Football: Season 2004/5 Discussion Thread.

[Ely]

The penalty decision at the end looked off. I didn't know the result when I watched MOTD, so when Ferdinand went down I wondered if the "extraordinary thing" was the goal being disallowed then United going up the pitch and winning the game. It certainly looked MILES inside the box, so when the ref gave the foul, but outside the area, I was very surprised. Would like to see a replay of that one.

I must admit I thought they'd got a penalty and that'd was the REAL shocker of the evening, given what they'd just got away with.

[Rev. Stuart Campbell]

Justice doesnt come into it for me.
I can see NO way that the case for ignoring goal line technology of some sort can be ignored after last night.

I haven't seen anyone arguing with that, certainly not me.

Spurs deserved a draw,

Um, isn't that exactly what I said...?

[rockwaldo]

Justice doesnt come into it for me.
I can see NO way that the case for ignoring goal line technology of some sort can be ignored after last night.

I haven't seen anyone arguing with that, certainly not me.

Spurs deserved a draw,

Um, isn't that exactly what I said...?

Why is it assumed im refering to anything you've said young man?....

[Dio]

Anyway, extreme example or not, my hypothetical scenario is the same principle. Your argument is that that the result, however it's achieved, is by definition always "justice". My argument is that that's cobblers.

I call cobblers back, I'm afraid, on the grounds that I've clearly NOT said that. A result can obviously be injustice when, as in your extreme example, the rules are misapplied - and so possibly there is a case it might have been a draw in last night's game if there was a clear penalty decision missed. But I can't believe it can ever be justice for a clearly legal goal not to be given: two wrongs do not a right maketh.

Surely, as 'game people', we can both agree that if the rules are adhered to the result should always be justice. If there is a perception that is not the case, then it indicates bad rules or bad application of the rules.

I would agree that there is a bad rule in football: the current stupidity that is the offside 'inactive player' rule, for example (My proposed change to that would be that for a player to be considered inactive they must A. be prone or moving towards their own goal B. have their arm raised or be writhing in simulated agony and C. take no further part in the game until an opposition player has touched the ball or they have reached the half-way line. If that's too complicated, go back to the old simple rule).

[Zoot]

"An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a metre.

"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring
his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
things."

In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained "If
they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
guidelines.

The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but with the
players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who broke one the
most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They placed a shot on
target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and perhaps he s
not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions.

Fortunately if he doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the
game visiting teams, by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old
Trafford then our officials are in a position to help Mr. Jol make that
cultural adjustment."

Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award a
goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
Nistleroy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never do.

No no no. Shocking, just the thought of it."

See. You blokes who don't support Man Utd have no idea of the pressures upon us to stay great

[KevG]

Fair play to you, Zoot I saw that this morning and thought about posting it here but held back on the grounds things might get a bit heated

[aureole]

Bah, football is all about injustice. That and flow. I'm dead-set against anything that will significantly disrupt the flow of the match. If you want to stop every five seconds and having the referees explaining all the calls that are made, there's already a game called American Football (not that I dislike it, I just don't think the style and mentality behind the game would work in England). Other than Spurs not getting to go nyaaaar into the Man Utd fans faces', what else will the decision last night really changed?

If you want injustice, how about 'boro last season when they were in their 0-0 run, nicking a 1-0 victory over Man City due to a Sun Jihai own goal whilst managing not a *single* shot on goal.

[Dio]

Other than Spurs not getting to go nyaaaar into the Man Utd fans faces', what else will the decision last night really changed?

Well, that's a nice big league system for you. I don't think any of us would argue that at the end of most seasons the league is usually a pretty fair reflection of how the teams have played (or, well, this season it seems like it will be if there is a blank space between the top two and the next one, and then another blank space after the team that finishes third).

[koworld]

My brother has just told me he was up at Old Trafford last night. He's a Manchester United fan (born in Oxford, so obviously) and was at the opposite end - he said the whole stand knew it was a goal.

[cyric100]

It is irritating, sure. I'd have liked us to get 3 points against Man Utd and according to the laws of the game (because whilst justice may be a decent argument topic, it is irrelevent here) we should have had it.

Am I annoyed? No. I think most Spurs fans if offered the point before the match would have at least had to seriously consider it. And if Man Utd now offered a replay, would we be wise to take it?

No, I'll take a point, sigh at not getting 3 and prepare to lose at home to Brighton and win away at Chelsea (or something like that).

[pd]

If there was technology, nobody would be talking about it all day today and that would be boring. I mean look at rugby, thats the dullest game in the world, and now there's no controversy in it, its even worse.

[PaulEMoz]

"An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a metre.

"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring
his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
things."

In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained "If
they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
guidelines.

The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but with the
players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who broke one the
most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They placed a shot on
target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and perhaps he s
not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions.

Fortunately if he doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the
game visiting teams, by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old
Trafford then our officials are in a position to help Mr. Jol make that
cultural adjustment."

Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award a
goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
Nistleroy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never do.

No no no. Shocking, just the thought of it."

Class!

[PaulEMoz]

Tell you what, I bet Harry Redknapp signs at least two strikers this month, because Southampton have got a truly horrendous forward line!

[PaulEMoz]

Hurray! Souness is talking to another defender. I don't know how he persuaded Shepherd that you do occasionally have to buy defenders to balance out all the attacking players, but well done to him.

[cyric100]

Hurray! Souness is talking to another defender. I don't know how he persuaded Shepherd that you do occasionally have to buy defenders to balance out all the attacking players, but well done to him.

But will he get another and will he have to pay 8m for each one