16 Comments Add your own

• 1. The Don  |  April 23rd, 2007 at 11:56 am

  Given the referee’s position behind the play, it was understandable he didn’t give it as O’Shea got aq feather touch on the ball and changed its direction.

• 2. Simon Thomas  |  April 23rd, 2007 at 12:27 pm

  After the four consecutive soft penalties Man Utd have been awarded against Boro this season for the ref to bottle this decision was extremely annoying. It definitely would’ve been given at the other end. And Don, the ref saw this one far better than the refs on the afforementiones soft ones. There is no doubt in my mind he bottled it.

• 3. steve wren  |  April 23rd, 2007 at 5:00 pm

  The fact is that a wrong call in Man Utds favour is likely to get less publicity (in terms of follow up over many days in the press) than a wrong call against them (which would see acres of press coverage).

  In many ways this one would already be a memory had Chelsea not kicke dup a stink.

  Was a dead cert penalty and I reckon it looked that way to the ref but he looked for agreement from the assistant and got no signal.

  Had it been a game without assistants (ie. at a much lower level) I am sure he’d have called it straight away.

• 4. gary bosworth  |  April 23rd, 2007 at 9:01 pm

  u cant really say that because what if the penalty taker missed the penalty,we know how good van der sar is good at saving penalties.so i reckon this is wrong because you cant really tell what could of happened.

• 5. Loki (Team - Spurs)  |  April 23rd, 2007 at 10:18 pm

  This was a penalty plain as day, and Manchester United are bloody lucky that Peter Walton bottled it. See the analysis of it here - no doubt

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDle6uMcTNg

• 6. Wizbit (Team - Everton)  |  April 24th, 2007 at 7:31 am

  Disgusting decision by the referee - they should be more accountable for their mistakes.

• 7. MFC1876  |  April 24th, 2007 at 10:39 am

  “Given the referee’s position behind the play, it was understandable he didn’t give it as O’Shea got aq feather touch on the ball and changed its direction.”

  If that was the case and if the referee thought O’Shea played the ball - why wasn’t a corner awarded to Boro?

  The referee bottled it plain and simple. When it comes to giving decisions at Old Trafford to the away team, the officials are 100% cowards. They know Sir Alex will give them stick, they know 75000 Man U fans will give them stick, and they know Man U’s players will surround them and harrass them and give them stick. Easier to wave play on than have to put up with all that ****.

  We need video evidence for these decisions (especially at Old Trafford) since the referee’s lack the courage to give them.

• 8. miguel (Team - chelsea)  |  April 24th, 2007 at 12:43 pm

  Its time for tv evidense… the game is to fast and the refs to chicken. (specially at Old Traford)

• 9. Niall_4 (Team - Arsenal)  |  April 24th, 2007 at 1:17 pm

  Clear Penalty Middlesbrough Were Robbed. Man U are Cheats

• 10. Mr MUFC  |  April 24th, 2007 at 3:02 pm

  So how can u say it was 2-1 to Middlesbrough. When there was nothing wrong with ole goal which the ref didnt give? Henry scored one for arsenal just the same last season and i was given? Please explain if you all no so much about football?

• 11. Buda (Team - Arsenal)  |  April 24th, 2007 at 3:15 pm

  Hang on, look at the reply above on Youtube - watch it 2/3 times VERY carefully, it looks like O’Shea does get a touch. BUT, if the ref does see that O’Shea gets the ball, hence no penalty was awarded, then why didn’t he give a corner as a result of it? Riddle me that please somebody.

• 12. MFC1876  |  April 24th, 2007 at 6:54 pm

  Mr MUFC , O’Shea went through the player to get the ball. Yes he made the slightest touch on the ball - but only after he wiped out the Boro player first. Thats a foul. Period.

  The Ole goal was rightly disallowed. The rule on this is that the goalkeeper MUST be allowed to kick the ball before an opposing player can do what Solkjaer did. If Solkjaer had nipped the ball away AFTER Schwarzer had touched it with his boot, the goal would have stood. The rule on this was explained and read out word for word on MOTD after the match.

  Henry’s goal last season should have been disallowed if it was identical to what happened on Saturday.

• 13. MUFC Ulster  |  April 25th, 2007 at 2:40 pm

  On SkySports it said that it was given because the goalkeeper must be allowed to RELEASE the ball. this reason was also given for the decision to ALLOW Henrys goal last year. If the goalkeeper releases the ball from his hands the ball is back in play.

  O’Shea got the ball, but if the referee is unsure, he cant give it simple as.

• 14. oobs (Team - Liverpool)  |  April 27th, 2007 at 1:39 pm

  it’s quite astonishing to me that, despite the fact that it is so blatantly obvious to 99.9% of the football viewing population that important decisions against United at OT are bottled by specific referees, that the FA doesn’t do something to correct the situation.

  If I was an opposing team coming to OT and I saw that Mike Riley (shudder) or Graham Poll or Steve Bennet was in charge, I’d turn the bus around.

• 15. Pip  |  April 29th, 2007 at 3:30 pm

  From FIFA’s Questions and Answers to the Laws of the Game

  “As a goalkeeper releases the ball to kick it into play, an opponent intercepts it before it touches the ground. Is this permitted? No. It is an offence to prevent a goalkeeper releasing the ball from his hands. The releasing of the ball from his hands and the kicking of the ball is considered to be a single action.”

  This is why Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s “goal” was disallowed.

• 16. Loki (Team - Spurs)  |  April 29th, 2007 at 3:43 pm

  So did the referee get it wrong a couple of seasons back when Thierry Henry intercepted the ball and scored a goal or have the rules since been amended?

Leave a Comment

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed