SAT, 7:45AM ET
WHU2
MCFC1
SAT, 10AM ET
LIV0
HULL0
SAT, 10AM ET
SUN0
ARS2
SAT, 10AM ET
SOU1
STO0
SAT, 12PM ET
REAL1
BARCA1
SAT, 12:30PM ET
SWA0
LEI0

Nani Gets Sent Off For Dangerous Play [GIF] – What’s Your Opinion About the Decision?

nani red card Nani Gets Sent Off For Dangerous Play [GIF]   Whats Your Opinion About the Decision?

In very controversial circumstances, Manchester United were knocked out of the UEFA Champions League Tuesday night by Real Madrid after the Spanish giants won 2-1 (and 3-2 on aggregate).

Manchester United were the better side for the first half, and were rewarded with a goal early in the second half after Sergio Ramos sent the ball into his own net. But the turning point in the match was when Nani was red carded in the 57th minute after trying to control the ball mid-air. Without seeing his opponent running toward him, Nani leaped up to control the ball but ended up kicking the player in the chest.

The harsh sending off gave Madrid an unfair advantage and they made the most of the opportunity by scoring two goals in quick succession through Luka Modric and Cristiano Ronaldo to steal a massive win at Old Trafford. In one week, Real Madrid has beaten Barcelona twice and conquered Manchester United.

What’s your opinion about the sending off? Let us know in the comments section below.

This entry was posted in Leagues: EPL, Manchester United. Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to Nani Gets Sent Off For Dangerous Play [GIF] – What’s Your Opinion About the Decision?

  1. Ed says:

    You raise your boot that high, it’s always always a risk.

    • Steven Duff says:

      Read “Why?’s” comments below, he is the only one who seems to know the rules in this house. I am a former Grade 1 ref and intent has nothing to do with this, he endangered an opponent and the fact he didn’t even know he was about to karate kick him makes it worse!

      Man Utd fans, grow up, your boy got sent off fair and square, live with it.

      Oh, and don’t be spouting off about intent, it has nothing to do with it here.

      • Wongo1 says:

        Stephen Duff you were a Grade 1 ref and yet you do not appear to know the rules, maybe this is why Refs get such stick, I have pasted the FIFA rule for you below, please read it carefully so that the next time you are reffing a game you know the rules and hopefully will interpret them correctly without bias:

        LAW 12 – FOULS AND MISCONDUCT 111

        Basic requirements for a foul
        The following conditions must be met for an offence to be considered a foul:
        • it must be committed by a player
        • it must occur on the
        fi
        eld of play
        • it must occur while the ball is in play
        If the referee stops play due to an offence committed outside the
        fi
        eld of play
        (when the ball is in play), play must be restarted with a dropped ball from the
        position of the ball when play was stopped, unless play was stopped inside the
        goal area, in which case the referee drops the ball on the goal area line parallel
        to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was located when play
        was stopped.
        Careless, reckless, using excessive force
        “Careless” means that the player has shown a lack of attention or
        consideration when making a challenge or that he acted without precaution.
        • No further disciplinary sanction is needed if a foul is judged to be careless
        “Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the
        danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.
        • A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned
        “Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary
        use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent.
        • A player who uses excessive force must be sent off
        Charging an opponent
        The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within
        playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.
        It is an offence to charge an opponent:
        • in a careless manner
        • in a reckless manner
        • using excessive force

  2. christian says:

    It’s a tough call and I’d say that United were hard done today. There won’t be any consensus on this but I’m going to side with Roy Keane here. Red card.

  3. Bishopville Red says:

    Terrible decision that destroyed a great game.

  4. Kody says:

    Controversial decisions happen all the time. United may have been hard done, but they also capitulated for the following 15 minutes and didn’t have a clinical touch to their chances late.

    I think if you added up all the favorable calls United has received and compared it to all the unfavorable, United still comes out ahead. Must take the bad with the good.

    • Frill Artist says:

      So if a team gets lots of yellows then they almost kill one of the opposition then since they have too many yellows, the ref should just let it slide?

  5. Fajar Agape says:

    Nani tried to control the ball without even seeing Arbeloa coming. Awful decision ruin a great game. Match fixing?

  6. andy says:

    The terrible call was leaving Rooney on the bench…

  7. stennieville says:

    I’m no fan of United (or RM really), but that was a great match ruined by a piss poor decision.

  8. Paul says:

    The shoe is on the other foot and they can’t handle it. We’ve all had bad calls and sh!t happens but they’re not too used to it… but this is how it feels folks ;)

    Harsh red but it was still reckless from Nani. Yes, we know he had his eyes on the ball… but he also had his leg up in the air. Played at full speed, you can’t blame the ref for showing red… he doesn’t have the benefit of replays.

    • Why? says:

      In fact in one off those giffs Nani clearly pushes hit foot through the player that violent conduct never mind Dangerous play! Definitely right decision looking at your giff and looking at a ball has no relevance to it being dangerous but putting force into it is just plain wrong.

      • Paul says:

        Looking at the ball does have relevance. The only intent was to take the ball with his foot but it just so happened another player came in and made contact at the same time. It was in no way malicious and was a yellow card every day of the week as a telling off… not a chance that was a red card. But like I’ve said… ‘sh!t happens’.

        • Why? says:

          Sorry paul but it doesn’t have relevance so are trying to justify it saying this his actions clearly ‘endangered an opponent’ even if he had his eyes shut. All that means is it may not have been serious foul play (until he is clearly seen pushing his leg into the player but that another argument.)Not seeing him till late doesn’t make it any less dangerous which is the word that gets him sent off.

        • Why? says:

          By the way it is ‘intent that would make it ‘Violent conduct’ a three match ban he will get a two match ban

          • Why? says:

            I have played semi pro for Droylsden F.C and Hyde Utd in the 90′s, I played for East Manchester then went on to Manage an Amateur team as player manager then Just managed. I have done the level 7 referee qualification with M.C.F.A (standard for one member of the team), How about you smart arse?

            So let me get this straight, contact with the studs into the chest spinning the player while leaving him in a heap on the floor isn’t excessive force??? YEAH RIGHT LMAO! If excessive force is akin to a broken anything why are there not broken limbs in football every week as somebody gets sent off for using excessive force every single week if not more???? Can’t you see how silly this looks? I give up, tell you what keep telling every body here how knowledgeable you are eh! LOL

        • Paul says:

          Sorry but that’s bollocks. I don’t have any reason to defend a Man U player or anything connected to them – anybody who knows me from this site knows full well who I support and where in the world I live.

          But if you’re going to sit there quoting rules and regulations at me, it was neither serious foul play nor violent conduct. There was no excessive force used what so ever.

          • Why? says:

            The rules back up that ‘bollocks’! dangerous play or serious foul play has nothing what so ever to do with intent (looking at a player in this case) fact.

            ‘A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as
            serious foul play.’

            Serious foul play is what he got the card for, it’s a sending off, two match ban.If you can say Nani’s actions didn’t endanger an opponent then I can’t say any more than jumping studs up not knowing what around you is a ‘danger’ (key) to others that may be around you.

            Where there is intent (this would be if he seen him) then that is ‘Violent conduct’ as it wouldn’t merely be dangerous it would have been purposeful.

            As for there being no excessive force please explain how the player manages to spin himself round in mid air??? Does that happen to all players who jump straight up? Tell you what u try spinning with both feet off the ground like in the giff! There must have been force, no? Now is that force allowed it the game? No it is not so it’s ‘excessive’!

            It was this clear as day ‘excessive force’ clear on the giff above that gets him sent off for serious foul play.

          • Paul says:

            Do you actually play football or are you just quoting things to me from the FIFA rulebook?

            There is movement from Arbeloa because there was contact. Simple physics. Add to that a bit of play acting. There was no excessive force – not even in the above GIF.

            Excessive force is akin to a leg breaker.

          • Why? says:

            I have played semi pro for Droylsden F.C and Hyde Utd in the 90′s, I played for East Manchester then went on to Manage an Amateur team as player manager then Just managed. I have done the level 7 referee qualification with M.C.F.A (standard for one member of the team), How about you smart arse?

            So let me get this straight, contact with the studs into the chest spinning the player while leaving him in a heap on the floor isn’t excessive force??? YEAH RIGHT LMAO! If excessive force is akin to a broken anything why are there not broken limbs in football every week as somebody gets sent off for using excessive force every single week if not more???? Can’t you see how silly this looks? I give up, tell you what keep telling every body here how knowledgeable you are eh! LOL!!

          • Why? says:

            Oh and with excessive force you don’t even have to touch the player so, so much for your ‘Excessive force is akin to a leg breaker’ theory. What’s your answer to try and blow that one off?

          • Paul says:

            That has to be one of the most ridiculous comments I’ve ever read. Can you just enlighten me on your perception of excessive force with no contact?

            Excessive force is akin to a leg breaker.

            Getting a sense of déjà vu.

          • Why? says:

            Upto now paul you haven’t put any facts behind what you have said. Just that you think flying into somebodies chest studs showing isn’t excessive!! You are just ignoring every fact. And tomorrow every ex ref who is asked will say it was a sending off. Just like Roy Keane et.al did tonight. He did what De Jong only this ref didn’t bottle it.

            By the way I have seen this ref send of three players off in the past for very similar. I said to my mate before the match that he will not except what many English refs will at OT.

        • Why? says:

          If a player lunges towards a player they do not have to touch them to be sent off as there is intent but no Violent conduct has taken place. Serious foul play has.

          ‘Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the
          front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force
          and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.’

          Note the word ‘at’ in the sentence the rule is worded this way for a reason. This rule could say

          ‘Any player who MAKES CONTACT with an opponent in challenging for the ball from the
          front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force
          and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.’

          But it just doesn’t does it? And why do you think that is? Kompany was sent off last year having not touch Nani for serious foul play if you’re right how could that be? Their are countless other examples!

          Aren’t you getting bored of being wrong??

          • Paul says:

            The only thing you’re doing pal is quoting word for word what the manual says. We all know how to read.

            Contrary to popular belief, football is a contact sport. A player will 99 times of 100 never be so much as cautioned for not touching a player unless there is CLEAR use of excessive force – i.e. flying in with such force you could seriously harm the other player by way of broken bones. That then becomes a tough call for the referee to make and would be viewed as harsh if a red was shown.

            Bored now.

          • Why? says:

            Football is a contact sport but that contact isn’t putting a foot up and putting studs into somebody is it, that’s excessive. or do you really think that it is allowed?

            The fact is here Utd fans seem to be saying that it’s one of the worst decisions ever! When the ref is clearly was in his right to send the player off and not by just using the rules but by his own judgement. You seem to be saying ‘he could of let him off’, ridiculous. It was dangerous and could have ended with a broken ribs. Any one using the word ‘dangerous’ concerning that are in fact saying it was a sending off as otherwise what is this danger they refer to? And just who are they endangering? I’ll tell you, the opponent which means exactly what it says, it’s clear. What don’t you get about that?

            Oh do you realize that your

            ‘most ridiculous comments I’ve ever read. Can you just enlighten me on your perception of excessive force with no contact?’

            Comment is incorrect? As you seem to just say something get it wrong while trying to have a go at me, then just try to brush over it by saying ’99 times of 100′, you’re wrong it’s that simple, and you’re even admitting it here! poorly but you are! If you go to use excessive force you should be sent off 100% of the time FACT. If no contact it is serious foul play, If contact is made it is depending on the intent, then it is can also be seen as Violent conduct. This is of course in the teachings of the F.A, maybe you actually know better! LOL.The word ‘Attempt or attempted’ are used in the rule book to cover none contact, it there and it’s not at all ‘ridiculous’.

            One last thing how the hell are you supposed to justify the sending off with out ‘quoting’ (not word for word that hasn’t happened at all!)’what the manual says’? Maybe you will be too bored too answer that?

  9. Why? says:

    The key word is ‘dangerous’ which it was plain and simple, when a tackle endangers an opponent it is a sending off like it or not.

  10. AJ says:

    Boot was not that high. I saw a couple times during the Dortmund game today where higher boots than that and play wasn’t even stopped. How does a Turkish ref get a game this big?

  11. Dean Stell says:

    I’m a United fan, so of course I think it was a BS call.

    I’m rational enough to see that Nani put everyone in a very lousy position by being careless. The frustrating thing is that it wasn’t even a key ball that he needed to win.

    Two things bug me about the call….

    1). I see a lot of rationalization of the call along the lines of, “Well, United get a lot of calls. Now you know how it feels.” That’s just a BS argument. It’s like saying the ref went into the game thinking that United was ahead in the Karma Department and was looking for a chance to even things up a little bit. Defend the call or not, but justifying it as karmic justice is silly.

    2). It was a bad call at THAT point in THAT match. I think knockout tournament games should be refereed differently. By sending Nani off, the ref basically served up the game to RM on a silver platter. You would expect them to score in the ~35 minutes left in the game. If United could hold them to ONE goal, then United would have to hold them for another 30 minutes just to get to PKs. It’s just kinda harsh. It isn’t like a crummy call in a league game where you thought you’d get 3 points and instead get 1…..this is it. It wasn’t even the first leg.

    Oh well….that’s the joy of knockout soccer.

    • Paul says:

      It’s nothing to do with the ref going into the game thinking anything. It’s to do with United fans taking a dose of their own medicine and having the smug smile wiped off their faces.

      What would Fergie have said if it was the other way around? Wouldn’t have put another airing of the ‘It could have killed him!’ line. Bore off.

      How dare a team go to Old Trafford and win? Whatever next.

      • Dean Stell says:

        Look….I don’t take any responsibility for the silly United fans who are looking at this purely through their own personal passions. Those guys are annoying even to the rest of us United fans.

        I’m just saying that I think the ref botched a difficult call. If he’d just have given a Nani a yellow card, Real Madrid would have complained a little, but I don’t think they’d have had as much to complain about as United did with the red card. It was a borderline call and the ref chose the course that was more decisive in the outcome of the match than anything that Madrid did on the field.

    • Kody says:

      ” It was a bad call at THAT point in THAT match. I think knockout tournament games should be refereed differently.”

      You can’t say one one hand that a call must be adjudged correct or not on its own merits, tacitly asking for consistency, on one hand, and yet on another hand ask for different refereeing in different games.

      • Dean Stell says:

        I’m not saying that the CALL should be judged in a vacuum. I’m saying that fans justifying the red card as karmic justice for United have a dumb argument. They should argue about the dangerous aspect of the play or something.

  12. kyle says:

    In the Champions League Nani’s action is always going to be a red card. In the EPL it might have been a yellow but definitely a booking. Players should know that anytime they raise their boot high it will result in a card, unless there’s no player around them.

  13. ThompsonLives says:

    And Fergie didn’t even have the stones to face the media after the match.

    What a gash.

  14. Tony says:

    Once the ball had passed him, Nani was aware of the other player. He went in foot high, studs showing, and compounded his mistake by having a second attempt to injury the other player, by straightening his leg out again after the initial contact. Cheap shot, not the first in his career. Red Card.

  15. Marc L says:

    Crap call. It’s a rare day that I can even use the proper name of the home side tonight, and even I think they were ill-served to the extreme here.

    Oh, I also love Arbeloa clutching the area closer to his throat (than where Nani’s boot caught him) and rolling over about 6 times after. Can’t see it in the gif but this is kind of what I remember. Total “Real Madrid way” with that stuff, of course. I’m sure that bunch of tosspots has been doing that sort of thing since the days it was Genalissimo Franco’s favorite club.

    Sincerely – sorry to see that happen, rags. You shouldn’t have a match of this scale ruined by some 3rd world referee’s questionable decision.

    Now I am not sure what Gus Johnson thought. His opinion truly should be dispositive, of course. But Martin Tyler on the FS2G feed was pretty clear in his opinion that this was a crap call. And Martin Tyler forgot more about football in the minute it took me to write this than I myself will ever know.

  16. M Owen says:

    It was never a red card but again karma is a b1tch. ManU have been getting dodgy calls going thier way and when a bigger team came to town this one went Real’s way.
    Btw Jose is priceless, a proper snake oil salesman..the way he walked away shaking fergusons hand with couple of minutes left. Classic!!

  17. Tom says:

    yet this one only got a yellow card…terrible red

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YomM87GNvs

  18. brn442 says:

    As per ED, it was a harsh card but Nani should have known that in Europe – there’s a chance he could be sent off. Intentional or not – putting one’s boot through an opposing player’s ribs, comes with a risk.

  19. La-A says:

    No way is that a sending off. Awful decision in a crucial part of a huge match. Nani’s clearly only going for the ball and catches him slightly. He even pulls his foot back when he realizes the Madrid player is there. These international refs are too soft and don’t use common sense. He ruined the biggest game of the season so far.

  20. Smokey Bacon says:

    I think Ramos had a lot to do with the decision. He was in the ref’s face straightaway making the case. Trying to get another player sent off when you were not involved in the play yourself is despicable in my book. Sums him up. A horrible t*rd of a player.

    That said Nani should know better than to raise his feet no mstter how instinctive a reaction. Even if it was unintentional. Arabeloa was going nowhere not that Nani knew that.

    Shame. Killed the game stone dead.

  21. Red10 says:

    Referee was paid off by Real Madrid. F*cking tw@t turkish piece of sh!t was bribed to send off a United player and found the perfect time for it.

    It is absolutely ridiculous that UEFA will allow this to stand. His head should roll.

    • Sammy says:

      While I myself have been guilty of doing this before, I have learnt not to jump into accusing referees of bribery unless I have any evidence to prove it. Otherwise, you might hurt someone’s feelings ( likely the ref in this case) or actually embarrass yourself if you are ever proven wrong.

      In this case, I believe you made this rash comment more out of frustration that United lost the match or because you thought that the red card was too harsh on United. I might be mistaken, but I believe that you didn’t really mean to belittle the ref the way you did, but just couldn’t help yourself due to your frustration. But if you did, then my suggestion is that you next time, maybe you could consider more carefully before deciding to make accusations and throw insults around like this. After all, referees are humans too, aren’t they?

      Finally, I think that the way you made reference to his nationality is totally un-called for. What on earth does being Turkish have to do with a person’s character or behaviour?

      • Red10 says:

        Well, I’m pretty sure that nearly every newspaper has referred to his nationality and this is pretty much par for the course for these sort of things.
        I can come out and say that he was bought, it seems like a pretty reasonable jump for me, considering that he is obviously a fan of real madrid. His twitter shows him as a follower of real as well as their controversial paper Marca. Not fishy at all, right?

        Yeah, he’s a human being, which means that he is not immune to a few wads of cash waved in his face or of obvious bias. It also doesn’t mean that he can’t be an absolute muppet of an idiot.

        • Scrumper says:

          So you witnessed him taking a few wads of cash did you? or because he’s a Turk you just know he took money?

          Perhaps he met Nani in a darkened doorway Monday night and offered him money to get sent off? After all Portuguese players are only second to the Italians when it comes to taking bribes aren’t they?

          Sounds like delusional pre WW1 attitude to me. That’s how we lost the Empire.

  22. Frill Artist says:

    Should have been a yellow not a red.

  23. dust says:

    I’ve seen it quite a bit now and I have a few observations.

    Firstly, on the whole he wasn’t looking at him thing…

    Just because he didn’t move his head at the time he raised his leg does not mean that he didn’t know he was going in for a ball with another player, Also as a person with sight he also has peripheral vision… I don’t buy that in going forward towards a ball that he could not see and had no idea where Arbeloa was. Unless Arbeloa was wearing the new predator kits that make you invisible?

    Further more you can see Nani’s body is shaped to anticipate impact to protect him self, if he truly didn’t know where Arbeloa was he would have been clattered.

    As for Nani what was he thinking making that challenge in a European game? it’s not like the premier league, you’d think these players would know this with all their experience in europe, especially in big games against spanish teams where accentuation and embellishment isn’t exactly rare.

    Was it red, yes in europe, you cant do that, players should know that, Fergie should know that.

    The Ref was in a difficult position, he called it as he saw it, and if you look at that GiF it looks pretty bad, Nani could have chosen a different approach.. he has to own it.

    There were other incidents where the ref made calls in Utd favor too by the way, I don’t remember seeing any complaints from Utd about disallowing a perfectly fine goal by Higuain in the first half, or When he didn’t send of Raphael for handball when he cleared the shot off the line with the ball hitting his arm that was raised and not by his sides.

    i think its really weak to blame the ref.

    On the tactics, I hear alot on the radio and sites that Fergie was doing great until the red card, his tactics were great, Utd were comfortable, and that no one can expect Utd to hold off Real Madrid with 10 men.

    Firstly… to play defensive was SAF’s choice and the wrong one in my opinion, the players he brought on and the chances they created in the last 15 minutes that they missed is proof that if they had 11 with those players on and that attitude at the beginning they could have scored a goal themselves instead of being up by one from an own goal 47 minutes in.

    Secondly… as much as this pains me to say shelsea did a much much better job in a far harder situation last year away at Barca.

    2-0 down and down to 10 men away to Barca and they draw 2-2 to get the result… sorry but that Barca was better than this RM.

    Utd had to hold on to a one goal lead, because they had run away from themselves, it wasn’t away at RM, where was the utd attack the fampous 4 diamond 2 ? plus SAF waited to long make changes to deal with the inevitable onslaught. It would have made more sense to take the ineffective RVP off and then stick Wellbeck as the lone striker to chase down clearances with his pace and hold up the ball allowing a breather. Crowd out the midfield and reduce them to shots from 30 yards. but that didn’t happen and Rat boy was given to much space and scored.

    The other thing is all RM needed even with Utd winning 1-0 was to score one goal and that would have taken it to extra time. So why play so defensive? choosing Giggs over Rooney is just weird, no way is Giggs better than Rooney, so what was that about…

    In summary, its to easy to blame the ref, 1-0 wasn’t good enough Utd needed to score 2 or 3 to put RM under pressure… also, after all the decisions that have gone Utd’s way at OT… some may say justice.

    • Frill Artist says:

      It wasn’t a challenge, Dust. He was trying to control the ball that was way out in front of him.

      • dust says:

        I understand what he was trying to do, but in european football you can’t leave your foot there when you see another player coming in, I disagree he didn’t see him. It was a foul that was bookable and by that understanding alone he has put himself at the mercy of the referee’s decision.

        I honestly thought Man Utd would come out attacking at home to seal the deal, and play that 4 Diamond 2 with Rooney and Robin Van Dirty, 1-0 was not enough with 11 men and 35 mins left when madrid have modric and benzema on the bench amongst other options, it is folly to assume that without the red Utd would have won.

        it is a shame we will never now and a shame that Nani’s wreckless challenge has put the team in a position that is not what you want and has gotten zero criticism for it.

        you were leading 1-0 too. CFC with 10 men for a lot longer did the job against a better side in hostile conditions, I think Fergie lost the plot, he is paid big money and has an embarrassing amount of riches in experience but last night failed to do what he needed to to get the job done.

        acknowledging CFC success is making me vomit in my mouth a little bit so Im gonna stop.

        I wanted to see the great attacking Man Utd, not the timid defensive Man Utd on show for the forst 55 minutes, I was gutted at the style and team selection.

        Man Utd could have won that game IMO if they stayed true to what they had been so successful at doing so far this season (except against spurs that is ;) )

  24. Burgos says:

    even the madrid players were shocked……well besides ramos since he was in the ref’s face the whole time.

  25. Andre says:

    That was a bad call but people have to get over it. They were up 2-1 on aggregate, with an away goal, playing at home with less than half the match to go. We’ve all seen plenty of teams have a man sent off in more challenging circumstances and come through it. If you honestly think the red card decided the game you are delusional

  26. ridgididge says:

    So if a raised boot should always be a red card if other players are nearby, any overhead kick for goal in the goal square, where there are always others nearby, should not be a goal but a red card?
    What if both players attack the ball with raised boots? Should both be red carded?
    How can you get consistency with such subjective decisions by referees as these?

  27. Yespage says:

    Nani was playing the ball the whole time, just like when the Real Madrid keeper punched Vidic in the face when he went for the ball.

    Nani didn’t follow through on the motion. Should have been a yellow card, but that is with the advantage of replay, which has no place in Football apparently, because that may upset the game or something? Because sending off Nani didn’t do anything like that.

  28. Prinz says:

    If Nani’s case was a red card then what about Jamie Carragher slicing open another player at Anfield it’s not dangerous play is it.
    As for those calling it Karma, well we’ll take it but remember Karma is a strong word, it has a way of being served around the plate.

    Prinz,
    I’m Coming.

  29. peterjs says:

    Good article. I found this article about the game last night, http://www.thecrossfieldball.com/cristiano-ronaldo-the-apologising-assassin/ Pretty interesting, def worth a read.

  30. Scrumper says:

    Definitely dangerous play although Nani was watching the flight of the ball so nothing pre meditated and for me a yellow. However, in the split second Nani sees the RM player contact the ball he then appears to kick out. Perhaps the high boot and the kick out culminated as a red for the ref? Only he knows.

    What I did witness was Man Utd immediately recoiling into a sloppy panicky mess which RM seized upon. What happened? You have one player less not two or three. At the moment of the red Utd were controlling the game and in my mind threw it away.

    In the last ten mins or so Utd showed some real spark and were unlucky not to score. The result may have been different if they had not gone into shell shock at the Nani sending off.

    What didn’t change was the god awful commentating. This Gus’voice seems contrived and a very strange baritone pitch. Like a little kid lowering his voice and trying to sound grown up. And the strangled grunts of “shot!” “christiano!” “goal!” (the Vidic effort) were so annoyingly forced. And when Barton said RM were easily the best team over the two legs?? what games did he watch?

  31. Wongo1 says:

    People let’s get this straight:

    1) Nani’s boot did not catch him in the ribs, it grazed his arm.
    2) Arbeloa went down like a heap to get Nani booked.
    3) Arbeloa was even shocked when he saw a red brandished.
    4) It has to be dangerous play that is the rule, where is the danger there?
    5) If you give the ref the benefit of the doubt then United should have had 2 penalties based on his red card decision.
    6) The poor decision knocked the wind out of United’s younger players and cost us the game.

    I was completely pissed yesterday but I will admit that bad decisions happen and move on so should all you ABU’s but you should admit that United were looking the more likely to win yesterday until that card.

  32. old33 says:

    I have a tough time with the red card as a referee. One thing that I have not yet heard is that calls are supposed to be made “in the spirit of the game.” The players on the pitch were internationally world class. We know how finite their skills are. Nani is not a De Jong. He is a finesse player who should be able to bring a ball like that down in his sleep. The direction of the play was that the majority of the players concentrated in the penalty box at the time and he was obviously hustling to run the ball down. The play was so frantic at the time as well. It was no doubt a dangerous play. However I fail to see where at any point that is was not in the spirit of that game. With all the build up, and all that was on the line trophy and money wise, how can you not expect players to go for something like that? This is not high school. This is two of the best teams on the planet. To send off Nani makes the referee part of the game instead of background. It’s a shame that 22 players couldn’t decide the outcome.

  33. yelnats says:

    I find it hilarious that every comment on here that says that the red card was harsh and too much automatically has more thumbs down than up. Loving the lack of a bias from people.

  34. Florian says:

    I think it’s OK because Nani looks like he is following through on the kick after the initial contact. Subtle, sneaky, but quite apparent from a different angle.
    Credit to the Ref for catching it.

    • Krawmn says:

      I agree with this. he does look as though he is “following through.” It looked this way when it happened, in real-time, without having ever seen the video reviews.

  35. Krawmn says:

    same as yesterday when I saw it live, the video clip above shows that, from the correct angle, the referee could have seen it as a kick to the ribs with the studs. whether or not you agree really doesn’t matter because the ref saw it from his angle and it looked like a bad enough challenge to warrant the red card. the ref doesn’t have the angles we’ve seen, but initially, it did look bad: like a kicking motion with studs directly into the RB’s ribcage.

  36. StellaWasAlwaysDown says:

    Good call by the ref, but definitely a game-changer as United were all over RM at that point. It was inevitable (IMO) that they were going to score a couple more. RM looked hard-pressed to do anything.

  37. ABU KILLAH says:

    what about the RM keeper punching Vidic in the face? was that dangerous play? cmon abu’s, i cant hear u !!!!!

    • Opti says:

      Punch to Vidic’s face by GK is OK, because:
      1) He could not see Vidic
      2) He went for the ball
      3) Referee is a Madrid fan
      4) Referee get his soccer news from Marca

      As a United fan, I am furious about the red card but more so disappointed at how we crumbled afterwards. Team (of 9 outfielders) lost all composure and JM made quick tactical modifications by removing Arbeola (who was on a yellow card for a high boot to Evra) with Modrid. Fergie was overrun by emotions and was not thinking straight… should have subbed Welbeck, Cleverley or even the sublime Giggs for Rooney earlier to cover the left flank vacated by Nani.

      Then again, RvP should had been sharper in Madrid and converted his 1-on-1 and we would all be talking in the hypothetical. Has he lost his shine?

  38. Wongo1 says:

    People here is the FIFA rule, learn the game and stop spouting nonsense, Nani does not show excessive force as he is trying to control the ball and the player comes from his unsighted side. He is not reckless because once again THE PLAYER COMES FROM HIS UNSIGHTED SIDE!!! To be reckless or have excessive force he would have to have seen the player and made a calculated decision. Stop simply hating United and blindly spouting nonsense.

    LAW 12 – FOULS AND MISCONDUCT 111
    Basic requirements for a foul
    The following conditions must be met for an offence to be considered a foul:
    • it must be committed by a player
    • it must occur on the
    fi
    eld of play
    • it must occur while the ball is in play
    If the referee stops play due to an offence committed outside the
    fi
    eld of play
    (when the ball is in play), play must be restarted with a dropped ball from the
    position of the ball when play was stopped, unless play was stopped inside the
    goal area, in which case the referee drops the ball on the goal area line parallel
    to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was located when play
    was stopped.
    Careless, reckless, using excessive force
    “Careless” means that the player has shown a lack of attention or
    consideration when making a challenge or that he acted without precaution.
    • No further disciplinary sanction is needed if a foul is judged to be careless
    “Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the
    danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.
    • A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned
    “Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary
    use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent.
    • A player who uses excessive force must be sent off
    Charging an opponent
    The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within
    playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.
    It is an offence to charge an opponent:
    • in a careless manner
    • in a reckless manner
    • using excessive force
    LAW 12 – FOULS AND MISCONDUCT

  39. vito says:

    Maybe this game was rigged and the ref was on the take?

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>