The penalty that Rafa contested was as clear as crystal. The Spurs player did not even look at the ball, he did not touch the ball, and he ‘removed’ our player in a sideways movement in a clear goal opportunity. Obviously Dowd did not have the balls the give a second penalty at White Heart Lane.
I agree with Admin that Rafa’s comments were out of place and may I add, unprofessional. The penalty was sacred, but we played like rubbish!

I’m sure Rafa was well aware of the potential consequences when he made the remarks but thought ‘f**k it’ as I’m sure we all do at times when things go against us. He’s human.
It goes against the Respect campaign and should they fine Rafa and ban him from the touchline for a couple of games then I don’t think anyone will argue, fair cop really.

As for the suggestion by… err.. ‘Anonymous’ that we should introduce a TV ref like they have in cricket and egg-chasing, I’ve never liked the idea.
I agree with FIFA’s argument that it would be wrong to introduce technology that could not be replicated at every level of football.
For Sunday morning pub teams to play each other you need a pitch (cow field will do), 22 players (I use the word ‘players’ in the loosest sense), 2 goals (relatively straight) and some form of netting, 4 corner flags (broom handles and Tesco carrier bags will suffice), 1 ball (possibly more if the pitch is surrounded by gardens, woodland or water) 1 ref (poor b*st*rd) and 2 (totally unbiased) linesmen selected from the small gathering who can’t play, don’t want to play or were not selected.
What we see in the Premiership is a big budget version of that, perfect pitches surrounded by huge stadiums, top quality players, perfectly straight goals with fancy nets, crisp corner flags, ludicrously expensive balls and professional officials.
It may seem like a different world but the basics are all the same. They can add fancy crap like light-up boards to show substitute numbers and added time and they can use a 4th official to hold said light-up board and chack players studs but these don’t make any difference to how the game runs.
Also, if you’re ever bored enough to watch egg-chasing then you will see that going to a video ref DOES often slow the game down (as if it needed help) and kill the momentum of the attacking team.
Finally, I don’t want football to be sanitised in that way. It’s infuriating when you feel robbed by a decision and yes, one decision could mean the difference between nothing and £30m (imagine it stopped you qualifying for the CL) but do you really want to go to work on a Monday, all relaxed and saying calmly, “well, I did think it was a goal for a bit but then the video showed it wasn’t so never mind”? No thanks! The controversy is part of the game and we all love it really!

There is one issue that will always go against the adoption of any form of technology in football. The rules are made to be complied with at all levels of the game. When an official game of football is being played, be it in the PL or at nursery level, the rules have to remain the same. There are many issues in today’s game that need addressing, namely: professional fouls, diving, mistaken identity, ball over the line. Many of these issues have determined wins or losses, promotions or relegation, winning or loosing a title.
If Phil Dowd did not give us the penalty against Spurs it must have been for two reasons: a) he did not have the balls to give a second penalty, or b) his assistant also did not have the balls to make him do it. I mean linesman have the power to get a player sent off today, so giving a penalty should be something within their responsability. The ref is there to apply the rules: if a team gives away 10 clear penalties in a game he has to blow all ten!
Of course there are many aspects that condition the ref’s decisions, but it’s a shame when he is conditioned and not professional enough to apply the rules the way they should be applied.