Powered by
Univision Deportes
JUL 5 12PM ET
arg1
bel0
JUL 5 4PM ET
ned4
crc3
JUL 8 4PM ET
bra1
ger7
JUL 9 4PM ET
arg4
ned2
JUL 12 4PM ET
bra0
ned3
JUL 13 3PM ET
arg0
ger1

Chelsea Scores Second Goal Against Spurs In FA Cup Semi-Final; Did It Cross The Line Or Not? [VIDEO]

In the FA Cup semi-final between Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur on Sunday, Chelsea was awarded a second goal in controversial circumstances after referee Martin Atkinson ruled that the ball had crossed the line.

However in the above video, you can see that the ball was nowhere near to crossing the line.

Plus, in the lead-up to the goal, John Terry pushes a few Tottenham players to get to the ball. A free kick should have been awarded to Tottenham. Instead, the goal was awarded.

Yet again, it’s another example of how FIFA needs to accelerate the implementation of goal-line technology. Incidents like these have been happening for decades. Yet, referees can only call what they see, while everyone else — including the fans in the stadium and at home can see the incident on replay from multiple camera angles.

In a match where there is so much on the line, it’d be a shame if that “ghost goal” would be the difference between the winning and losing side.

About Christopher Harris

Founder and publisher of World Soccer Talk, Christopher Harris is the managing editor of the site. He has been interviewed by The New York Times, The Guardian and several other publications. Plus he has made appearances on NPR, BBC World, CBC, BBC Five Live, talkSPORT and beIN SPORT. Harris, who has lived in Florida since 1984, has supported Swansea City since 1979. He's also an expert on soccer in South Florida, and got engaged during half-time of a MLS game. Harris launched EPL Talk in 2005, which was rebranded as World Soccer Talk in 2013. View all posts by Christopher Harris →
This entry was posted in Chelsea, FA Cup, Leagues: EPL, Tottenham Hotspur. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Chelsea Scores Second Goal Against Spurs In FA Cup Semi-Final; Did It Cross The Line Or Not? [VIDEO]

  1. Yespage says:

    Then add the Peter Cech deal, where he doesn’t need to be red carded because of the miraculous happenstance that Tottenham was still able to score.

  2. The Gaffer says:

    The shame about the incident is that it may have changed the game. If the goal hadn’t been allowed, the final score could have been quite different.

    Cheers,
    The Gaffer

    • Fernando says:

      A fair point but Spurs had 30 mins to get one more goal and failed to do so.

      So while Chelsea’s second was unfair it did not kill the game as many will presume.

      • Myron says:

        So if you were walking down the street and someone just sucker punched you I’m guessing you would be able to just shake it off and go on with your day as if nothing happened. It wouldn’t affect you psychologically at all.

        I guess when a team is behind and trying to score a goal it’s the same as when the score is even. Ya, you don’t have to push forward at all and open yourself up and leave yourself exposed. I’m glad you opened my eyes to this way of thinking.

        • Fernando says:

          I mean if you want to get into sarcasm you can go to Sarcasm Talk anytime you want.

          As for this game at 2-1, were Spurs likely to get an equalizer, yes or no?

          • Myron says:

            They got the equalizer. It was 1-1. But in all honesty I don’t have the answer to your question and neither do you. Maybe spurs wouldn’t have scored a goal after chelsea was gifted with the second one, but it’s way to simple to look it they way you are. You can’t take into account momentum swings by just looking at the onslaught chelsea had at the end of the game and the one sided score line. Spurs had the momentum and Drogba quickly scored the first and that changed things, but it’s hard to recover from a being down. If you were to give me the hypothetical option of going into a game with a lead or being behind with 30 minutes to either defend or have to score, well I know what I would pick. I would be more frantic and be taking more chances if I needed to score that goal to tie it. That’s basically all I wanted to say in regards to your first comment.

      • Paul says:

        Of course it did. It only takes one goal or bad decision to change the entire flow of a game! You can’t say just because Chelsea ended up netting 5 that they would have won anyway because had their goal been disallowed, the flow of the game could have changed completely. Football is just as much about confidence, being in the right frame of mind and having calls go your way as it is physically running up and down the pitch. Goes hand in hand.

        • Fernando says:

          I never said Chelsea would’ve won the game b/c they got 5 goals.

          My point was that when Spurs score to make 2-1 they had all the momentum. Ramires’ goal killed the game but Spurs had time to get the second.

          Spurs have been fragile for weeks now, if they were as good as everyone thinks they are they would’ve had the mental strength to make sure they get the goal.

          • Paul says:

            I don’t dispute that – Spurs had a good start but they couldn’t handle a full season at the same intensity. It’s all a case of what ifs and could have beens now that the result is in BUT had the poor officiating been to top flight standard then it COULD have been a lot different. Confidence wouldn’t have been knocked after arguing with the linesman and ref over a goal you knew (and they knew at the time as well after hearing John Terry’s post-match interview!) was never a goal and had the ref chosen to blow the whistle and send Cech off it’s a case of how well would Tottenham have done shooting at second choice? We’ll never know.

            I’m not a fan of either team by the way! I just like to see the game being played properly and even though I wanted Chelsea to reach the final, I’d still prefer the best team on the day won and got to the final for the right reasons without question marks hanging over the result at the end…

          • Paul says:

            And let’s not forget that had Cech been sent off, Chelsea would have been a man light and down to 10… therefore another reason as to how the game would have changed even more. But anyway, it’s done now. Well done to the winners.

          • Dust says:

            The players know Harry is off, there is a lot of uncertanty at the club. we held 3rd for 17 weeks, then the England circus began and we are still in the top 4. we will see

  3. andy says:

    It’s a shame, Spurs were the better side in the first half all be it, not by much, but they were. Created more chances, had more meaningful possession, and defended better. One bit of skill from the Drogba of old gave Chelsea the lead and with a second given incorrectly the game was over. The ref kicked Spurs when they were down and walked away as if nothing was wrong. As far as i’m concerned, all goals that were scored after 2-1 were non goals. Spurs didnt care how many Chelsea scored because they had already lost but not because of their own doing. Lampard scored a good goal but he only scores those once in every 30 attempts. I just dont understand who the ref misses that goal line call. BAE’s BRIGHT ORANGE BOOTS were right on the line and the ball never goes past them. How on earth does he get that wrong. Not like he was blocked. I understand why the sideline official coundnt see it because that were players blocking his view but the main official has no excuse. One more thing, why was Frieldel not started in goal?

  4. Fernando says:

    The goal never happened. Chelsea took advantage but after Spurs scored who didn’t think they would equalize?

    At 2-1 the game is still in the balance and for anyone to say the game was over at 2-0 is not being rational. Still at least 30 minutes for Spurs to get one goal. Tottenham were the better team in the 1st half but didn’t finish their chances. Drogba had one chance and he finished emphatically.

    The ref totally blew the second goal but the game did not end there. John Terry won the header before falling into the Spurs defenders who were just standing there. Spurs had their chances but Ramires ended the contest.

    No single Spurs player took the game by the neck like Drogba did for his goal.

    • Paul says:

      50 mins – Juan Mata doesn’t score so it’s still 1-0. Not that case thanks to shocking decision.

      56 mins – Cech is lucky not to have been sent off and given a penalty away in the process, therefore (probably!) making it 1 – 1…

      At that point it would have been game on!

      • Fernando says:

        But at 2-1 it’s still game on!!!

        Were Spurs playing with 4 men? NO.

        • Paul says:

          You’re missing the point entirely as to how it takes just one incident in a match to change the flow entirely.
          Have you ever played football? Or are you one of those casual armchair fans because you certainly sound like a clueless one of those right now!

          • Fernando says:

            It changed it so much Spurs scored minutes after the bad goal? I totally get what you’re saying. The game changed b/c Chelsea had a lead.

            The issue is the game didn’t end at 2-0. That’s my point. Even with 10 men and Cech being sent off it does not mean Spurs could’ve scored the winner in regulation or in extra time.

            Listen Paul as you were no doubt watching the game you’re just as armchair as me or anyone else. So if you want to go there that’s your problem.

          • Paul says:

            I was watching the game on TV today because like I said, I don’t support either team. Yesterday however, I got on a train at 8.50am to go all the way to London to watch my team play at Wembley… and then all the way home again afterwards! Just so you know ;)

    • Guy says:

      The replay from the side clearly shows that King won the header. Terry simply flew into King, got no ball…..at all.

  5. Paul says:

    This made me laugh… from Twitter:

    “Chelsea had 5 diff scorers today: Drogba, Malouda, Lampard, Ramires, and Casper. #BBCFootball”

  6. CTBlues says:

    Kind of funny how fast this went up but there hasn’t been any articles about GB’s new member of the diving team Ashley Young.

    • The Gaffer says:

      I posted something almost immediately after it happened on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150741726808430&set=a.404448808429.178346.98375913429&type=1

      There are a couple of reasons why the dive wasn’t posted on this blog: 1) I couldn’t find a video of the incident, and even if I did, the Premier League would have removed it within minutes (the FA is more lenient about videos being online, hence the Spurs vs Chelsea goalmouth scramble), and 2) If I posted a video of a dive whenever one happens in a big Premier League match, this blog would be inundated with videos like that.

      Cheers,
      The Gaffer

  7. huhe888 says:

    Until goal line technology companies are willing to “grease enough palms” at FIFA, UEFA, etc., FIFA will NOT permit goal line technology in football.

    Even Michel Platini has recently gone on the record opposing goal line technology, preferring goal line referee assistants instead.

    FIFA is still waiting for the right “deal” to be offered by a goal line technology manufacturer.

    Bottom line: whichever company that wants its goal line technology to be implemented will have to PAY FIFA licensing fees plus “grease”. That company will have to approach the implementation as a public relations exercise instead of a for-profit business.

    That’s the way FIFA works.

    • Paul says:

      Actually, if FIFA approve one (or even both) of the systems on July 2nd then it’ll be free to be implemented next season… whether or not they can get things set up in each ground and fully tested out in that time frame is another thing. Expectations are that it will be approved without a problem, once the second phase of testing is out the way.

      UEFA prefer a physical person to be on the goal line… so it means that the technology wouldn’t be used in the Champions League etc because it’s up to each individual organisation to adopt it once it’s been FIFA approved if they so wish. Personally, after seeing the system in place for many years on cricket and tennis coverage amongst other things, I really hope they bring in the Hawkeye system.

  8. Ryan says:

    I watched the game, and it was a mad house in the goal. The ref and or linesmen had no view of the ball what so ever with about 4 prone bodies and a bunch of standing ones in between. The bigger issue is the fact the John Terry decides to go Tottenham Hotspur bowling and manages to bring down 3 players including the goalie. If that call is made for the foul, there would be no need for the goal line controversy.

  9. Jeff says:

    There is no getting around that the second goal was a bad call, but to say that it ended the game and demoralized Tottenham is crazy. They scored shortly thereafter to make a two goal game. For those who are saying it should have been 1-1 are selectively choosing momentum. Chelsea was up 1-0 at the time of the incident. If the ref rules correctly, it is still 1-0. There is no way to know how it would have turned out afterwards. Maybe Chelsea defenders let up because of the 2 goal lead, allowing the quick score. If the goal was not allowed, maybe Bale’s goal never happens. Who knows? Bad calls happen, good teams, or at least team that are playing well, can overcome them. The fact that Tottenham had 34 minutes to get the second goal and didn’t, is on Tottenham.

  10. Yespage says:

    Allowing that goal changed the game. When Chelsea went up 2-0, it seemed like a very tall order. It didn’t mean Tottenham couldn’t come back, just that it made it that much harder.

  11. NP says:

    Awful call by the referee. He gave something that he didn’t see which is complete BS. I don’t think it would have changed the outcome but you never know in football so I would be mad about this if i was a spurs fan.

    The ref needs to be disciplined because he gave a goal based on nothing – he couldn’t have seen the ball cross the line because it didn’t.
    Refs need help and technology is the only answer. It seems like we are talking about this every 2 weeks because of dodgy decisions. Rugby does a great job of using techology while keeping the game flowing so football can use it too.
    FIFA’s argument about keeping the game like at grassroute level is BS because they added 2 goal line refs…..how many people playing football at grassroute levels have 1 ref, 2 linesman and 2 goal line refs? its hard enough finding a ref to turn up on time!

  12. Dust says:

    As a spurs fan this has been a brutal day, here are my thoughts for what its worth.

    We had ample chances to score first in the game but didn’t be it john terry again off line for the second time this season to save chelsea…

    The Controversy:
    The goal that never was is the SECOND time in 2 seasons that Chelsea have been awarded a goal without it going over line (the first was the equalizer given at the bridge when Gomez stopped Lampards shot from going over the line). This was an atrocity, for a couple of reasons, 1) of course it changed the dynamic of the game, 2-0 down with the officials deflating any real chance you think you have. 2) lampard admitted after the game in interviews they new the ball did not cross the line–WTF ZERO integrity especially as frank lampards aunt is harry’s wife –WTF again!

    3)The goal that Bale scored was again an example of poor refereeing, Cech’s offense was a red card, Atkinson could have still given the red and allowed the goal or even just made them take the penalty, by not doing so he again gave Chelsea the advantage, to honestly try and argue that those 2 decisions didn’t effect spurs is just crazy.

    The third goal was again just poor defending, the Lampard goal incredible you can’t argue that, you could argue that with 10 men chelsea may have had to change completely, maybe taken lampard off to sure up the defense and hold on to the lead and he wouldn’t have scored), the last was just garbage time goal.

    Maybe Chelsea would have won anyway if the phantom goal never happened or in equalizing Cech had been sent off, Cech didn’t even get a yellow for the challenge, nothing… a joke. a 10 man chelsea would have changed the game completely at that point.

    Aside from chelsea players lying when they knew there wasn’t a goal and the chelsea fans sining through the 1 minute silence after the tragic death of Piermario Morosini adds up to a classy day for Chelsea.

    I have followed my Spurs for 30 years watched from the Paxton Road for 20 and held season tickets for 15, just go Harry, the sooner Harry goes and the distractions stop the better, one thing before you go Harry, finish in the top 4 and keep Chelsea out of the UCL.

  13. Greg says:

    As a recent football convert, regardless of being a Spurs’ fan, games like this are just fundamentally discouraging. I couldn’t bear to watch the rest of the game, I just fast-forwarded through it and played it regular speed when there were close-ups.

    So I got to see Scott Parker nearly deck somebody. That was fun.

    Of course, there were a multitude of officiating flaws in this game. Terry’s invention of his new favorite sport, Spurs Bowling, should have been penalized immediately. The goal-line decision should never have even been a factor. It’s a persistent shame and embarrassment to this sport that technology plays no part in game-changing decisions like this. We have the technology, it was clear to everyone watching within 20 seconds that it was NOT a goal.

    Controversies like this, and leagues’ unwillingness to penalize flagrant dives after-the-fact of games, are the two elements that will always stop this sport from gaining real traction and popularity in America, where technology has been used in these decisions for years.

    Sport has to be fair to be fun, to be invested in, to be cared for and encouraged. Blithely denying the opportunities to seize fairness and accuracy will only drive people away, more and more.

  14. Al says:

    Don’t let actual facts get in the way of this discussion.
    Ball clearly crossed the line as this Getty image shows
    http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/juan-mata-of-chelsea-scores-their-second-goal-during-the-fa-news-photo/142946614
    TV does not always have the best angle.

    • Paul says:

      Heed your own advice before posting such nonsense. Ball isn’t over the line in that photo. Admittedly, it looks like a possibility but look at it from various angles, especially from the top down and it shows it in a different light. Anyway, ball needs to be over the line to be given and that certainly isn’t over the line, even in that photo.

      When John Terry himself said the ball wasn’t over the line (and this was before he’d even seen a replay of the incident) I think we have case closed!

    • The Gaffer says:

      Al, the photo doesn’t prove anything — especially from that angle.

      Cheers,
      The Gaffer

    • Yespage says:

      Much better view than any of the others. This proves it was much closer than previously thought, but the ball does appear to be straddling the line still.

  15. Cech’s foul is a red card offense if and only if it is a denial of a scoring goal opportunity. bale scored it, hence the fould did not deny the opportunity. probably shouldve still been a yellow, but youre reaching if you tink that was a terribly poor decision. the mata goal though? horrendous, not even close. glad to see my blues move on, but the game still had kind of an empty feeling after that decision in all honesty

  16. Rex says:

    I agree that one can fairly say, “we can’t know what would have happened had the goal not been given.” However, given that fact, one can’t then assume that Spurs would have scored and Cech been sent off with the game tied at 1-1 in the 56th min. If you want to argue the butterfly effect, you can’t pick and choose which subsequent events would have happened while assuming others would not have happened. If I concede that Spurs massively changed their tactics out of necessity, opening their attack and such up after going down 2-0, and one wants to take the position that this tactical change allowed Chelsea to score 3 more goals in the second half, then one must also recognize that this tactical change lead to Bale’s goal.

    For me, one must acknowledge that bad calls happen (this one was particularly egregious), but the story is told by how professionals respond under those circumstances. At 2-1, Spurs had every opportunity to take this game with most of the second half left to play, particularly given Chelsea’s horrendous late defending this season. But they cocked up an offside trap and then essentially folded, in a game that was still winnable or at least could have been drawn.

    Therefore, while the wrongly-given goal was huge, I think the better side clearly won and what cost the Spurs most was not the officiating, but was their poor defense (Gallas particularly) and inability to finish the numerous chances they had.

  17. pete says:

    There’s no good reason to not have goal-line technology in a sport where goals are at such a premium. In this case, one poor decision (to allow the goal) completely changed the course of the game.

    Atkinson had a terrible day. If Bale doesn’t score, Cech is given a straight red, no questions asked. How he didn’t get booked at all is just insane.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>