A&H

clattenburg

The Referee Store
Correct decision reached in the end.
Better than sticking with the first one to save face
 
SM said:
Great decision.
Click to expand...

Hardly 'great', monkey, when he initially signalled a goal.

Deusex put it much better, methinks

Re the decision - it appears, from the angle shown, that neither of the players interferes with the keepers sight line. you could argue that it's a good example of an attacker getting close enough to a defender to put the defender off....however, given that both attackers were facing away from the keeper when he tried to stick out a hand to save it (haven't looked at it again since last night, so I may be wrong here), is that a justifiable argument
 
It is a great decision. The correct decision. :)

Only one of the player interferes with the goal keeper, he is pretty much standing right next to/in front of him when the shot comes in - obstructed view and impeded the goal keepers arm movement. You see it best on the second part of the video you posted.
 
I thought he had a great game, especially booking the porto player for dissent when he waved an imaginary yellow card at Clatts. The only decision i think the officials got wrong is the first porto penalty shout. I thought it was a pen but thats opinion for you!
 
Pretty clear interference by the nearest attacker. Had he not been present though, I don't believe the second attacker has influenced play or gained any advantage from being offside.
What do others think - if the goalkeeper had a clear line of sight, but simply missed the ball - goal or IFK?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top