
 
fecking hell, 13 pages and 500 plus comments over something thats so clear and obvious, seriously what's the debate here, where's the confusion??

Nani went down looking for a pen..
Ref said no pen and play on as Spurs and Gomes had the ball...
At no time is the whistle blown or indeed does the flag go up hence the games in play and at NO TIME was it ever stopped...
Gomes then has a spastic episode and for whatever reason drops the ball to the ground...
Nani gets up and knowing the game has at no time been stopped puts the ball into the goal.

Hence we score..

Its just a goal simple as that, the linesmans flag if you watch on the highlights only goes up AFTER the goals scored and a long time after infact not before and not during, it doesn't just straight away go up after Nani scores either, he starts running to the centre of the field and only raises the flag when Gomes charges at him.

Gomes fecked up, he decided to award himself a free kick and unfortunately for him he wasn't hired as the authority figure for the match, clattenburg did nothing wrong whatsoever, he waved away our penalty appeal and clearly never stopped the game, play on was the verdict and Nani did, Gomes didn't....

Tough shit.
 
green demon said:
1. Did he see the penalty incident? I doubt it because even Waddle admitted it was a penalty.

2. The handball was no less dubious than the penalty, but here the ref definitely DID see it as he waved play on as Spurs had a good advantage.

3. To still be claiming what you're claiming is, to use your word above, "dumb"! It was a brain fart by Gomes, he wasn't even taking the kick from anywhere near where the handball happened anyway - he had claimed some 12-15 feet advantage already.
Click to expand...

The handball was no more dubious than the penalty..

:lol:

fecking idiot
 
Fred, it is long after midnight, and you've been acting like an idiot on this issue for nearly 12 hours straight.

Who said you don't crave the attention, like a proper drama llama?
 
I always wonder what people like Fred are like in real life.

You'd think he'd have some sort of personality disorder due to his posting habits and the way he attaches himself a subject and opinion and doesn't let go like a horny Jack Russell. I suspect however, he's actually quite normal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.