They have to score twice.Well, from what we saw of the first leg games, I would say Schalke have a better chance of overturning one goal, than United had overturning two in Paris
Mark Clattenburg has his say:
“Let's be clear, referee Damir Skomina applied the laws as UEFA wish them to be in awarding Manchester United their late penalty in Paris.
But PSG will be furious, and I understand why. This, for me, should not have been a penalty as Presnel Kimpembe did not deliberately handle the ball.
This would never be given as a penalty in the Premier League, but it was given in the Champions League because of UEFA's recent instruction to referees, which came about after Manchester City conceded a similar one at Schalke last month.
+5
The referee made the right call by awarding a penalty following Presnel Kimpembe's handball
+5
The ref simply applied the laws as UEFA wish them to be but for me it shouldn't have been a penalty.
They want referees to penalise handballs when the arm is out and in a non-natural position. In that respect the official has been consistent.
However, he watched a slow-motion replay of the incident, and when it comes to handball it always looks worse slowed down.
I would always want to watch a handball claim in a real-time replay. Do that here and it's never a penalty as the player turned away and tried to withdraw his arm away from the ball”
I thought The ball hit Sterling's back.If it’s a new directive and it’s going to be applied consistently then I’ve no real issue with it, and let’s be honest we’d all be screaming for a pen if it was us.
However, Clattenburg has a some neck saying what he did in that last paragraph as he was the one who awarded a penalty against Sterling vs Spurs 3 seasons ago for the exact same thing. In fact, I’m still not sure whether it even hit Sterling on his hand or arm or whether it was in the area while that one last night clearly did and was clearly in the 18 yard box.
From what I recall of the Sterling incident certainly not on the arm and most probably not in the boxIf it’s a new directive and it’s going to be applied consistently then I’ve no real issue with it, and let’s be honest we’d all be screaming for a pen if it was us.
However, Clattenburg has a some neck saying what he did in that last paragraph as he was the one who awarded a penalty against Sterling vs Spurs 3 seasons ago for the exact same thing. In fact, I’m still not sure whether it even hit Sterling on his hand or arm or whether it was in the area while that one last night clearly did and was clearly in the 18 yard box.
You do realise those decisions were given to Real Madrid and Liverpool respectively, don't youJuventus ( A European heavyweight) and a darling club, conceded a 90th minute penalty that knocked them out of the UCL last year. Milan conceded a nothing penalty in the 2005 UCL final.
If there's cheating or an agenda, it would exist regardless of VAR. If these corrupt officials don't want to give decisions against darling clubs, then they'd refuse to do so, with or without VAR.
Take your point, but being consistent doesn't make it right. Just more wrong decisions.If it’s a new directive and it’s going to be applied consistently then I’ve no real issue with it, and let’s be honest we’d all be screaming for a pen if it was us.
However, Clattenburg has some neck saying what he did in that last paragraph as he was the one who awarded a penalty against Sterling vs Spurs 3 seasons ago for the exact same thing. In fact, I’m still not sure whether it even hit Sterling on his hand or arm or whether it was in the area while that one last night clearly did and was clearly in the 18 yard box.