I thought he handled it at the time, but the way that it was glossed over made me think that he didn't. That looks pretty conclusive, but the look on his face really seals it. He knows he's got away with it. please log in to view this image
I don't think Owen choose the man of the match; someone else - the other commentator? - choose for him. Owen forgot and had to be reminded, which is understandable as I couldn't take my eye off the game either. Ade or Lennon were the obvious choices. Ade was the obvious choice if you were a striker, such as Owen.
I thought Owen chose MOTM, but in extra time as they got distracted with the siege of our goal that was ongoing
Adebayor MOM comfortably for me. Eiriksen's cross for the first goal was good but not great, though his combination with Soldado was outstanding. Ade's header was extraordinary. He seemed to be our best dribbler outside of Lennon, defended very well, and seemed head and shoulders above everyone on the field, no disrespect intended to Eiriksen and Lennon, who were both excellent. I can't see Chiriches MOM at all. I rated him lower than Dawson, and usually I'm a Chiriches and not a Dawson fan. It was those clever dribbling turns that cost us the ball a few times in the opening minutes. I haven't seen Walker singled out for praise, but I thought he and Dawson were both very good. Should have been a pen on Lloris and a handball on Smalling. Even-steven, except Welbeck got away with a dive. Man U had a lot of pressure but didn't convert it into clear-cut chances. If we'd both put all our clear-cut chances away, it would have been 6-3 or 6-4 our way (Lennon missed two, Soldado one, and I'm probably missing one.)
You could say the Welbeck dive was cancelled out by Rose's foul on Januzaj, where they probably should have got a free kick on the edge of the box. So, 4 ref errors, not ideal but at least they were evenly distributed for once!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJjeg9bUBMw Because Young : 1. just gets the shot away before Lloris arrives 2. appears to be diving over Lloris to avoid a collision and 3. two Spurs players are between the ball and the goal From : - #1/3 he has not been denied a clear goal scoring opportunity. - #2 he was not prevented from following on to have another go (he was not going to stay on his feet and get to the ball first) . The right decision was given. But no way IMHO could the officials call that in real time. So as I said, I reckon Young got some "boy who cried wolf" from Agent Webb.
1 and 3 explain why he wouldn't be sent off, not why it was not a penalty. Most people think Suarez should have got a penalty against Chelsea and he wasn't even on the ball. 2 may be just enough, but not for me.
I can just see Mr Alex F running on the field and asking Webby where "our annual penalty against Spurs was today? It's in the contract!!!!"
It should have been a penalty and a booking though. It was a reckless challenge by Lloris, who ran across his area, slid across the ground with both feet raised high, got nowhere near the ball and appeared to make some contact with Young (but made him take drastic avoiding action anyway). Dermot Gallagher said as much on SSN and he was right.
Both feet were not high, LDL. The commentator got it right in that Young has seen him coming, and Lloris has not gone for the player. Reckless ?? If you want GKs to be a non-contact participant. The officials would have to decide in real-time whether Lloris caught him even though Young is diving over him that split moment beforehand. As we said, we expected it to be given.
A GK will always go for the ball, which is, almost invariably right at the attackers feet, so a collision, after the GK takes the ball is usually inevitable. Refs always take that into account when a goalie makes that kind of last-ditch save. If you're going to give a penalty for the Lloris challenge, you're going to have a lot of penalties awarded, and a lot of goalies walking.
I think it's reckless because Lloris is not in control - he's run at pace to the edge of his area and slides along the turf towards the oncoming Young. It's down to luck whether he gets the ball, the man or neither - and he was always 2nd favourite for the ball. Young didn't dive, but hurdled Lloris to avoid a collision. I think his reputation probably did for him there when an official had to make a split second decision in real time.
I don't think it was a penalty and that bloody Guy Mowbray who commentated for MOTD was ridiculously bias. Wellbeck dived 100% so did Janasacj or however you spell it. And HIAG is right if you give a penalty for the young incident you would see so many penalties given.
Does it all matter now?You can't change the result.It still remains:- MANCHESTER UNITED 1 TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR 2. For those who can only read slowly I'll repeat it:- MANCHESTER UNITED 1 TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR 2. p.s. I wonder if my brother in law fell off his sofa? I think he might have been wearing his United shirt to watch the game!
comment by Marc Melander (who?) :- Here comes Ashley Young,much maligned,but most good folk do not realize that the lad's great,great grandfather was a U boat captain and that he likes to pay homage to his ancestor whenever he can. He's joking,of course.......?
The referee got it right on the basis that he has to be 100% certain before has gives a penalty. If he wasn't 100% certain then he had to turn down the appeal. Simples.
