I'm inclined to agree.

It has to be put into the correct context though. The affect that decision had on Spurs was clear. Prior to that Utd had only worried Spurs from set plays with Ronaldo, after that from the highlights I saw, we were ripped open everywhere. It was a disgrace frankly.

I have posted earlier on here that I honestly felt the game was there for Spurs to win by more goals but always cautious in the fact that we had to make sure Utd didn't get one first and they didn't look like doing so. Once the official gave them that penalty it was obvious from the reaction of the Spurs players, Utd players and the crowd what was coming (which was why I turned it over). It left me with a sense of corruption and unfairness, which was a pity because we more than equalled the best side in the land for an hour on their own turf (as we have done everytime we've played them this year tbh).

This may all seem like sour grapes and in a sense it may well be but there have to question marks about the fairness of the sport with that, it is too coincidental with yesterday and Mendes' goal not given a couple of years back. It needs sorting IMO.

I think Webb's decision to award the pen was totally wrong.

But it's not as wrong as SS's whining about corruption based on two dodgy reffing decisions.

Fairness? Once again, I point out the penalty United should've had against Everton in the FA Cup semi final. Where you whinging about corruption in football then? No, you weren't, because it didn't affect you or your team.

Everybody gets bad decisions given against them across the entirety of a season. It's not right, but it happens, mainly due to human error, not blatant corruption as you've suggested. Because these decisions do even themselves out, they cannot have a major influence on the final table. Championships are not won and lost by officials. European places are not won and lost by officials. Clubs are not relegated by officials. These things happen because of how a club plays over the course of the season. The majority of people can see this and do not whinge like babies when something goes against them, because they know that they've had decisions go for them at other times. However, because they're not always high profile decisions, they slip under the radar of conspiracy theorists such as yourself.

It's just a shame those who took charge of our loss to Porto in 2004 wasn't as influenced by Fergie, Old Trafford and his general surroundings as you reckon they should have been. Scholes may never have been given offside when he was stood behind the defender. But, at the end of the day, over the two legs we weren't good enough to win. That cost us, nothing more. Therein lies the difference between your ramblings and the observations of a sane person.

Anyway, I've had enough now, bring on Arsenal on Wednesday.

Madrid equalise and the commentator wets himself. someone get a towel!
how higuain and gago haven't been booked is beyond me

I'm not convinced about the human error or the evening out theory.

Decisions are consistently made at the top clubs which have a negative influence on the opposition, the non giving of a penalty when it is blatant, the giving of a penalty when it isn't a penalty, a harsh sending off etc etc. These are undoubtedly influenced by the fear of Fergie, Wenger etc (but particularly at OT where Fergie picks and chooses his officials, one poor decision against Fergie and you don't ref at OT again) and this is corruption, not in the criminal sense but still a corrupt side to the game. It may be a conspiracy theory but it has ample evidence when it comes to Utd and Old Trafford. There is a whole list of incidents where the officiating has strangely helped Utd get a result at OT with Fergie.

It is about time technology is brought in so a side can question a pathetic decision such as yesterday.

United still would have won eventually.

Get on with it.

No evidence to support this theory unfortunately cockle (unless you think Ronaldo was going to score 5 free kicks that is).

Back to reality, Spurs were comfortable, United hadn't opened us all day, after the penalty they opened us easily.

Go figure.

Opened up easily? You meant bent over and took one for the champions?

United had started off quite well in that hals. Carrick being in the position to almost score is proof of this. It was an inevitability that the reds would come back at you strong and this feeble penalty excuse is just a convenient way of dodging the real issue - when United turned it on you had no answers whatsoever. Penalty counts for one goal. You were still ahead after it was scored and still had the game in your hands. No wonder you are so ashamed.

Coming from a St. Helens fan this is very, very funny indeed.

I only watched the highlights to see the penalty decision. I skipped parts of the vid until I saw the 2-0 scoreline. I then saw Ronaldo bring a fine save from Gomez with a dipping shot to the top corner and another fine save from Gomez when Tevez was 1-on-1 with him.

I believe you that these were the only times United opened you up, I really do.

If it wasn't for Gomes we would have scored a couple, he pulled off a couple of great saves in the first half, and before the penalty.

Off the top of my head you came close 3/4 times in the first half, twice you scored, and three of those times (inc goals) were down to errors by Ferdinand. When United came out in the second half, it was a matter of when and how much rather than if.