The Nani Goal

Red Dreams said:
honestly I don't understand why fred is arguing this....just for the sake of arguing perhaps.
Click to expand...

OK let me ask you three questions.

1) Did Nani handle the ball ?

2) What should be awarded when a player handles the ball

3) If the ref doesnt see it, does it mean that handball didnt happen ?

I am 100% in agreement with Clattenberg giving the goal. He did the only thing he could do.

But that doesnt mean to say that the goal was right. It wasnt. Nani handled the ball, and a free kick SHOULD have been given. But it wasnt, and thats why we are having this debate.

As I said before, if this had happened up the other end you would all be going fecking mental saying how we were robbed.

There are no top red points to be awarded here. It was a comedy goal that we were lucky to get. Any football fan would see that. It shouldnt have been allowed to get to the point where Clattenberg had a decision to make.
 
Red Dreams said:
the key in all this is Gomes puts the ball down for a freekick....without a whistle.

maybe it was a dog whistle.
Click to expand...

We dont even know for sure that he put it down for a freekick. He could just be spotting up a kick from the ground. Afterall the freekick would have been taken from 15 yards behind where he took it from. And he moved the ball forward twice.
 
fredthered said:
OK let me ask you three questions.

1) Did Nani handle the ball ?

2) What should be awarded when a player handles the ball

3) If the ref doesnt see it, does it mean that handball didnt happen ?

I am 100% in agreement with Clattenberg giving the goal. He did the only thing he could do.

But that doesnt mean to say that the goal was right. It wasnt. Nani handled the ball, and a free kick SHOULD have been given. But it wasnt, and thats why we are having this debate.

As I said before, if this had happened up the other end you would all be going fecking mental saying how we were robbed.

There are no top red points to be awarded here. It was a comedy goal that we were lucky to get. Any football fan would see that. It shouldnt have been allowed to get to the point where Clattenberg had a decision to make.
Click to expand...

The ref saw the whole entire incident. Seems you didnt.
 
fredthered said:
what are you on about.

The goal was given by Clattenberg, and quite rightly. From his persective he hadnt seen the handball and therefore could only go on what he saw.

The person who COULD have made the difference was the linesman, who clearly did see the handball and raised his flag later on simply to tell the referee that he had made a feck up and hadnt signalled at the time.

Clattenbergs only course of action was to tell the linesman that it was too late and that the goal stood because the linesman had not signalled at the time.

So to the letter of the law Clattenberg was 100% correct.

That said, no matter what the law says, no matter who fecked up, it should not have been a goal. Nani handled it. No arguments.

Its just like the Henry incident, which I bet most on here lambasted Henry for.

The ref gave the goal as he should have done, but that doesnt mean that the goal should have been allowed. if the linesman had done his job the goal wouldnt have been allowed and that would have been 100% correct.

Just like the Mendez incident. The goal wasnt given. Fair enough. but you know and I know that the ball had crossed the line and it should have been given.
Click to expand...

No surprise that the linesman only realised he fecked up after Spurs players surrounded him? :smirk:
 
Ekeke said:
I'm not sure its quite that severe, but he didnt seem to understand that a linesman doesnt have the power he thinks he does. And not being aware of the rules of a football match, when posting on a football forum, can easily lead to you looking like a twat.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that they don't have the same power as a referee. I would just really like to know what the linesman said to the ref when he came over. I'm surprised Rio hasn't stuck it on Twitter given that he must have heard what was going on.
 
fredthered said:
OK let me ask you three questions.

1) Did Nani handle the ball ?

2) What should be awarded when a player handles the ball

3) If the ref doesnt see it, does it mean that handball didnt happen ?

I am 100% in agreement with Clattenberg giving the goal. He did the only thing he could do.

But that doesnt mean to say that the goal was right. It wasnt. Nani handled the ball, and a free kick SHOULD have been given. But it wasnt, and thats why we are having this debate.

As I said before, if this had happened up the other end you would all be going fecking mental saying how we were robbed.

There are no top red points to be awarded here. It was a comedy goal that we were lucky to get. Any football fan would see that. It shouldnt have been allowed to get to the point where Clattenberg had a decision to make.
Click to expand...

What about the penalty shout before the hand ball? It's surely relevant because Nani snatched the ball because he thought he was fouled?
 
I think the Official Website has got it right.
The 2-0 scoreline SHOULD minimise the fuss about the goal.......but of course it wont. Spurs fans will claim that anthing could have happened in the remaining ten minutes with a 1-0 scoreline. And we know that......dont we? (Everton for example).
Its definitely a case where it went FOR us today. I saw it on a stream and to be honest its not one of our great golden moments in Manchester United history. Even Alex Ferguson (a real football man) had the decency to be just a bit embarrassed (and it takes a lot to make that happen).
Fergie will have an inevitable reaction.
So will Harry Redknapp.
And just put it down to one of those things. The contoversy will only last as long as Monday mornings papers.
Then the next match.....and the prospect that it might be the exact opposite of today. The other team will get a break. And there will be an even longer thread here on how we wuz robbed.

When it happens......and it will.......forgive me if I post a reference to this thread and how I said that these things tend to even out (Gary Neville not getting sent off last week was also a bit of luck).

Have a good laugh at Stoke.
Have a good laugh at Spurs.
But dont cry into your keyboard on a bad day.
 
Chabon said:
Besides, after this:

article-0-08FCB098000005DC-409_468x286.jpg


...cost us number 19, four in a row, and so on, I'm less inclined to give a shit about "fairness" and "morality." Everyone gets fecked by refs now and then, but few as significantly as us last season, and you're asking me to feel guilty about today's wonderful bit of kharmic justice?
Click to expand...



How did it cost us #19, 4 in a row. Weren't Chelsea already 1-0 up and to be fair completely all over us? If anything we cost ourselves the title for not getting at least a draw AT HOME to the only team who really could have beaten us to it, then going onto Blackburn and not scoring despite muchos possession.

As for Nani today, great goal and very alert he was, thought it was a clear penalty myself but will check MOTD later. :D Great win.
 
fredthered said:
OK let me ask you three questions.

1) Did Nani handle the ball ?

2) What should be awarded when a player handles the ball

3) If the ref doesnt see it, does it mean that handball didnt happen ?
Click to expand...

1) Yes

2) A freekick, unless the referee plays on because the opposition already have possession. Why would you needlessly stop the game?

3) No, but why have you assumed the ref hasn't seen it? Regardless, if the ref hasn't stopped play for handball, we play on. Gomes fecked up
 
Olly said:
2qd7haw.gif
Click to expand...

Cheers. Christ, you'd think he'd just scored a screamer to win a derby or a cup, I just wish he'd done the flips. It's so obvious he loved fecking them over after being denied such a blatant penalty, after he'd tried to stay on his feet and all.
 
alastair said:
I appreciate that they don't have the same power as a referee. I would just really like to know what the linesman said to the ref when he came over. I'm surprised Rio hasn't stuck it on Twitter given that he must have heard what was going on.
Click to expand...

Whatever the linesman said to the ref, the ref was cool and unsurprised by it. It wasnt an "oh shit" moment, the ref just dismissed it straight away because he'd seen the whole thing.

Clearly he would have told the referee something about the handball, maybe something about Gomes not kicking the ball - the ref dismissed it all. He had the advantage from the handball, he didnt have to kick the ball for play to continue.
 
fredthered said:
OK let me ask you three questions.

1) Did Nani handle the ball ?

2) What should be awarded when a player handles the ball

3) If the ref doesnt see it, does it mean that handball didnt happen ?

I am 100% in agreement with Clattenberg giving the goal. He did the only thing he could do.

But that doesnt mean to say that the goal was right. It wasnt. Nani handled the ball, and a free kick SHOULD have been given. But it wasnt, and thats why we are having this debate.

As I said before, if this had happened up the other end you would all be going fecking mental saying how we were robbed.

There are no top red points to be awarded here. It was a comedy goal that we were lucky to get. Any football fan would see that. It shouldnt have been allowed to get to the point where Clattenberg had a decision to make.
Click to expand...

fred. no one here is saying this was 'fair'. All I and many are saying is 'unfair' decisions or non-decisions do happen. If you really want to talk about something that is utterly immoral. lets just take the Liverpool goal against Sunderland.

in the end this was a pure goalkeeper feck-up.
Fergie had it spot on.
 
fredthered said:
As I said before, if this had happened up the other end you would all be going fecking mental saying how we were robbed.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't. Considering this came about directly because of what should have been a blatant penalty. Plus it would be VDS I'd be pissed at, although it'd be hard to be too angry considering what he's done for us over the years.

Maybe the referee didn't see the handball. Maybe he did. In the former he plays on because there is nothing to blow for. In the latter he plays on because the Spurs goalkeeper has the ball and proceeds to come out another 10-15 metres before putting it down.

Really is as simple as that.
 
Chabon said:
Cheers. Christ, you'd think he'd just scored a screamer to win a derby or a cup, I just wish he'd done the flips. It's so obvious he loved fecking them over after being denied such a blatant penalty, after he'd tried to stay on his feet and all.
Click to expand...

I think it was the same reaction some of our supporters had, the ones who have been claiming for years that the lad doesnt have a "football brain", but then he outsmarts everyone to show they've been talking bollocks for years.
 
Chabon said:
It should have been a penalty to Manchester United, if we're getting into questions of "legtimacy." I just wish Gomes had dropped the ball on the spot (as statistically unlikely as that is) and then we could simply assure Spurs fans and the rest that we were merely taking the penalty.

Besides, after this:

article-0-08FCB098000005DC-409_468x286.jpg


...cost us number 19, four in a row, and so on, I'm less inclined to give a shit about "fairness" and "morality." Everyone gets fecked by refs now and then, but few as significantly as us last season, and you're asking me to feel guilty about today's wonderful bit of kharmic justice?
Click to expand...


Same linesman....:devil:
 
fredthered said:
Oh come off it. It wasnt a fair goal, whatever way you want to paint it.

We all know that United got the goal because hte linesman fecked up.

If the lino had flagged properly and the goal had been disallowed not one of us would have complained.

If that had happened at the other end then we'd all be screaming the house down about it, but the rules are the rules.

Yes it was a goal, a legitimate goal, but we all know that really we got that goal because the lino is a fecking plonker.
Click to expand...

Give it a rest fred, for fecks sake. If the lino had flagged properly we would have been awarded a penalty and if my auntie had bollocks she'd be my uncle etc.
 
MadDogg said:
I wouldn't. Considering this came about directly because of what should have been a blatant penalty. Plus it would be VDS I'd be pissed at, although it'd be hard to be too angry considering what he's done for us over the years.

Maybe the referee didn't see the handball. Maybe he did. In the former he plays on because there is nothing to blow for. In the latter he plays on because the Spurs goalkeeper has the ball and proceeds to come out another 10-15 metres before putting it down.

Really is as simple as that.
Click to expand...


exactly.
 
Claymore said:
How did it cost us #19, 4 in a row. Weren't Chelsea already 1-0 up and to be fair completely all over us? If anything we cost ourselves the title for not getting at least a draw AT HOME to the only team who really could have beaten us to it, then going onto Blackburn and not scoring despite muchos possession.
Click to expand...

That goal was the difference, so was the similarly unjust winner at Stamford Bridge. When you lose the title by a single goal, and both of those goals (that doesn't actually make sense, but nevermind) are blatantly illegitimate, it is hard not to feel annoyed. If anything it's really rather remarkable that United fans aren't more bitter about it, if it happened to the scousers...
 
Ekeke said:
Whatever the linesman said to the ref, the ref was cool and unsurprised by it. It wasnt an "oh shit" moment, the ref just dismissed it straight away because he'd seen the whole thing.

Clearly he would have told the referee something about the handball, maybe something about Gomes not kicking the ball - the ref dismissed it all. He had the advantage from the handball, he didnt have to kick the ball for play to continue.
Click to expand...

But surely Spurs can argue that the referee didn't signal advantage? The referee didn't appear to give anything, whilst the linesman may well have pointed out to him that there was a handball. Is it clear that Clattenburg was aware of the handball from Nani?
 
B Cantona said:
You've completely ruled out the most obvious conclusion, that just like incident after incident week in week out... refs play on when the offended team has possession

Why?

Whether he should play advantage or stop the game doesn't matter anyway... he DIDN'T stop play. Having not heard a whistle, Gomes fecks up big time

The linesman has had one too, his flag shouldn't be up
Click to expand...

The ref did not make any signal to play on because there was nothing for him to signal for because he hadnt seen it. You even saw him admit that to Gomez after the game when the cameras showed Gomez complaining. He clearly said "I didnt see it"

The linesman has to put his flag up if a foul occurs. No debating that. No arguments. if a foul occurs he should raise his flag and its then down to the referee to either go with his decision or allow play to go on. When he allows play to continue he should place both arms in front of him signalling he recognises the foul but he is playing advantage.

The reason Clattenberg didnt signal to say he was playing advantage is because the linesmans flag hadnt been raised.

Clattenberg is 100% free from blame here. Completely and utterly.

Gomez should have sought clarification before putting the ball on the floor, however the fact he assumed a free kick had been given is fair point because everyone ( even Uniteds players ) thought the same. Even Nani wasnt sure.

The only person to blame here is the linesman. And for that reason the goal had to stand because he fecked up.

But that doesnt mean that because the linesman fecked up Nani didnt handle the ball and a free kick SHOULD have been given.

The right decision should have been a free kick to spurs, but because the lino fecked up it wasnt, and THAT is the bottom line.
 
Red Dreams said:
fred. no one here is saying this was 'fair'
Click to expand...

Easy there

I'm saying it was perfectly fair

Anyone who doesn't play to the whistle is a mug

Anyone who doesn't tuck the ball home when the keeper throws the ball down when no free kick has been given is a mug

Any referee who overturns his decision purely because the keeper is a bellend is a mug

This makes Gomes the only mug in this incident, and the goal was perfectly fair
 
fredthered said:
The ref did not make any signal to play on because there was nothing for him to signal for because he hadnt seen it. You even saw him admit that to Gomez after the game when the cameras showed Gomez complaining. He clearly said "I didnt see it"

The linesman has to put his flag up if a foul occurs. No debating that. No arguments. if a foul occurs he should raise his flag and its then down to the referee to either go with his decision or allow play to go on. When he allows play to continue he should place both arms in front of him signalling he recognises the foul but he is playing advantage.

The reason Clattenberg didnt signal to say he was playing advantage is because the linesmans flag hadnt been raised.

Clattenberg is 100% free from blame here. Completely and utterly.

Gomez should have sought clarification before putting the ball on the floor, however the fact he assumed a free kick had been given is fair point because everyone ( even Uniteds players ) thought the same. Even Nani wasnt sure.

The only person to blame here is the linesman. And for that reason the goal had to stand because he fecked up.

But that doesnt mean that because the linesman fecked up Nani didnt handle the ball and a free kick SHOULD have been given.

The right decision should have been a free kick to spurs, but because the lino fecked up it wasnt, and THAT is the bottom line.
Click to expand...

I said what now?

I don't mind debating with you Fred, especially when its blatantly obvious you're wrong :D, but don't be cheap enough to make shit up, I never said that at all

The right decision prior to all this was a Nani penalty. But its irrelevant, the ref didn't give it. Just as he didn't give a freekick for the handball. We play on

The linesman fecked up, but his came long after the goal was scored, and was rectified by the referee in awarding the goal
 
alastair said:
But surely Spurs can argue that the referee didn't signal advantage? The referee didn't appear to give anything, whilst the linesman may well have pointed out to him that there was a handball. Is it clear that Clattenburg was aware of the handball from Nani?
Click to expand...

There was a referee on the 606 phone in who says that the referee told Gomes it was his ball. Does a referee need to flap his arms about if he's a few yards away to signal the advantage? I admit I dont know. I would have thought that if he could talk to the players he would do.
 
alastair said:
But surely Spurs can argue that the referee didn't signal advantage? The referee didn't appear to give anything, whilst the linesman may well have pointed out to him that there was a handball. Is it clear that Clattenburg was aware of the handball from Nani?
Click to expand...

Clattenberg ( you saw him admit it after the game to Gomez ) hadnt seen the handball. And if you look at his positioning you would see why he maybe wouldnt have seen it.


The spurs players have absolutely no arguments against Clattenberg. He played it EXACTLY as he saw it. if he didnt see the handball the the linesman ( who clearly had seen it ) didnt signal, then as far as Clattenberg is concerned, no offence has taken place.

Thats not saying it didnt happen, just he ( Clattenberg ) hadnt seen it and therefore could only act on what he saw.

The fault lies 100% with the linesman. No one else.

Was it a fair goal. No it wasnt. We all know a free kick should have been given against Nani for the handball, but it wasnt and because no freekick was given Nani was 100% right to put the ball in the net.
 
MadDogg said:
No. The right decision would've been a penalty to us. That's the little thing you're forgetting with all this talk about 'morality' and so on.
Click to expand...

Yeh, but you're assuming a penalty to be a goal. Nani might have hit the penalty into row Z.

The crux of it is that it was a penalty. If you don't give that, it was a hand-ball. The referee should have either blown the whistle or held his hands out for advantage. So basically, it may well have ended 2-0 if the ref had got it right, but it was guaranteed by a poor decision, obviously in my humble opinion.
 
alastair said:
Yeh, but you're assuming a penalty to be a goal. Nani might have hit the penalty into row Z.

The crux of it is that it was a penalty. If you don't give that, it was a hand-ball. The referee should have either blown the whistle or held his hands out for advantage. So basically, it may well have ended 2-0 if the ref had got it right, but it was guaranteed by a poor decision, obviously in my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

You know, he does hold his hands out before Nani kicks the ball. Thats what happens when Nani looks back to check on what the referee wants. He gets that signal
 
Ekeke said:
There was a referee on the 606 phone in who says that the referee told Gomes it was his ball. Does a referee need to flap his arms about if he's a few yards away to signal the advantage? I admit I dont know. I would have thought that if he could talk to the players he would do.
Click to expand...


Oh, I haven't seen those pictures. If he's in speaking range of the player, yeh, I imagine he doesn't have to put his hands out.

It just surprises me that it was given - it would have been far easier to disallow it, just for the sake of avoiding controversy.
 
People keep saying if it happened to us we'd be going nuts, well we would, but I'd hope our players would have the cop on to play the whistle.
 
The linesman started running towards the centre of the field AFTER the goal went in and didn't raise his flag then. Him running towards the middle is the same as signalling a goal. What made him change his mind all of a sudden?
 
Ekeke said:
You know, he does hold his hands out before Nani kicks the ball. Thats what happens when Nani looks back to check on what the referee wants. He gets that signal
Click to expand...

Does he? If that's right, that's my argument gone. If he clearly demonstrates advantage, it's a fair goal.
 
Fred, you're being too kind on Gomez. It doesn't matter if the whole stadium thought it was a free-kick - there was no whistle, so it was utterly daft to put the ball on ground. It was a schoolboy error on his part. You're complaining about the linesman, and yes he did come out looking rather incompetent. But in all fairness, he should have flagged for a penalty earlier anyways - so if we're going to say that it was an unfair goal because a decision wasn't given moments earlier in Spurs' favor, you have to say that it is cancelled out by the fact that we should have had a penalty regardless.
 
B Cantona said:
I said what now?

I don't mind debating with you Fred, especially when its blatantly obvious you're wrong :D, but don't be cheap enough to make shit up, I never said that at all

The right decision prior to all this was a Nani penalty. But its irrelevant, the ref didn't give it. Just as he didn't give a freekick for the handball. We play on

The linesman fecked up, but his came long after the goal was scored, and was rectified by the referee in awarding the goal
Click to expand...

I am agreeing with you, you fecking plum.

I thought it was a penalty but the ref didnt give it.

However, because the ref didnt give it, it doesn't wipe out the fact Nani handled the ball. Which SHOULD have been a free kick.

The ref makes no signal to say hes seen the free kick, or that he's playing an advantage. I very much doubt a ref of his calibre and standing would make such a fundamental error.

The fact is he didnt see it ( and as I've said he even admitted it to Gomez after the game ). He cannot give what he didn't see.

But my point isnt that the ref was right to give the goal, because he was. My point is, penalty aside, it should have been a free kick to spurs. If the lino had done his job, a free kick would hve been given. The reason the ref didnt award the free kick is because the lino made no effort to tell him until the ball had gone in net, by which time the ref had awarded the goal and he could not disallow the goal because the lino had to admit he fecked up.
 
alastair said:
Oh, I haven't seen those pictures. If he's in speaking range of the player, yeh, I imagine he doesn't have to put his hands out.

It just surprises me that it was given - it would have been far easier to disallow it, just for the sake of avoiding controversy.
Click to expand...

Wouldnt that be doing the same thing the linesman may have done, that you suggested was a lack of balls on his part if it were really the case?

The bit that makes it clear enough for me is, the ref is looking at it the whole time. Nani looks over to him for confirmation and he signals to play on. And if the linesman proves the ref with any new information in their discussion, you'd imagine he'd act surprised or reverse his decision. He did neither.

The ref seemed in complete control the whole time and having watched the whole thing, you can see why. The only delay was from the Spurs fans pestering the linesman until he got the ref to come over to talk about the handball/no kick or whatever.
 
alastair said:
Oh, I haven't seen those pictures. If he's in speaking range of the player, yeh, I imagine he doesn't have to put his hands out.

It just surprises me that it was given - it would have been far easier to disallow it, just for the sake of avoiding controversy.
Click to expand...

Yes actually he does have to put his arms in front of him.

Standard FA guidelines as laid down to referees in the manual ( and I know because I used to be a class 2 referee ).

The only reason Clattenberg didnt signal is because he hadnt seen the incident and he couldnt wave play on when in his mind no offence has taken place in the first instance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.