J
jem
Guest
Re: Last night's game at Old Trafford
>
> An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
> for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
> shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a meter.
>
> "The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
> out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
> developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
> wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face
obscuring
> his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
> things."
>
> In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained
"If
> they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
> wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
> support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
> to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
> guidelines. The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but
> with the players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who
> broke one the most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They
placed
> a shot on target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and
> perhaps he's not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions.
> Fortunately if he
> doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the game visiting
> teams, by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old Trafford then
> our
> officials are in a position to help Mr Jol make that cultural adjustment."
>
> Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
> to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
> national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award
a
> goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
> Nistelrooy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never
do.
>
> No no no. Shocking, just the thought of it."
>
> An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
> for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
> shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a meter.
>
> "The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
> out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
> developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
> wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face
obscuring
> his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
> things."
>
> In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained
"If
> they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
> wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
> support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
> to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
> guidelines. The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but
> with the players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who
> broke one the most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They
placed
> a shot on target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and
> perhaps he's not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions.
> Fortunately if he
> doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the game visiting
> teams, by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old Trafford then
> our
> officials are in a position to help Mr Jol make that cultural adjustment."
>
> Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
> to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
> national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award
a
> goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
> Nistelrooy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never
do.
>
> No no no. Shocking, just the thought of it."