Football 2010-2011

[ralph250]

And the rules would have certainly not allowed that goal 40 years ago, as it would have been classed as unsporting conduct.

[eFestivals]

The ref clearly signaled him to play on and a whistle wasn’t blown.

But the ref didn't.

The ref made a signal (twice). That signal was best described as a shrug.

It was a million miles away from the more normal action of a ref when indicating "play on".

[The Nal]

They were of the opinion that he hadn't informed Clattenburg of the handball.

Edited November 1, 2010 by The Nal

[Cardboard Box City]

Gomez f**ked up - but the ref f**ked up more than Gomez did.

[ralph250]

the 'penalty or not' bit is naff all to do with anything here. The ref makes that call, and he decided (rightly or wrongly - but in this case rightly) 'no penalty'. The game moves on to the next bit.

[ralph250]

But the ref didn't.

The ref made a signal (twice). That signal was best described as a shrug.

It was a million miles away from the more normal action of a ref when indicating "play on".

[ralph250]

It goes beyond making the most of an opportunity presented to you when you celebrate like you've won the World Cup

[eFestivals]

As I said above, I perhaps agree it's not in the spirit of the game, but equally I can't see how it would be ruled out 40 years ago, if like Nani did, the player asked the ref for permission to play on. He hasn't just gone up and kicked it and risked the yellow. He's checked with the ref twice.

He checked with the ref once, the first check with the ref was Gomez checking. And by Gomez's actions it's clear that he believed the ref to be telling him that it was a free kick - otherwise Gomez's actions are unexplainable.

Gomez moved towards the ball to protect it from Nani, and then backed away again to run up and kick it. He clearly thought the ref had indicated it was a free kick.

A ref would have ruled it out 40 years ago because Utd gained an unmeant advantage via the ref*. It's not sporting conduct to take advantage of that sort of thing. Sporting conduct means winning by being better at the sport, not being better at deciphering confusion caused by the ref.

(* tho of course it wouldn't have happened in that way, cos the ref wouldn't have played "advantage" back then for something like that).

[eFestivals]

no whistle is generally a clear sign to play on.

and the play having come to a stop without a whistle because everyone recognised that an offence had been committed is also the norm. The ref doesn't always blow his whistle.

[Cardboard Box City]

and the play having come to a stop without a whistle because everyone recognised that an offence had been committed is also the norm. The ref doesn't always blow his whistle.

Edited November 1, 2010 by Cardboard Box City

[ralph250]

He checked with the ref once, the first check with the ref was Gomez checking. And by Gomez's actions it's clear that he believed the ref to be telling him that it was a free kick - otherwise Gomez's actions are unexplainable.

Gomez moved towards the ball to protect it from Nani, and then backed away again to run up and kick it. He clearly thought the ref had indicated it was a free kick.

A ref would have ruled it out 40 years ago because Utd gained an unmeant advantage via the ref*. It's not sporting conduct to take advantage of that sort of thing. Sporting conduct means winning by being better at the sport, not being better at deciphering confusion caused by the ref.

(* tho of course it wouldn't have happened in that way, cos the ref wouldn't have played "advantage" back then for something like that).

[eFestivals]

He does check twice. Goes to the ball, looks at the ref, puts his arm out towards the ball, ref spreads his arms, Nani just before he kicks it, looks at ref again, kicks.

the ref only does the shrug thing twice, and one of them was defo to Gomez.

Nani might have looked at the ref twice, but the ref only gives him one indication (that's visible from the TV shots, anyway - there might have been a facial expression).

And the fact that it's that shrug and not waving play on is of clear relevance to what happened - Gomez takes that shrug to mean it's a free kick.

Edited November 1, 2010 by eFestivals

[The Nal]

and the play having come to a stop without a whistle because everyone recognised that an offence had been committed is also the norm. The ref doesn't always blow his whistle.

[eFestivals]

Gomez saw Scholes running from beside the ref saying “play on play on” and Gomez still stood there with the same expression the rest of the world did when Bush got re-elected. He should’ve hacked it into row Z. If Gomez had played a long ball to Bale who then scored, Utd would’ve had no right to complain as there wasn’t a whistle blown. When Nani dived, the ref clearly says “no peno”, turns and starts running back to the middle of the pitch. Ive no idea how Gomez thought that was a signal for a free kick? He assumed it was, and he assumed wrong. You know what they say about assumptions? They make a c**t out of you and me.

While Gomez obviously made an assumption, it was an assumption he made after looking to the ref for clarification - so if Gomez wrongly assumed, then it's fair to say his wrong assumption was made because of the ref's unclear signals.

It was defo NOT the standard "play on" wave. It was a shrug.

If others got better info - such as Scholes perhaps - then it's more than possible they got that better info via vocals that Gomez wasn't able to hear.

Edited November 1, 2010 by eFestivals

[Cardboard Box City]

the ref only does the shrug thing twice, and one of them was defo to Gomez.

Nani might have looked at the ref twice, but the ref only gives him one indication (that's visible from the TV shots, anyway - there might have been a facial expression).

And the fact that it's that shrug and not waving play on is of clear relevance to what happened - Gomez takes that shrug to mean it's a free kick.

[spwan-of-the-devil]

Rubbish Refs.. Tuncays goal was a goal..

[eFestivals]

If he hasn't indicated an advantage (both arms outstretched) then he hasn't viewed it as a freekick (which comes back to the linesman being at fault).

well, he did have both hands outstretched - but downwards, and not the normal upwards.

To me it looked like the ref indicating "what are you asking me about?".

On the basis that it was an indisputable handball, it was more than reasonable for Gomez to assume that there was nothing to ask and it was a free kick - and given the way that Gomez went to protect the ball from Nani and then moved away from the ball after that signal from the ref, I reckon that's what happened.

The ref caused the confusion which allowed the goal to happen. On that basis, it shouldn't have been a goal IMO. It wasn't a goal that came about because one team is better at football than the other - so it's unsporting conduct.

[eFestivals]

Rubbish Refs.. Tuncays goal was a goal..

Yeah, that Everton player dived.

[Cardboard Box City]

Rubbish Refs.. Tuncays goal was a goal..

[funkymp]

Find it hilarious how spurs fans are so up in arms about this when the situation goes against them.... they weren't complaining about huddlestones goal against fulham were they

Man U deserved all 3 points from that game anyway, Tottenham were shocking in attack I thought.

Really good result for us against Blackburn, Zhirkov is starting to looking awesome

[The Nal]

The ref caused the confusion which allowed the goal to happen. On that basis, it shouldn't have been a goal IMO. It wasn't a goal that came about because one team is better at football than the other - so it's unsporting conduct.

[Cardboard Box City]

well, he did have both hands outstretched - but downwards, and not the normal upwards.

To me it looked like the ref indicating "what are you asking me about?".

On the basis that it was an indisputable handball, it was more than reasonable for Gomez to assume that there was nothing to ask and it was a free kick - and given the way that Gomez went to protect the ball from Nani and then moved away from the ball after that signal from the ref, I reckon that's what happened.

The ref caused the confusion which allowed the goal to happen. On that basis, it shouldn't have been a goal IMO. It wasn't a goal that came about because one team is better at football than the other - so it's unsporting conduct.

[eFestivals]

Did he shrug or give the advantage signal? If he's shrugged then he hasn't seen a freekick and the linesman subsequently didn't inform him of it.

it was defo more of a shrug than it was the normal advantage signal.

The linesman MUST have told the ref about it - as the first players approach him saying it was handball, the linesman can be seen saying "I know" as he puts his flag up.

He went down very easily after Tuncay had pushed him in the back. Probert indicated a push, using an exaggerated signal to show what he meant. He saw a push, and called it right (tho it was one of those things that the same ref on another occasion might not have given - it was a margin call).

corrected for you.

No wonder you think all refs are crap, as you have the belief from the stands that you know the right calls more than them.

Edited November 1, 2010 by eFestivals

[brighteyes]

Hammers dont seem happy about this either. They're also wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue_AtZ1wqVs

[ralph250]

Did he shrug or give the advantage signal? If he's shrugged then he hasn't seen a freekick and the linesman subsequently didn't inform him of it.

Edited November 1, 2010 by ralph250