The Nani Goal

fredthered is probably Andy@Allerton.

If you analyze the posting style it is the same weak sarcasm and attempt at being condescending.


Unfortunately he has gone so far up his own arse he is now WUMing himself.
 
Fred...do yourself a favour and feck off with the holier than thou shit...this is the same linesman who never spotted last seasons 'offside' Drogba goal at Old Trafford which ultimately decided the title.... a major incident which was hardly even mentioned in the press !...because it was against Utd and no one gave a feck!
 
alastair said:
Linesman ruled it out. I get the fact that the referee can re-allow a goal, so to speak, but once the linesman had disallowed it, I took that to mean it wasn't a goal. It was by no means a fair goal.
Click to expand...
This has probably already been answered, but needs to be answered again as the level of retardation is unreal.

They're not called linesmen. They're called assistant referees. Why? Because they assist the main official in his decision making, especially in situations where he wouldn't have a clear view of the incident, the main examples being offsides. Therefore, a linesman can never make a decision, but indicate his opinion to the referee. If the linesman puts his flag up to indicate that a handball has occurred, and the referee chooses to give them the advantage (as Gomes has the ball in his hands), then the handball situation is technically over.. So as soon as Gomes uses his advantage to drop the ball, Nani is well within his rights to play the ball, as it's alive.. Especially indicated by the fact that he stands over the ball for two seconds and more or less has a chat with Clattenburg over whether he's allowed to play it or not, as to not risk a yellow card, to which Clattenburg says "no, I've not blown the whistle, so go ahead" and Nani scores.

Spurs can feck off.
 
Youngie said:
Fred...do yourself a favour and feck off with the holier than thou shit...this is the same linesman who never spotted last seasons 'offside' Drogba goal at Old Trafford which ultimately decided the title.... a major incident which was hardly even mentioned in the press !...because it was against Utd and no one gave a feck!
Click to expand...

also the same linesman that allowed Bale to play on even though the ball had gone out of play. Don't recall Bale objecting to that or the non-existant offside incorrectly called on Hernandez when odds on to go through one-on-one on the goalie. But the main thing that has me confused is why did the lino not flag for handball when it happened instead of waiting for United to score and then suddenly deciding that it was handball afterall?

Like the Mendes "goal" that never was, this was a result of the lino not doing his job. Far be it for me to defend Clattenberg, we've had enough to complain about under his watch in the past, not least a nailed-on pen here, but as in the Mendes incident, I don't see what else he could've done here. Apart from the fact that Spurs were poised to suddenly grab two goals and three points when they'd only managed TWO shots on goal all afternoon is besides the point

and whilst we're at it, Nani needs to wise up and stop falling about because the "Ronaldo rule" is now being applied to him. ie: there is no such thing as a foul when applied to Nani. If in doubt look at Modric's blatant obstruction on him right under Clatttenberg's nose
 
The goal really was meaningless since United were in the lead and were about to win the game, anyway. In terms of the final result it made little difference, better team won, 1-0,2-0, in the end who cares.

All that aside, I agree with Fred, linesman was at fault there, or to be even more precise, the lack of communication between him and Clattenburg. It was a major feckup by the refreeing team and Spurs have the right to feel aggrieved. Nani had every right to put the ball in, by the way, all that lack of sportsmanship malarkey is a bunch of nonsense, he looked at the ref, the ref waved 'play on', he shrugged his shoulders and stuck the ball in the back of the net, which I'd expect any player to do under the circumstances.

Nani didn't have to run around with a big smile on his face afterwards as if he's scored a goal of the month, but that's a different story.
 
What a joke. If it was play on then shouldn't Nani have been carded for the deliberate hand ball?

VIDEO - Luis Nani goal v Tottenham

What the feck was Nani even doing on the ground there at the end? :lol: Gomes touches his face and he acts like he's been shot.

Ah well the goal didn't decide the match so there shouldn't be too much made of this.
 
cesc's_mullet said:
If it happened to us there would be lynch mobs on here. Double standards.
Click to expand...

it does - nearly every week

This is actually a United form - if you can find an equally balanced one elsewhere be our guest, but you won't. You'd be banned and you know it, which is why you come here. Why a so called arse fan sees a necessity to constantly visit a United forum is beyond me but do us a favour and don't act all indignant if the general consensus is sympathetic towards United.
 
Denis' cuff said:
it does - nearly every week

This is actually a United form - if you can find an equally balanced one elsewhere be our guest, but you won't. You'd be banned and you know it, which is why you come here. Why a so called arse fan sees a necessity to constantly visit a United forum is beyond me but do us a favour and don't act all indignant if the general consensus is sympathetic towards United.
Click to expand...

I'd be banned for what exactly? And I don't 'know it,' and that's not the reason I come here.

Your assumptions aside, I know to expect these reactions - and the reverse when some similarly outrageous goal is awarded to Arsenal, etc - but that doesn't mean I can't point out the humorous level of double standards.
 
Hitchcocker said:
Correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure The Laws of the Game stipulate that a deliberate handball should always be a booking.
Click to expand...

You are wrong. The only kind of handball described in The Laws of the Game IS the deliberate handball.
 
A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any
of the following three offences:
• holds an opponent
• spits at an opponent
• handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own
penalty area)

A player is cautioned and shown the yellow card if he commits any of the
following seven offences:
• unsporting behaviour
• dissent by word or action
• persistent infringement of the Laws of the Game
• delaying the restart of play
• failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a corner
kick, free kick or throw-in
• entering or re-entering the fi eld of play without the referee’s permission
• deliberately leaving the fi eld of play without the referee’s permission
 
Hitchcocker said:
Correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure The Laws of the Game stipulate that a deliberate handball should always be a booking.
Click to expand...
Nope. The Caf went over this a couple of years ago when Ronaldo got sent off against the massives for punching the ball when he thought he heard a whistle. Here's the rule anyway:

Handling the ball
...
There are circumstances when a caution for unsporting behaviour is required
when a player deliberately handles the ball, e.g. when a player:

• deliberately and blatantly handles the ball to prevent an opponent gaining
possession
• attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball

A player is sent off, however, if he prevents a goal or an obvious goalscoring
opportunity by deliberately handling the ball. This punishment arises not from
the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable
and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored.
Click to expand...
Nearly all of the time Nani's wouldn't be a bookable offence, but I suppose it's open to interpretation by the ref.
 
RK said:
A deliberate handball is not automatically a yellow card.
Click to expand...

It's not?

How do they police it then, it's the ref's discretion? He has to determine the motive?

But surely all the unintentional handballs should not be card-worthy then?
 
cesc's_mullet said:
It's not?

How do they police it then, it's the ref's discretion? He has to determine the motive?

But surely all the unintentional handballs should not be card-worthy then?
Click to expand...
All unintentional handballs are technically not even fouls, let alone card-worthy.

Handball decisions and bookings are very much open to interpretation, usually relying on the ref's own judgement of the incidence and his definition of "deliberate". Nani wasn't trying to gain an advantage or stop the opponent, he just thought it was a penalty. Free-kick yes (or play advantage), but no booking. It's not an uncommon occurrence.
 
I have seen many occasions where the attacker deliberately touches or even grabs the ball in an effort to force the ref to blow the foul, only for handball to be called and free kick to the defending team. No card.
 
mj_popcorn.gif


This thread was fun
 
Gomes did not hear a whistle (Referee did not blow his whistle, Line assistant did not raise his flag) and yet Gomes assumed a freekick has been given?

Anyway, I don't think he was putting the ball down for a free kick. He put the ball down having seen Nani on the deck. He then dithered as if he hadn't occurred to him that Nani might get up.
 
fredthered said:
No he wasnt. The ball was on the floor in open play.

Not ONE United player barring Nani made any effort to play it, and as I say, one player at least, was even closer to the ball than Nani.

Barring Nani, there wasnt another United player who thought the ball wasnt dead. You even see Fletcher talking the ref as he's tracking backwards
Click to expand...
The ball was in Gomez hands. In that situation every player starts running to get back in position. Why are you insisting it's because they thought it was a free kick, when it could be just as easily be because, like every single time in the match when the keeper has the ball in his hands, to simply get back in position to defend the oncoming kick or throw out?

It's not like Gomez immediately put it down while our players were still all around him. He took a bunch of steps forward, waited about four seconds, then put it down. By that time only Chicharito and Nani were in a position to possibly challenge him, and yes Chicharito obviously thought it must've been a freekick (although that could simply have been, like me, because of how Gomez reacted).
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
Gomes failed to play to the whistle and paid dearly. Lesson learned.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

All Fred's guff about players assuming it was a free-kick ignores the simple fact the referee didn't blow his whistle.

Their are 6 year old kids playing football matches yesterday who realise you always play to the whistle. It's safe to assume professional footballers are aware of the same basic premise. If Clattenburg doesn't blow his whistle, play continues so long as the ball is on the pitch.

Gomes seemed blissfully unaware, mind you, but he's always been an odd one.
 
fredthered said:
In the case of Nani, he has just had a penalty appeal turned down, and in what could be construed as a fit of temper, has grabbed hold of the ball either preventing the opposing player from getting the ball whilst it is still in play, or attempting to influence the referee into making a decision in his favour.
Click to expand...
Except there wasn't enough time for the penalty appeal to be turned down before Nani pulled the ball back with his hand. He presumably thought it would be a penalty so he was grabbing the ball, something you see happen all the time.
 
fredthered said:
The ref could argue for or against a penalty being awarded there. He could not argue for or against that handball. It most definitely did 100% happen.
Click to expand...
The handball happened. No doubt about that. You seem to be having selective memory and saying Nani grabbed in a fit of petulance after not receiving a penalty. In reality, he reaches out and grabs it at pretty much the same moment he hits the ground, like players do all the time when they think they've been fouled.

Therefore there was understandable reason why he did it (therefore not unsporting behaviour) and seeing as Gomez immediately picked it up we got no advantage from the action (therefore not unsporting behaviour). End result - foul but not a yellow.
 
fredthered said:
YouTube - Controversial Nani Goal VS Tottenham Hotspur (Saturday 30th October 2010)

If you look the ONLY person barring Scholes who made any effort to carry on playing was Nani.

You clearly see the other players pointing signalling that Gomez was bringing the ball too far up the pitch and that the free kick was further back

You can even see Fletcher beckoning Nani to come back.
Click to expand...
Yes, Fletch was beckoning Nani backwards. Strangely enough, the moment Nani reaches the ball that beckoning became a point towards goal. Funny that if he thought it was a freekick.
 
fredthered said:
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.
Click to expand...
Any footage of this "I didn't see it" claim?

Sorry if I don't take your word for it Fred, but considering your eyesight and judgement on this is a bit questionable ('Nani petulantly grabbing the ball because he didn't receive a penalty' was in reality Nani grabbing the ball as he hit the ground long before he could have known whether or not the ref was going to give it; 'Scholes talking to the referee when Nani gets to the ball' when in reality there's at least a 10 metre gap between and Scholes is standing next to a Spurs player; and so on) I'd like to see it for myself.
 
Hanson and co on Match of the day begrudgingly say that the ref did not blow for a freekick and the goal should stand.
One thing I noticed was that the ass ref did not flag for anything until Gomes charged up to him, why? He did not see anything wrong with the goal until them.
Pure and simple in my book a cock up by Gomes , you play to the whistle and Clattenburg did not give a freekick
 
fredthered said:
The handball was no more dubious than the penalty..

:lol:

fecking idiot
Click to expand...

I congratulate you on your intellect and tremendous ability to debate. You cannot explain why the clear, 100% clear, penalty (that even Waddle admitted was) is, in your little mind only, more dubious than a 100% clear handball - so you resort to abuse. I think it shows you now realise you are wrong, but to admit it would be such a loss of face that all you can do is behave like a child.
 
So we know the Ref allowed it because he had played advantage and just wanted Gomes to get on with the game, can you imagine the uproar if he had disallowed it because he "understood that Gomes thought it should have been a free kick"?

Play. The. Whistle.
 
pauldyson1uk said:
Hanson and co on Match of the day begrudgingly say that the ref did not blow for a freekick and the goal should stand.
One thing I noticed was that the ass ref did not flag for anything until Gomes charged up to him, why? He did not see anything wrong with the goal until them.
Pure and simple in my book a cock up by Gomes , you play to the whistle and Clattenburg did not give a freekick
Click to expand...
I tell you what He may have played for them and said We couldn't win anything with kids but I have respect for that man.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Bingo.

All Fred's guff about players assuming it was a free-kick ignores the simple fact the referee didn't blow his whistle.

Their are 6 year old kids playing football matches yesterday who realise you always play to the whistle. It's safe to assume professional footballers are aware of the same basic premise. If Clattenburg doesn't blow his whistle, play continues so long as the ball is on the pitch.

Gomes seemed blissfully unaware, mind you, but he's always been an odd one.
Click to expand...


just what me old Irish granny would've said

truly :lol:


(thought you meant Fred at first though)
 
MadDogg said:
The ball was in Gomez hands. In that situation every player starts running to get back in position. Why are you insisting it's because they thought it was a free kick, when it could be just as easily be because, like every single time in the match when the keeper has the ball in his hands, to simply get back in position to defend the oncoming kick or throw out?

It's not like Gomez immediately put it down while our players were still all around him. He took a bunch of steps forward, waited about four seconds, then put it down. By that time only Chicharito and Nani were in a position to possibly challenge him, and yes Chicharito obviously thought it must've been a freekick (although that could simply have been, like me, because of how Gomez reacted).
Click to expand...

Very true and even more so that it was late and Spurs were trailing by a goal.Of course they were gonna prepare very fast for the next attack when Gomes had the ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.