Nani goal

If an advantage is called ("play on") but no advantage is gained, shouldn't the ref call back play and give the free kick?

What people are saying is that advantage was gained as the goalie had full control of the ball, he even had it in his hands.

I have now changed my mind and apportion the blame as follows:

33% Clattenburg for not awarding a free kick retrospectively.
33% linesman for not flagging the offence immediately (it was Clattenburg's decision to allow play to continue or not). The linesman must have seen it as he later flagged for it.
33% Gomes for a) putting the ball on the floor and b) attempting to take a free kick that was never awarded from 5 metres away from where the offence was commited.

1% Alex Ferguson, just because :D.
 
the advantage is gained as soon as he had full control of the ball.

However even if we ignore this how long do you give him? I saw it mentioned 4-5 seconds, yet I'm pretty sure more far more than that elapsed before Nani touched the ball into the net. If advantage was given in the center circle and the outfield player just stood there with the ball at his feet for 10 seconds and then got tackled would we have to call that back as well as no advantage was gained?
 
If that happened I'd say the advantage would be over in football. If he has the ball for ten seconds yet has done nothing with it, he's had ample opportunity to 'take advantage of the advantage'.

Advantage in football should be like advantage in rugby, where it can go on for a minute. The reason this wouldn't work is because football fans are thick and would forget what happened a minute ago :D.
 
If an advantage is called ("play on") but no advantage is gained, shouldn't the ref call back play and give the free kick?

Just like if there is a foul in any other area of the pitch and advantage is played.

Yes.

If for example, a player is fouled while passing the ball to a teammate, the ref can play on to see if the teammate receives the pass and controls it. If he does then the advantage is gained and the game continues (no matter if he gives the ball away with his next touch), if he doesn't he pulls the game back for the initial foul.

In the Nani/Gomes incident, nobody can claim that Gomes didn't have the ball completely undercontrol, therefore the advantage was gained. What happens after that has nothing to do with the advantage rule.
 
I think it's similar to the situation where the ball is kicked out of play for an injury, you give the ball back uncontested to the team that had possession prior to kicking it out.

Or if it's a drop ball, it may be an uncontested drop ball that is just kicked to the opposition keeper or out for a goal kick.

You don't go and challenge for the drop ball, or you don't go and chase down the goalkeeper when you're giving the possession back in those situations. I remember Arsenal replayed a match against Sheffield United in the FA cup after a dubious goal.
 
Yes.

If for example, a player is fouled while passing the ball to a teammate, the ref can play on to see if the teammate receives the pass and controls it. If he does then the advantage is gained and the game continues (no matter if he gives the ball away with his next touch), if he doesn't he pulls the game back for the initial foul.

In the Nani/Gomes incident, nobody can claim that Gomes didn't have the ball completely undercontrol, therefore the advantage was gained. What happens after that has nothing to do with the advantage rule.

I do agree to an extent, but the problem with that is that 'under full control' isn't the only requirement for advantage to be over. Advantage can be given, the player can have the ball then play a terrible pass, and the ref can still call it back. The player had control of the ball otherwise how did he pass it.
 
There's definitely an arguement to be made that Nani could have been more sporting and realised it was a moment of confusion but had he done so and Spurs ended up pinching a point, he'd have been slaughtered for not scoring.
 
I do agree to an extent, but the problem with that is that 'under full control' isn't the only requirement for advantage to be over. Advantage can be given, the player can have the ball then play a terrible pass, and the ref can still call it back. The player had control of the ball otherwise how did he pass it.

IINM, the only 2 requirements for there to be an advantage is the player has control of the ball and the team is in as good or a better position to where the foul took place.

If a player is fouled on the edge of the area but the ball ends up with a teammate 15 yards further away from goal, of course you award the free-kick.

I've often moaned at officials for playing advantage when there clearly isn't an advantage to be had (the situation above is very common) but you can't criticise the officials on this 1.
 
I haven't watched the replay again, someone said he put his hands behind his back, ref's do that to signal they have given nothing, in which case he didn't play the advantage. As for playing the advantage, posession doesn't equal advantage, someone can foul, other guy can still have the ball and the ref see's if anything useful happens, if he runs forward and loses it 2 seconds later, there was no advantage and he'd pull it back.

As I said before, its a little difficult, if a player runs away from the ball, he hasn't had an advantage, but neither was stopped from having an advantage, thats the thing, the advantage is allowed but if someone stops that player/play from happening thats the point he'd give a freekick unless it was quite a while later.

Gomez lost the advantage, but really of his own fault, I really don't know if the ref takes into account a players stupidity or not. Its an odd one, but its all mute if he did put his hands behind his back, indicating no freekick, no advantage, nothing.

Likewise, NO ONE but the linesman knows what he flagged for, you can flag for anything, infact when you see the ear piece fail you've seen linesman flag to get the ref to come speak to them before. He may have said penalty but the earpiece didn't actually transmit so after the goal was given he got the ref's attention said it was a penalty and the ref just left it as is, if thats what happened he could have pulled it back and given the penalty, but also sent Kaboul off, there was a slim chance of them not scoring, or leaving as is, definate goal, but Kaboul still on, its kind of evens out either way and leaving as is was less of a **** storm at that point.

Who knows, no one till the ref/linesman say what happened exactly. HOpefully the FA will investigate it and both will have to say exactly what happened and why.
 
Within the rules of the game it was a legitimate thing to do, in every other way though, not really. I think maybe he should have just ran back to the half way line maybe a few low fives instead of the dickheaded manner he celebrated in.
 
Can i just throw in that the whole debate over the Mendes thing evened itself out a couple years back anyway as i remember a vidic header being a good few feet over the line and not being allowed.

Only difference was that i've fairly sure we still scored 4 other goals during the game!
 
If Gomes had put the ball down where the incident actually occured and Nani tapped it in then I suspect the referee might have pulled it back, the problem is Gomes ran a good 10yrds away with the ball in hand so his argument of "I thought it was a free kick guv" looked very weak to the referee at the time.
 
Last edited:
If Gomes had put the ball down where the incident actually occured and Nani tapped it in then I suspect the referee might have pulled it back, the problem is Gomes ran a good 10yrds away with the ball in hand so his argument of "I thought it was a free kick guv" looked very weak to the referee at the time.

mostly all free kicks these days are taken 10-15 yard from where the incident happened, unless of course the free kick is near the oppositions penalty box.

to me it is a yellow card to nani for handling the ball and a free kick awarded to Spurs (ronaldo done this in a game once, inside the box and was sent off for it). a second yellow for kicking the ball away (it was a free kick). free kick to be re-taken where the first incident happened and man utd down to 10 men. :D

the fact the referee didnt call the free kick is the biggest mistake that was made. he should be fined or something.
 
I have to say, I'm not getting this "Nani is blameless" idea. As much as he had every right to poke the ball in the net when it was presented to him, surely if Gomes is guilty of not playing to the whistle by incorrectly assuming he had a free kick, Nani is guilty of the same by handling the ball when he had no given reason to do so?
 
If i was in his shoes, i would have done the same thing. But i would have also handled the ball in the world cup when Suarez did.

Both are similar moral decisions. You would do anything to win, no matter the consequence. Still doesn't make it right, but who cares anyway? At the end of the day your a winner.
 
Back
Top Bottom