I'm in two minds about this. Forget who the two teams are, on the one hand, there was the handling of the ball that the ref and lino missed, but then the keeper shouldn't have put the ball down and played to the whistle.
Thoughts?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 137317.stm
Was it or wasn't it a goal?
Re: Was it or wasn't it a goal?
The golden rule is to play to the whistle, so it was a goal fair and square.
However, just imagine the fuss SAF would be making if it were Spurs that had taken advantage and scored like that...crikey, we'd never ever hear the end of it :roll:
However, just imagine the fuss SAF would be making if it were Spurs that had taken advantage and scored like that...crikey, we'd never ever hear the end of it :roll:
R.I.P Dale....always and forever in our hearts
-
- Posts: 955
- Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 11:59 am
Re: Was it or wasn't it a goal?
By the rules.... Yes.
By common sense... No.
A VERY clear handball should have been blown up by the ref, I blame him.
Clattenburg should serve a suspension for it, absolutely ridiculous that he allowed that.
Playing the advantage would mean Spurs had some sort of advantage... I'm sorry but that didn't happen ANYWHERE. Rolling the ball out after a clear handball is not playing the advantage, the ref saw it, the linesman saw it, everyone watching saw it.
Its typical Man Utd. Decisions always go their way, if Spurs had scored like that it would have been disallowed.
Redknapp sums it up perfectly
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 142580.stm
By common sense... No.
A VERY clear handball should have been blown up by the ref, I blame him.
Clattenburg should serve a suspension for it, absolutely ridiculous that he allowed that.
Playing the advantage would mean Spurs had some sort of advantage... I'm sorry but that didn't happen ANYWHERE. Rolling the ball out after a clear handball is not playing the advantage, the ref saw it, the linesman saw it, everyone watching saw it.
Its typical Man Utd. Decisions always go their way, if Spurs had scored like that it would have been disallowed.
Redknapp sums it up perfectly
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 142580.stm
Re: Was it or wasn't it a goal?
A thread in English. Wonderful
Should'nt have, could have, would have. Instead of should of, could of, etc.
Bliss
Should'nt have, could have, would have. Instead of should of, could of, etc.
Bliss
-
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 3:59 pm
- Location: The south these days
Re: Was it or wasn't it a goal?
Oh that's gotta hurt.PhilM2 wrote:A thread in English. Wonderful
Should'nt
AFC Rushden & Diamonds - Member No: 354
You could have 140 years of no achievement, or twenty years of glorious victories, you decide.
One Dale Roberts.
Twitter
You could have 140 years of no achievement, or twenty years of glorious victories, you decide.
One Dale Roberts.
-
- Posts: 955
- Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 11:59 am
Re: Was it or wasn't it a goal?
:lol: Just brilliant, karma is a bitch? Comes to mind.wewantourdarbyback wrote:Oh that's gotta hurt.PhilM2 wrote:A thread in English. Wonderful
Should'nt
Re: Was it or wasn't it a goal?
sorry shouldn't have put the ' in the wrong place : O )
You can't expect my English to be perfect, I've been out of the country for 7 years.
You can't expect my English to be perfect, I've been out of the country for 7 years.
