Harry Redknapp

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

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.

 

This is where Dave agrees with you to save face.

[Dave]

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.

 

Presumably the linesman thought the referee saw the handball just like every other fucker in the stadium. If he thinks the referee is playing advantage he has no reason to flag. Unless the linesman was belatedly flagging for some other mystery incident then overruling him is another thing the referee gets wrong.

[Dave]

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?

 

Gomes fucked up, I never disputed that. I'm arguing against the notion that the referee did nothing wrong.

[Dave]

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.

 

This is where Dave agrees with you to save face.

 

Eh?

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

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?

 

Gomes fucked up, I never disputed that. I'm arguing against the notion that the referee did nothing wrong.

 

The whole thing has been blown out of proportion. You'd think Clattenberg cost Tottenham 3 points for trying to keep the game flowing in the last few minutes (which would be to Tottenham's advantage anyway). I'm not even convinced Clattenberg saw him handle the ball, he seemed to be telling Scholes that it wasn't a Pen, and Nani's body was between the ref and the ball.

 

Suppose it all hinges on what the conversation with the linesmen was about.

[Dave]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2010_11_e.pdf

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/473/advantage.jpg

 

I'm going off this btw. Completely different gesture to Clattenburg's.

[Dave]

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?

 

Gomes fucked up, I never disputed that. I'm arguing against the notion that the referee did nothing wrong.

 

The whole thing has been blown out of proportion. You'd think Clattenberg cost Tottenham 3 points for trying to keep the game flowing in the last few minutes (which would be to Tottenham's advantage anyway). I'm not even convinced Clattenberg saw him handle the ball, he seemed to be telling Scholes that it wasn't a Pen, and Nani's body was between the ref and the ball.

 

Suppose it all hinges on what the conversation with the linesmen was about.

 

The referee got it wrong then, to a ludicrous degree. He has no excuse for missing such a blatant (not to mention lengthy) handball.

 

The stuff about the effect on the result is again irrelevant to my argument here.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

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.

 

This is where Dave agrees with you to save face.

 

Eh?

 

That you'd fall back to the argument that I was wrong about it being a letter of the law hand gesture for 'play on', rather than the argument that Clattenberg allowed play to continue and suggested towards Gomez 'what you waiting for'.

[Dave]

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.

 

This is where Dave agrees with you to save face.

 

Eh?

 

That you'd fall back to the argument that I was wrong about it being a letter of the law hand gesture for 'play on', rather than the argument that Clattenberg allowed play to continue and suggested towards Gomez 'what you waiting for'.

 

Why would I give a fuck about 'saving face', this is my opinion. What an arsey thing to say man.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

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.

 

This is where Dave agrees with you to save face.

 

Eh?

 

That you'd fall back to the argument that I was wrong about it being a letter of the law hand gesture for 'play on', rather than the argument that Clattenberg allowed play to continue and suggested towards Gomez 'what you waiting for'.

 

Why would I give a fuck about 'saving face', this is my opinion. What an arsey thing to say man.

 

 

Eh? Relax, Dave. No need to start arguing with each other over this decision. Its clear we're not going to agree and see it from different angles.

[Dave]

 

I just can't see how anyone can claim the referee didn't get it wrong.

[Dave]

I notice nobody has addressed the point about Nani not getting booked btw.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

 

I just can't see how anyone can claim the referee didn't get it wrong.

 

He wasn't the sole reason for what happened in that game, but people are making him into a total scapegoat over it. Gomez and the linesmen have to be held accountable too, they all played a part. If Gomez hadn't assumed something, then the ref wouldn't have been made to look stupid and potentially make a mistake.

 

u8's and u11's I coach both know that you play to the whistle and listen to the ref. Though what I do find funny, is how cool and assured Benoît Assou-Ekotto is when Clattenberg walks over to the linesman.

 

"Yeah, its cool, guys, let him go talk and sort it all out."

[Incognito]

Should have been booked for the diving.Once the assistant told the ref of the handball,then Clattenburg should've awarded the free kick as a goal obviously isn't an advantage.

[Dave]

 

I just can't see how anyone can claim the referee didn't get it wrong.

 

He wasn't the sole reason for what happened in that game, but people are making him into a total scapegoat over it. Gomez and the linesmen have to be held accountable too, they all played a part. If Gomez hadn't assumed something, then the ref wouldn't have been made to look stupid and potentially make a mistake.

 

u8's and u11's I coach both know that you play to the whistle and listen to the ref. Though what I do find funny, is how cool and assured Benoît Assou-Ekotto is when Clattenberg walks over to the linesman.

 

"Yeah, its cool, guys, let him go talk and sort it all out."

 

Another reason to believe the linesman flagged purely because he saw the handball and was trying to tell the referee the goal shouldn't stand. Can't for the life of me understand why he would overrule his linesman in those circumstances.

 

Assou-Ekotto: 'He fucking handballed it, didn't you see it?!'

Linesman: 'Yeah I saw it. Clear handball.'

Assou-Ekotto: 'Cool.'

Referee: 'What seems to be the problem?'

Linesman: 'Nani deliberately handballed it before, did you miss it?'

Referee: 'What's your point? Goal.'

 

[Exiled in Texas]

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?

 

Gomes f***ed up, I never disputed that. I'm arguing against the notion that the referee did nothing wrong.

 

The whole thing has been blown out of proportion. You'd think Clattenberg cost Tottenham 3 points for trying to keep the game flowing in the last few minutes (which would be to Tottenham's advantage anyway). I'm not even convinced Clattenberg saw him handle the ball, he seemed to be telling Scholes that it wasn't a Pen, and Nani's body was between the ref and the ball.

 

Suppose it all hinges on what the conversation with the linesmen was about.

 

The referee got it wrong then, to a ludicrous degree. He has no excuse for missing such a blatant (not to mention lengthy) handball.

 

The stuff about the effect on the result is again irrelevant to my argument here.

 

With Nani's body being between the referee and the ball, he lilkely didn;t see it.  Now, the AR?  No excuse there....he had to have seen it as he has a great view across the field.

 

So my guess on what happened.

 

AR sees handling, but Gomes picks up ball. AR sees no signal from referee, and continuing with a punt is a better play than a DFK from 2 yards of goal line, so he assumes play will continue with punt.

Then Gomes has his brain fart, AR is looking to referee for direction, goal scored and then AR wants to talk to Ref.

 

At this point AR will have mentioned handling - not sure why Ref decided to over rule him.  No-one would have objected to the goal being disallowed and the DFK awarded for handling.

 

A monumental cluster.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

 

Would have been class if Clattenberg had done an old Italia 90 'GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL! GOAL! GOAL! GOAL! GOAL! GOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL!' as he pointed back for the restart. Possibly not.

[indi]

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.

 

That's my take on it.

[brummie]

In this and that incident at Liverpool recently, all the talk has been "laws of the game" and making a case to support or reject the decision taken by the referee, but there has been a notable lack of common sense.

 

It is hard to come to any conclusion other than Clattenburg bottled it at Old Trafford. And that's before even looking at the way he waved the Spurs players away like errant schoolboys, but then practically drew up a chair, poured a nice stiffener and stocked and lit a pipe for Rio so he'd feel comfortable in discussions.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

The only error by an official is the assistant not spotting the handball. And if he didn't see it he couldn't give it. Either that or he assumed the referee would give it himself, which he also shouldn't do.

 

Clattenburg did everything right IMO, or at least not wrong. You could argue that (if he did award advantage) Gomes was unlikely to gain any, but that's more a matter of opinion.

[Optimistic Nut]

Gomes taking the ball 15 yards further upfield from where the incident took place was "gaining an advantage" imo.

[Guest Chubby Jason]

I'm so sick of hearing about this now. The amazing thing is, that Redknapp mercilessly slated Cattenberg after the game and then even writes a column in the Sun about what a terrible decision it was and STILL escapes punishment. The FA are truly pathetic.

[KaKa]

Harry Redknapp to Man City? Wonder what the odds on that would be.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Harry Redknapp to Man City? Wonder what the odds on that would be.

 

He'd flop badly there

[Village Idiot]

Would he? Harry is the shining example of a chequebook manager if there's one.