First comments from Martin Hansson

[Noelys Guitar]

Wouldn't matter anyway - as the Fourth Official has no powers to do so to get a decision changed:

We don't know whether Trap is saying the fourth official told Hansson just after the incident happened or just after the referee made his decision. But here is the referee's exchange with Kevin Kilbane at half-time in extra time. From the Sunday Times
I asked the referee at half-time in extra time: “Did you see it?” and he told me: “I can 100% say it wasn’t handball.” Those were his exact words. That is what made it even more annoying. I don’t know how he can make a comment like that when he hasn’t seen it.

Hansson had the option to tell the truth and instead decided to lie.

[tetsujin1979]

Wouldn't matter anyway - as the Fourth Official has no powers to do so to get a decision changed:

Then how did the ref and linesman know about Zidane's headbutt in 2006?

[old git]

Wouldn't matter anyway - as the Fourth Official has no powers to do so to get a decision changed:

on fifa website offical rules of the game

referee decisions are final , but the referee may only change his decision on realising it is incorrect , or at his discretion, on the advice of assistant referee or fourth offical provided he has not restarted match or termiated match ... so going by fifa fourth offical has the power to intervene before match restarts wonder why then fourth offical never advised referee..

[Réiteoir]

Then how did the ref and linesman know about Zidane's headbutt in 2006?

If you'd had read the bit I quoted in that post above - it states:

He must indicate to the referee when the wrong player is cautioned because of mistaken identity or when a player is not sent off having been seen to be given a second caution or when violent conduct occurs out of the view of the referee and assistant referees.

[Emmet7]

I didn't see where Henry told the ref he handled the ball and I am not convinced he did tell him.

But if he did tell him, then surely the honest thing to do by the ref was immediately book Henry and give a freekick out. It's amazing that the player who committed the foul owned up and the ref who seems not to have seen the incident at all tells him he is the ref and it hit Henry on the hip.

This is why I have suspicions that ref was doing FIFA bidding. He was waiting for a clearcut goal for France, awarded what he thought was a clearcut goal despite not seeing the handball and then didn't have the experience or charachter to cancel his decision.

I think Trap was right in saying the ref wasn't experienced enough or a strong enough charachter. He was fair in other decisions, but the biggest decision of the match he got wrong.

I'm almost inclined to side with Henry although he is not a saint. It was up to the ref to award a free out and instead he was insistant on awarding a dodgy goal.

We cannot say he was bribed in any way, but it is like one of those dodgy refing decisions that Ireland suffered from in Eastern Europe in the 1970's.

The FIFA rule that what a ref decides is final is a really stupid rule. If a ref was later found to have been bribed, what then?

[Emmet7]

If you'd had read the bit I quoted in that post above - it states:

Does it say in the rules if the 4th official can use video evidence or not as he appeared to do in the WC final 2006?

I don't think it does. In some cases the rules can be bent, in others they cannot.

In any case, it was Henry who told the ref he handled the ball, as did all the Irish players. Henry telling him should have been enough to disallow the goal.

Hansson saying he was 100% sure the ball hit Henry on the hip makes him a blatent liar. He either saw the incident and the handball or he didn't see anything of the incident. Either way he told lies to the Irish players to justify the awarding of the goal.

In summary, Henry cheated and the ref told lies to cover it up.

[Junior]

Does it say in the rules if the 4th official can use video evidence or not as he appeared to do in the WC final 2006?

I don't think it does. In some cases the rules can be bent, in others they cannot.

In any case, it was Henry who told the ref he handled the ball, as did all the Irish players. Henry telling him should have been enough to disallow the goal.

Hansson saying he was 100% sure the ball hit Henry on the hip makes him a blatent liar. He either saw the incident and the handball or he didn't see anything of the incident. Either way he told lies to the Irish players to justify the awarding of the goal.

Has anyone got the few seconds footage when this happened? I dont believe he did tell the ref, I thought he was off sheepishly celebrating with Gallas and co. Another lie more like but Im open to being corrected............

[Emmet7]

The odds of a player blatently cheating followed by a referee blatently lying and awarding the cheated goal must be a million to one.

That's one of the reasons this goal was so unusual and why there are serious questions to be answered. You just wouldn't get this in any other match.

Take for example the Ireland V Georgia goal. The linesman or ref had a clear unimpaired view of the incident and saw a handball, rightly or wrongly, (leaving aside the offside question) it was definitely a handball.

In the Ireland v France match, the ref didn't see the incident or so he claims, yet was 100% sure it wasn't handball.

[jebus]

The odds of a player blatently cheating followed by a referee blatently lying and awarding the cheated goal must be a million to one.

Yeah, I mean how often do you see a player dive in a box for a penalty and the DEFINITELY LYING ref award it??? God damn Zionists

The odds of a player blatently cheating followed by a referee blatently lying and awarding the cheated goal must be a million to one. That's one of the reasons this goal was so unusual and why there are serious questions to be answered. You just wouldn't get this in any other match.

Unless if it was in a World Cup quarter final 23 years ago, but since then how often??? Only a few hundred times!! At least!!! God damn Illuminati

The odds of a player blatently cheating followed by a referee blatently lying and awarding the cheated goal must be a million to one. Take for example the Ireland V Georgia goal. The linesman or ref had a clear unimpaired view of the incident and saw a handball, rightly or wrongly, (leaving aside the offside question) it was definitely a handball

Rightly or wrongly I think you're definitely right. God damn Mayans

The odds of a player blatently cheating followed by a referee blatently lying and awarding the cheated goal must be a million to one. In the Ireland v France match, the ref didn't see the incident or so he claims, yet was 100% sure it wasn't handball.

Yeah, I mean like why tell a pack of Irishmen screaming at him that he felt he was right in what he just said was right a few seconds earlier? God damn Joe Duffy

[Emmet7]

Has anyone got the few seconds footage when this happened? I dont believe he did tell the ref, I thought he was off sheepishly celebrating with Gallas and co. Another lie more like but Im open to being corrected............

1. If Henry didn't tell the ref, but he is going around telling everyone he did, this makes Henry an even bigger liar and a seriously dodgy character, but we can only give him the benefit of the doubt and say he did tell the ref.

2. If he did tell the ref and the ref chose to ignore what he told him and instead insisted it was not handball, then this makes Hansson to blame for the whole incident.

I have my doubts Henry told Hansson. But if he did, then why didn't Hansson do what surely is in the FIFA rule book and give Henry a yellow card, and cancel the goal.

Yet even after Henry told him, Hansson goes around telling the Irish players it was definitely not a handball.

The 'official' version of events doesn't add up.

That's why there should be an enquiry into all of this. I am not sure FIFA are the people to conduct such an enquiry seeing as they run the game. But there definitely should be an enquiry with all sides, Henry, Hansson, etc giving their version of events.

[Emmet7]

Has anyone got the few seconds footage when this happened? I dont believe he did tell the ref, I thought he was off sheepishly celebrating with Gallas and co. Another lie more like but Im open to being corrected............

This is the best I could come up with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs8WWBXGiXg&NR=1

Lots of replays but Henry definitely said nothing to the ref for a minimum of 30 seconds after the goal. What I'd really like to see is if someone in the Stade de France had personal video footage of the aftermath, that would show if Henry went to the ref or not. It's difficult to see on the TV footage with all the replays.

I am beginning to doubt Henry told him at all. It doesn't sound right that he would say to Hansson "I handled the ball" and Hansson replies, "I'm the ref". I think any half decent ref would immediately book Henry and go talk to his linesman again and then cancel the goal.

[Metrostars]

I think Henry probably told the ref after the game which is pointless at that stage.

I do also think the ref did not actually see the handball because there were players in his way. He sees the ball bounce, then can't see the ball, next thing he sees is Henry kick it over to Gallas. It's hard to give a handball if you didn't see it. As for the Linesman, he should have seen it but never raised his flag. Maybe the angle was not adventagous for him. In any case, even if he did not see the handball he surely must have seen the offiside. One of the camera shots we see if the ref next to the linesman surrounded by Given & Co so I suppose he did check with him.

[Junior]

I think Henry probably told the ref after the game which is pointless at that stage.

I think that is about right. He certainly didn't tell him at the time so might as well not have bothered unless purely to try and ease his conscience. Id say the only person he did tell at the time (if he even needed telling) was Gallas looking at the sheepish look he had as he headed back to the halfway line.

[jbyrne]

It's hard to give a handball if you didn't see it. As for the Linesman, he should have seen it but never raised his flag. Maybe the angle was not adventagous for him. In any case, even if he did not see the handball he surely must have seen the offiside. One of the camera shots we see if the ref next to the linesman surrounded by Given & Co so I suppose he did check with him.

sky sports showed the view the linesman from the far side had at the time and there is no way he could have missed it. no one will ever convince me that none of the officials saw it. after disallowing a non penalty and an offside goal they just didnt want to make such a call to keep the bigger team out. i'm not saying that they deliberately cheated, just didnt want to make the big call.

it had been speculated at the time that fifa seeded the play off teams and made it clear they wanted the bigger teams to qualify that this attitude would put pressure on the offiials and thats exactly how it panned out

[SkStu]

sky sports showed the view the linesman from the far side had at the time and there is no way he could have missed it. no one will ever convince me that none of the officials saw it. after disallowing a non penalty and an offside goal they just didnt want to make such a call to keep the bigger team out. i'm not saying that they deliberately cheated, just didnt want to make the big call.

it had been speculated at the time that fifa seeded the play off teams and made it clear they wanted the bigger teams to qualify that this attitude would put pressure on the offiials and thats exactly how it panned out

i agree with you jb but the ironic thing to me is surely the "penalty" was a far bigger call for the refereee to have made? I mean if that had been given i think the majority would have said, fair enough-seen em given before-too bad. To have made that call and then completely bag it on Henry's handball is just weird. Doesnt make sense to me.

It still fckin hurts and everyone here (in Canada) wants to fuppin talk about it.

[Emmet7]

I just think for all his good decisions, he was too inexperienced and he has a record (Liverpool champions league) of getting things wrong and favouring bigger teams.

A more experienced ref with a stronger character and an actual sense of fair play would have immediately run to his linesman without awarding the goal and had a consultation. This would also have given the 4th official time to look at a replay and whisper in the linesman's ear. I know it's not supposed to happen but it has happened before and no-one would be the wiser.

He had a clear view of the Anelka dive for the penalty and rightly did not give it. But he had no clear view of the Henry goal and awarded it despite obviously not having a clear view.

But what's done is done. I don't blame the ref that much, his lack of experience cost us. I blame that lying cheating Henry more, who says it was accidental and then changed his story to instinct (ie on purpose) and he told the ref immediately after which it now appears he didn't.

[4tothefloor]

Jebus I love the way you can't or won't answer any of my questions or points

[jebus]

Jebus I love the way you can't or won't answer any of my questions or points

What the one about Liverpool? We have talked about Liverpool in Jackman Park alright and I'm fully sure from that that you don't consider Gerrard to be a diver. Am I wrong?

[Brenny]

Was gigging an Irish pub here in Sweden the weekend and about 30 people came up and asked me what I thought of Martin Hansson. All of them thought he was a pr1#k and were ashamed he was Swedish.
One couple even asked If they should unbook their planned trip to Ireland this weekend.

[Noelys Guitar]

Aaaaah. Like Henry 'wanted' to quit. But won't of course. Who is coaching these two to come out and say exactly the same thing? Whoever it is is not doing a good job.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...france-ireland
Some real self indulgence from this ref. "It was an unlucky situation with big consequences for Ireland. But it wasn't our referee team's fault."