Blame Gomes, not Clattenburg
Posted on 01/11/2010Nani's bizarre goal that sealed Manchester United's win against Tottenham has sparked outrage over referee Mark Clattenburg's dealing of the situation, but Graham Poll in The Daily Mail says the referee was right, but admits he was not credible as he gives his analysis of the turn of events at Old Trafford.
Like everyone else I couldn't believe my eyes as events unfolded at Old Trafford. It was one of the most bizarre and divisive goals in Premier League history.My analysis is that Mark Clattenburg was right by the letter of the law, but his decision lacked credibility - and left a scar on this match.
1. The penalty appeal
Due to the bizarre run of events that followed, Nani's legitimate penalty claim was overlooked by many, including Tottenham boss Harry Redknapp.Nani appeared to be pushed from behind as he raced past Younes Kaboul. He went to ground very easily as most players do, but if an attacker does not go down then he will never get the decision.
Clattenburg saw this incident clearly and instantly gave a 'negative' signal, placing his arms behind his back - he saw it but didn't think it was an offence.
His decision was a good one as there was so little contact. It would have been a soft penalty but technically it wouldn't have been wrong.
2. The handball
Next came the moment that Spurs claim should have resulted in a free-kick. Players who feel they have been fouled often grab the ball to force the referee to make a decision.Clattenburg could not see Nani deliberately handle the ball from his position. Anyway, it became irrelevant when Heurelho Gomes picked up the ball.
The referee would want the game to flow and playing on was the best decision having not given the penalty. For the record, handball is not a mandatory caution, whatever Alan Hansen says.
3. The 'free-kick'
If Gomes felt he had a free-kick why walk 10 yards up the pitch to take it? Why not play to the whistle? His actions were bizarre and caused all of the problems.At no point did Clattenburg blow the whistle or make any move to do so, nor did he signal 'advantage'. He shouted 'Play on', but you do that when there is no offence.
If Gomes had put the ball down at the point where Nani had handled it and Nani had kicked it in from there then I am sure that Clattenburg would not have allowed the goal.
Mark Clattenburg4. The confusion
Even if Clattenburg was playing advantage, it would have been over as soon as Gomes had the ball in his hands. Advantage is accrued once the player has control of the ball and can play on unaffected.Despite Nani's handball, a free-kick could not have been awarded once Gomes picked up the ball.
5. Naughty Nani
As a top-flight referee, you have to contend with the 'win at all costs' mentality which over-rides all else.With players prepared to dive and feign injury, it is perhaps too much to ask for sportsmanlike conduct. Nani knew that Gomes had put the ball down for a free-kick which is why he hesitated. He did nothing wrong in law.
6. The consultation
This is the point at which the whole incident could have been cleared up. Assistant referee Simon Beck knew there was an unsatisfactory and unnatural feel to the goal. He had seen the handball and so gave Clattenburg an opportunity by calling him over.Clattenburg did well to keep the Tottenham players away but mysteriously allowed Rio Ferdinand to approach. He might be England captain but he is not the United captain and had no right to approach - let alone stay at - the consultation.
The law allows a referee to change a decision providing he has not restarted play. Clattenburg decided not to.
7. The protests
I fully understood the Spurs protests. Clattenburg did nothing wrong in law but there was a lack of credibility in his decision. I always tried to ensure that things felt right while trying to apply the law correctly.Unusually this situation had two alternative endings, both right in law - let the goal stand or give a free-kick for the missed handball after consultation with Beck. Personally I would have done the latter. Of course that would have saved Gomes the embarrassment that his stupidity perhaps deserved.
Same old City
After a solid start to the season, two straight defeats have exposed the cracks at Manchester City, and Alan Hansen in The Telegraph warns Roberto Mancini needs the team to gel or there could be more trouble.
From the outside looking in, City have three big weaknesses and Roberto Mancini faces a truly difficult challenge if he is to resolve any of them.City’s money is the first problem and it is one which will not go away, but the two most pressing weaknesses are the issue with team bonding and their glaring lack of a real leader on the pitch.
Mancini has been critical of the 'British culture’ and those players who were pictured drinking last week following a golfing trip to St Andrews. But my first reaction to that story was to question why it was only the four players – Shay Given, Gareth Barry, Joe Hart and Adam Johnson – and not the rest of them.Clearly, the game has changed an awful lot since I played for Liverpool in the 1970s and 1980s, but had the same thing happened at Anfield under Bob Paisley or Joe Fagan, they would have gone ballistic.
Their anger would not have centred on the drinking, however. The problem in their eyes would have been that only one group of players were on a bonding trip. They would have asked 'where were the rest of them?’
The landscape is obviously different in the modern game. For a start, Mancini’s dressing room contains players from all over the world and many different cultures.
At Liverpool, we were pretty much an entirely British squad. But the principle of team bonding is crucial because the fruits of that spirit are borne out on the pitch.
Teamwork and team spirit is not about liking each other. It is about being able to rely on one another when the going gets tough.
It’s not about one player going on to the pitch thinking 'I’m on £200,000 a week’ or British lads socialising together.
Reports of tunnel rows between players or arguments on the pitch, as seen with Emmanuel Adebayor and Vincent Kompany at Wolves on Saturday, are no big deal because those things happens all the time.
But Mancini must find a way of bringing all of his players together and getting them to gel as a group because that mentality is crucial for any team with ambitions of success.
He also needs to find a player who will lead from the front on the pitch, but the likes of Roy Keane and John Terry are few and far between.
I look at this City team and I don’t see a leader. They don’t have a player who the rest of the team can turn to, somebody who will motivate the others and bring out the best from them when things are going wrong.
And that takes us back to the money. Clearly, the riches provided by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan are allowing City to attract some top-quality players, but there is so much money in the game now – and not just at City – that motivation becomes an issue.
Until recently, the only way that footballers could earn top money was through the incentives that came with winning matches and trophies.
But if you were being supercritical, you could argue that too many modern footballers are just in it for an easy ride. Their salaries are so big that there is no extra motivation or incentive to do well.
That isn’t an issue that is restricted to Manchester City, but it is out there nonetheless and it all contributes to the difficulty facing Mancini.
City cannot point to the loss of the injured Carlos Tevez as the reason for their bad week, however. With the money they have spent and with the players they have, you cannot be so reliant on one player.
Tévez is an exceptional player, but you have to remember that Manchester United chose to let him go.
When he played in a front three with Cristiano Ronaldo and Wayne Rooney, nobody could argue that Tévez was anything but the third ranking player in that threesome.
Tévez isn’t of the same calibre as Ronaldo or Rooney and City, for all of their spending, have so far signed very good players rather than great ones.
And until they break into the Champions League, they will struggle to attract the very best and will find it difficult to acquire the leader that they need.
But it was always going to be a bumpy road to where they want to be and the last few days have only proved that to be the case.