The Nani Goal

Oi, I'm not taking that.


Nor Graham Poll neither... 'I fully understood the Spurs protests. Clattenburg did nothing wrong in law but there was a lack of credibility in his decision. I always tried to ensure that things felt right while trying to apply the law correctly.

Unusually this situation had two alternative endings, both right in law - let the goal stand or give a free-kick for the missed handball after consultation with Beck. Personally I would have done the latter. Of course that would have saved Gomes the embarrassment that his stupidity perhaps deserved'.



Graham Poll: Blame Heurelho Gomes not Mark Clattenburg for Nani goal | Mail Online
 
peterstorey said:
Unusually this situation had two alternative endings, both right in law - let the goal stand or give a free-kick for the missed handball after consultation with Beck. Personally I would have done the latter. Of course that would have saved Gomes the embarrassment that his stupidity perhaps deserved'.
Click to expand...

By that logic there is a third ending, also right in law - award a penalty to United for the foul on Nani. This also would have saved Gomes the embarrassment that his stupidity perhaps deserved.
 
lynchie said:
It's true. Watch as he runs up to the ball and puts his hands out against the invisible barrier. He then steps back so that he can take a run up and smash through the blockage, just before Nani switches off the invisible shield and knocks it in.

I'm pretty sure there's nothing in the rules about using invisible force-fields to shield the ball, but it's certainly against the spirit of the game.
Click to expand...

Gotta feel for Reina there. Nani was extremely lucky to get through, but it's a force-field for godsake. Certainly not within the spirit, or chief ghost spirit of the law.
 
Harry Redknapp is wrong about the decision Clattenburg made.
It was not Manchester Uniteds finest moment.
It was not Nanis greatest moment.
And not the beautiful games finest moment,

But it was the right decision......and I dont feel proud at saying it.
I think Redknapp is wrong.
But I defend his right to say his piece......two, three, four minutes after the final whistle to journalists with really only one question on their minds.
I sincerely hope that the FA dont try and slap a fine on Redknapp.
And if they do I hope he carries out his "threat" NOT to talk on TV after a match.
and I hope managers back him all the way.........and also refuse to be interviewed on TV.

Like him or loath him........and frankly Im not a big fan of 'arry ......he is a football man. And this is a football issue and the man deserves a bit of respect.
Just two weeks ago the Premiership managers rallied behind Ferguson on a footballing issue....on the power of agents.
The power of the Premier League and its sheer arrogance is something all football people......managers, players and FANS!!! should question.
 
I suppose technically he doesn't. In fact, there's absolutely nothing he can or can't do.
 
Fitzjames said:
Like him or loath him........and frankly Im not a big fan of 'arry ......he is a football man. And this is a football issue and the man deserves a bit of respect.
Just two weeks ago the Premiership managers rallied behind Ferguson on a footballing issue....on the power of agents.
The power of the Premier League and its sheer arrogance is something all football people......managers, players and FANS!!! should question.
Click to expand...

It's a fair point, apart from... where are all the other managers, fans etc running to defend United for the fine that is slapped on us every week when Fergie doesn't talk to the BBC? (I presume this is still going on and our accountants have just put a recurring wexpense in for it?)
 
peterstorey said:
Oi, I'm not taking that.


Nor Graham Poll neither... 'I fully understood the Spurs protests. Clattenburg did nothing wrong in law but there was a lack of credibility in his decision. I always tried to ensure that things felt right while trying to apply the law correctly.

Unusually this situation had two alternative endings, both right in law - let the goal stand or give a free-kick for the missed handball after consultation with Beck. Personally I would have done the latter. Of course that would have saved Gomes the embarrassment that his stupidity perhaps deserved'.



Graham Poll: Blame Heurelho Gomes not Mark Clattenburg for Nani goal | Mail Online
Click to expand...

The highlighted is the relevant bit.

You can't bring play back just because the person to whom advantage was awarded was stupid enough to piss that advantage away.

Advantage was not lost because of events continuing from the offence in question, the advantage was lost because Gomez inexplicably threw the ball to the ground rather than booting it 80 yards downfield. Bringing play back for a freekick to Spurs would have been a wrong decision, not an 'equally right but less embarrassing for Gomes' decision as Mr 'three yellows' Poll is claimiing.
 
Bearded but no genius said:
:lol:

Alan Green on 606 was making a right tit of himself banging on about how Clattenburg had dropped a clanger, but admitting that he ruled correctly.

Apparently the linesman was giving him a 'get out' by putting up his flag, which he should have taken (and thereby broken the actual laws of the game) so that United did not have a goal awarded.

"Common sense" apparently is the logic behind chalking off perfectly good goals scored by Manchester United due to a mistake by the opposition. No such claims were made with Kuyt/Sunderland, I do believe.
Click to expand...

What a hypocritical twat. I hope Nani does a hand of God and gets away with it the next time we play Liverpool to win the game
 
Not sure if it's been mentioned but there's a reason Gomes tried to sprint, dive and nanis shot and that's because he suddenly realised he'd fecked up. Also, if you watch clattenberg he does clearly signal play on.
 
A1Dan said:
Exactly. That's why I don't want us to sign him.

Goalkeepers need to be able to do something, even if there are other things they can't do.
Click to expand...

:lol: I was just writing the reply below when I realized I had written Reina instead of Gomez.

This was such an important day for science, and humanity, yet it had to be about Gomez.....
 
towcester_red said:
The keeper clearly didnt realise that it was advantage did he? The ref has admitted that he was playing advantage, therefore after what happened, he should have just given them the free kick.
Click to expand...
Why'd he run ten yards with the ball in his hands, after picking it up from where the handball took place, if he didn't think play was active?
 
Harry threatens TV blackout

Harry Redknapp claims he will not give immediate post-match TV interviews if the Football Association punish him for criticising referee Mark Clattenburg.

The governing body will decide on Tuesday if they are to take action over the Tottenham boss' comments following Nani's controversial goal at Old Trafford.

Redknapp branded it a 'scandalous decision' after referee Clattenburg allowed the Manchester United midfielder's late effort to stand in Saturday's 2-0 victory.

Nani rolled the ball into the net while Spurs goalkeeper Heurelho Gomes believed he was preparing to take a free-kick.

After consulting with his assistant, Clattenburg allowed the goal to stand, but Redknapp instead believed Nani should have been booked for handball and could not understand why the referee had not given the visitors a free-kick.

The Spurs boss said on Monday of the prospect of being charged: "If they want to make an issue of what I said then I'll make some issues as well - don't worry.

"Don't expect me to come out on the TV anymore - ever - and speak to the press after a game.

"If you want me just to come and talk rubbish and say, 'No, it was a good decision, I'm quite happy with it', then don't bother to get me to come out after a game."

He added: "We shouldn't be dragged out onto TV two, three, four minutes after a game.

"I don't want to go on TV; I'd much rather stay in the dressing room with the players.

"But when I'm asked a question, I give a truthful answer.

"He made a right mess of it all, and that was my answer. And I stand by that 100 per cent."

Redknapp added he is usually the last person to criticise referees after his side have lost.

"I never come on TV after a game and start moaning about referees if we get beat," Redknapp told Sky Sports News.

"I still can't understand the decision - it was a complete mess up. No one knew what was going on in the end, it was farcical really.

"I think Mark knows he made a mistake. I think he knows I know that he knows that he dealt with it not very well at the time.

"It's happened, it's history - it's forgotten, we move on."

Clattenburg rejected a penalty appeal from Nani as he tumbled in the area and indicated Spurs should play on, but Gomes mistakenly believed a free-kick had been awarded.

After the game, Redknapp also claimed the officials would "come up with a story that will make it all look right, that's what happens".

Sky Sports | Tottenham Hotspur News | Football | Premier League | Harry threatens TV blackout
Click to expand...
Harry's in bother over this goal now.
 
"I think Mark knows he made a mistake. I think he knows I know that he knows that he dealt with it not very well at the time."

:lol:

Spastic.
 
To be fair, I think "he dealt with it not very well at the time" is worthy of highlighting too, if you're pointing out somebody talking like a total spaz...
 
I feel sorry for Spurs had this goal not been give I think that Harry thinks that spurs think they still had a chance to score two goals and win. But Gomes thought it was a freekick, nani thought not, and united scored. At this point I think Spurs and Harry can feck off.
 
I'm not going to add anything new to this, as all that's needed to be said (and needn't be said as well) has been, but my viewing of it was thus - there was no whistle at any point, so you assume it was play on. It's as simple as that really.

FWIW, I don't know how anyone would take fredthered's argument in all this seriously, or why they would engage in a debate with him, because the muppet fails to spell Gomes' name correctly even once.

He also contradicts himself so many times it'd be laughable if it weren't so tedious. :boring:


Chabon said:
Not really comparable tbh, there's nothing even remotely controversial about Ole's goal, it's just that refs have now decided that kicking the ball out of the keeper's hand is now illegal. Even though it isnt.
Click to expand...

Just on that - it is illegal. I believe a keeper is deemed in control of the ball while in the act of kicking it from his hands. And you can't kick the ball away from a keeper when he has the ball under his control, therefore no goal. Anyway, I don't want to open another can of worms here.
 
Red Defence said:
Harry's in bother over this goal now.
Click to expand...

I guess he is in trouble over this:

“In the end he'll come up with some excuse as to why he didn't see it - he couldn't see, he let play go on - well if he did that he should have been saying to Gomes 'play on, play on”​

Basically dismissing any possible explanation out of hand. I guess the ref should have been verbally explaining the fact that the whistle hadn't gone, to Gomes?

What annoys me most about this is that Redknapp's argument seems to rest on the fact that play should have been stopped to book Nani. Not because there was no advantage (there was) but because he needed to book him for deliberate handball. Something which is just false and seems to have gone unchallenged by journalists.

Also, isn't Redknapp claiming he doesn't want to do interviews 3 minutes after the game because he will say heat of the moment things which he shoudn't be charged for, yet he continues these allegations 2 days later?
 
Makki said:
Why'd he run ten yards with the ball in his hands, after picking it up from where the handball took place, if he didn't think play was active?
Click to expand...

Since when does anybody not try to sneak a few yards with a free kick position? Admittedly he was being a bit cheeky but i believe that he thought the ball was dead.
 
Basically Harry had three alternatives: Blame Clattenburg,admit that Gomez is a bit thick or else shut his big mouth.

In the circumstances, the third option was clearly the best one but that's not possible with harry...
 
Whether Nani should have been booked or not is immaterial in respect of the goal, the referee would have still played the advantage, Nani would only have been booked after the ball went out of play (ie. into the net)
 
As far as I'm concerned the thought that Redknapp's ugly mug won't be on telly any more is quite the bonus in this whole affair.
 
I noticed that Talksport spent most of yesterday talking about the incident.

Everything from favoritism towards United to downright cheating by Nani to utter incompetence of the officials was covered over and over and over again.
 
It'll always be this way. It comes with the territory of being successful unfortunately.
 
PeterStorey has been dispatched very well in this thread.

The linesman only flags when Gomes runs over to him. He clearly isn't talking about the handball which has happened quite a bit previously.

You also can't say no advantage has occured and bring play back, because the player you have given the advantage to in the first place gives the ball away cheaply.
 
Gomes said: "In my opinion, the whole stadium saw what happened. It is impossible the ref did not see the handball.

"He did not gesture in any way to play on, like you would normally expect. When I put the ball down on the floor, he started gesturing with his shoulders.

"He is supposed to use his hands. It was not clear to anyone. It was only when I saw Scholes shouting at Nani to shoot that I reacted.

"The biggest mistake was not being clear afterwards. Maybe he did not have to give the foul but you have to be clear. He only gestured after I put the ball down.

"Nani stopped the game with his hands but this is not basketball."

Gomes maintains that, as far as he is concerned, he did nothing wrong.

He added in The Sun: "I feel bad, as I let in a goal. But I would react the same again.

"The ref was not clear. He gesticulated with his shoulders and barely moved his arms. He was not able to explain and show to anyone in the stadium what was going on.

"Even the linesman was confused. He told me he did not know what the ref gave.

"He said he saw the handball and told me to go back to the goal, that he would tell the ref what he saw."
 
Makki said:
Gomes said: "In my opinion, the whole stadium saw what happened. It is impossible the ref did not see the handball.

"He did not gesture in any way to play on, like you would normally expect. When I put the ball down on the floor, he started gesturing with his shoulders.

"He is supposed to use his hands. It was not clear to anyone. It was only when I saw Scholes shouting at Nani to shoot that I reacted.

"The biggest mistake was not being clear afterwards. Maybe he did not have to give the foul but you have to be clear. He only gestured after I put the ball down.

"Nani stopped the game with his hands but this is not basketball."

Gomes maintains that, as far as he is concerned, he did nothing wrong.

He added in The Sun: "I feel bad, as I let in a goal. But I would react the same again.

"The ref was not clear. He gesticulated with his shoulders and barely moved his arms. He was not able to explain and show to anyone in the stadium what was going on.

"Even the linesman was confused. He told me he did not know what the ref gave.

"He said he saw the handball and told me to go back to the goal, that he would tell the ref what he saw."
Click to expand...
Seems like it was very clear to Scholes what was going on then. Scholesy must have been paying attention.

Unfortunately for Gomes it seems that he had made a mistake in assuming it was a freekick....but it's normal procedure for the ref to blow the whistle for a freekick...,..or have the rules changed?
 
So basically the ref should spend the entire game saying "carry on, play on, keep going, ball is in play" so that the players don't suddenly think the game has stopped?

If only there were some sort of clear signal the referee could give to delineate times when the ball is in play from when the game is stopped. Maybe a buzzer or a whistle or something.
 
TheReligion said:
PeterStorey has been dispatched very well in this thread.

The linesman only flags when Gomes runs over to him. He clearly isn't talking about the handball which has happened quite a bit previously.

You also can't say no advantage has occured and bring play back, because the player you have given the advantage to in the first place gives the ball away cheaply.
Click to expand...
I don't know how you work that out. Anyone with any sporting instincts would say it's a stupid goal that should never have been allowed, even against Spurs.
 
lynchie said:
So basically the ref should spend the entire game saying "carry on, play on, keep going, ball is in play" so that the players don't suddenly think the game has stopped?

If only there were some sort of clear signal the referee could give to delineate times when the ball is in play from when the game is stopped. Maybe a buzzer or a whistle or something.
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Dunno if this has been posted but as I went to check my emails I received this from a friend who reads the Caf and thought it would be appropriate to this thread:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.