Incognito Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I do have some sympathy with him,Clattenburg clearly made a massive error and,I felt Churchill was right to pick him up. However surely he should point the finger at Gomes first for gross incompetence.He should also blast Nani for cheating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 What makes the decision worse was the assistant flagging - it's arguably less of a situation if they both completely ignored the decision and allowed the goal The fact the assistant flagged after the goal and pointed towards a freekick makes Clattenburg look worse for still giving the goal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Boot Boy Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 What makes the decision worse was the assistant flagging - it's arguably less of a situation if they both completely ignored the decision and allowed the goal The fact the assistant flagged after the goal and pointed towards a freekick makes Clattenburg look worse for still giving the goal. Apparently, raising the flag was just a sign to get the referee to come over so he could ask if he'd seen the handball. If that's the case, the linesman was spot on, despite what all the pundits seem to have said. I think the referee not explicitly gesturing play on (with the arms out in a parallel forwards position) and allowing Rio Ferdinand to scream in his lug hole when he was discussing the incident were the two big refereeing errors of the situation. The other was Gomes awarding himself a free kick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 The point is the ref didn't make a mistake, his goalkeeper did. So for him to come out and blame the ref was wrong and even now that the dust has settled he's still blaming the ref, rather than accepting that, as much as he doesn't want it to be the case, his team were not hard done by. Instead of throwing a tantrum he should retract his comments and then the FA would have nothing to charge him with, but as long as he continues with them he's clearly bringing the game into disrepute just as much as all the other players and managers who have been done for it in the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Untouchable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Untouchable. Seems like it. Total spineless gutless tossers. If I was a manager I'd make the same threat every week from here on in. Apart from anything it's pretty blatant double standards seeing as Taggart gets fined every week for not talking to the BBC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 What did he say to warrant sanctions? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 I really hope he does decide never to speak to the media again... the man's a crime against humanity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 What did he say to warrant sanctions? The point is the ref didn't make a mistake, his goalkeeper did. So for him to come out and blame the ref was wrong and even now that the dust has settled he's still blaming the ref, rather than accepting that, as much as he doesn't want it to be the case, his team were not hard done by. Instead of throwing a tantrum he should retract his comments and then the FA would have nothing to charge him with, but as long as he continues with them he's clearly bringing the game into disrepute just as much as all the other players and managers who have been done for it in the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Some quotes would be nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 John Hartson unplayable That's why he went to Scotland then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Mr Clattenburg, in private, has said to somebody that I know, for a fact, that he made a mess, really. When the reports go in, all the assistants back up Mark Clattenburg. They all get together and make a decision - it's a fact. If it's a fact which people don't like, what can I do about that? It's a fact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Mr Clattenburg, in private, has said to somebody that I know, for a fact, that he made a mess, really. When the reports go in, all the assistants back up Mark Clattenburg. They all get together and make a decision - it's a fact. If it's a fact which people don't like, what can I do about that? It's a fact. They should do something about that. He's challenged them to first though and they've bottled it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikri Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Mr Clattenburg, in private, has said to somebody that I know, for a fact, that he made a mess, really. When the reports go in, all the assistants back up Mark Clattenburg. They all get together and make a decision - it's a fact. If it's a fact which people don't like, what can I do about that? It's a fact. The voices in his head? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Some quotes would be nice. Here's the interview: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/9147379.stm He suggests a number of things that would warrant a charge, including that the ref got it wrong, which is simply untrue. The ref made the decision to play on, it's not his fault that Gomes then awarded himself a freekick, the ref awards freekicks, not the players. People are continually moaning about refs awarding unnecessary freekicks when they should have played on, there was no need for a freekick in this instance and to play on was the correct decision, we can't have it both ways. Well not under the current rules where once a decision has been made that's pretty much it, personally I'd prefer a rugby-style rule where the ref can give himself time to see what happens before making his call, but that's not how it is in footy at the moment. In a similar vein, I actually think Redknapp has a point about things said in the immediate aftermath of a game, I'd prefer it if people where able to withdraw their comments once they've calmed down and had a chance to asses the situation properly without any sanction being made against them, but again this isn't how it currently is in football. However this isn't what he's done, he's in fact gone further since and is now claiming that the officials have colluded to cover up their "mistake", this is clearly unacceptable as he's now calling into question their integrity and for that he should rightly be punished. Here's the quotes relating to that: "When they get in their room, and I've said it before, that they would always make sure that they sing from the same hymn sheet," said the 63-year-old Redknapp, whose Spurs side face Inter Milan in the Champions League on Tuesday. "Mr Clattenburg, in private, has said to somebody that I know, for a fact, that he made a mess, really. When the reports go in, all the assistants back up Mark Clattenburg. "They all get together and make a decision - it's a fact. If it's a fact which people don't like, what can I do about that? It's a fact." Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/9151607.stm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 The referee never signalled that an advantage was being played. So he either got his signalling to the players wrong or he missed the deliberate handball. According to FIFA the referee 'allows play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalises the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time'. Under what circumstances is conceding a goal an advantage? Deliberate and blatant handball is a bookable offence, and regardless of the 'advantage' Nani should have been booked at the next break in play. He was not booked. Completely aside from the moral question of whether the goal should have stood, it's incorrect to say he didn't get it wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 He didn't blow for a foul though? Pretty sure I saw Clattenberg hold his arms out in the 'play on' fashion towards Gomez too, before Nani scored. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 I agree about the collusion claims btw, coming out with that is probably going too far. I expect the FA have decided not to punish that because it's true, however. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 He didn't blow for a foul though? Pretty sure I saw Clattenberg hold his arms out in the 'play on' fashion towards Gomez too, before Nani scored. Nope. He shrugged his shoulders with his arms out wide as if to say 'I don't know'. It wasn't close to being the signal for advantage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Not sure about that. Still look like he was saying 'go on, play', as he turned around and shook his head when Nani scored as if saying 'stupid, Gomez'. 59:35 - MOTD2 OK, so its not straight out typical 'Play On' gesture, but it still looks like he's going 'go, play, what you waiting for.' Wouldn't say he was clueless. Suppose these are the moments pub football conversation are made for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exiled in Texas Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Have been replaying this incident from a ref perspective...to review what happened and how to apply the LOTG. It looks like referee saw no foul on Nani, but was up field and probably missed Nani putting his hand on the ball and pulling it back towards him as Nani's body was probably blocking his view of the ball. So referee sees keeper pick up the ball and wants to let play continue. Then keeper puts ball on ground (thinking that it's a DFK), and the rest is history. My question is why the AR did not flag Nani for handling the ball. At no time did the AR raise to flag for handling, so there was nothing for referee to call. AR even followed ball/keeper upfield as if ball was still in play (keeping his offisde positioning). At time that ball was on the deck and Nani was asking if it was live, referee was giving the open-palm display of "nothing there - keep playing" Only after ball was in the goal did the AR signal and then subsequently get overruled by the referee who awarded the goal. In all this - I think the AR is the problem for not flagging for deliberate handling by Nani. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Churchill is doing the media darling bullshite on SS2 now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Not sure about that. Still look like he was saying 'go on, play', as he turned around and shook his head when Nani scored as if saying 'stupid, Gomez'. 59:35 - MOTD2 OK, so its not straight out typical 'Play On' gesture, but it still looks like he's going 'go, play, what you waiting for.' Wouldn't say he was clueless. Suppose these are the moments pub football conversation are made for. http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/football/premier-league/video/allvideos-22327918/nani-s-controversial-goal-22764457 43 secs on. Not even close to being the signal for advantage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Dave, man. Clear as day Clattenberg is doing 'what you waiting for for', he's not shrugging cluelessly. Still doesn't change that he never blew for a foul - so why does Gomez seemingly act like there's one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exiled in Texas Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Advantage is signaled with two hands, open palmed and both arms upwards and outwards at 45 degrees. Play on - nothing there, is usualy signaled with a single hand, open palmed but arm down and forward. Clattenburg's two handed open palmed shrug was saying, why are you looking at me....I didn't stop play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts