Nani goal was morally wrong

That Nani goal can't be right, can it?

If you didn't see it, I'll try and describe what happened.

Nani was running towards the Spurs goal just on the angle of the six-yard box. In a challenge by a defender, he went down. No penalty was given, but somewhat petulantly, he reached out and rolled the ball towards himself with his hand. Nani then got up, claiming that he was fouled. Spurs keeper Gomes retrieved the ball, defenders moved upfield, and Gomes threw the ball forward with backspin about ten yards ahead of the place where the handball took place, as if to take a free-kick. But the free-kick for handball had never been given.

As Gomes retreated to take the kick (by the way, waving his hands as if asking his defenders to be available for a short one - they weren't interested), Nani realised that the whistle had never gone. Looking round, wondering, he mentally shrugged and poked the ball goalwards and into the net.

Referee Mark Clattenberg gave the goal, but then did go and talk to the assistant referee, who obviously said that there had been a handball. But Mr Clattenberg had played an advantage. It was up to Spurs (Gomes) to play the ball out without stoppage. That he failed to do so was, according Mr Clattenberg, his own fault. The goal was allowed to stand.

By the letter of the law, I guess the referee was right. But morally, the outcome was wrong. Nani handled the ball. A free-kick should have been given. After Nani had stabbed the ball into the net, Mr Clattenberg should have retrospectively given the free-kick for handball. Nani could hardly have complained – he blatantly handballed it (on purpose actually, so he might have been booked!).

None of this probably affected the result. Manchester United were already 1-0 up and won 2-0.

But this was morally wrong.