In Pictures: Fulham 1-2 Tottenham

Ollie Irish

19th, October 2010


By Ollie Irish

Continuing our pictorial round-up of the weekend’s Premier League action, we come to Fulham v Tottenham, and – disengages neutral mode – a triffic win for the mighty Lilywhites. It’s also Fulham’s first defeat of the season, after a stack of draws that Mark Hughes seemed way too pleased with.

The main talking point was Tom Huddlestone’s winner, which was disallowed then allowed, after the Hudd himself had done a good job of persuading the officials that when he shot from 25 yards out, team-mate William Gallas wasn’t actively offside. Rafael van der Vaart deserves a special mention for his assist for Tottenham’s opening goal – a tap-in for Roman Pavlyuchenko in the end – as it was so nearly a brilliant, instinctive lobbed goal.

Pics from the Cottage:

Photos: PA

Posted in Fulham, Photos, Tottenham Hotspur

Share this article: Email


  1. tottenblog says:

    huddlestones goal was a goal because a Fulham player clipped it as it went past. So wether gallas was in an offside position, active or not, it doesn’t matter.

  2. dc says:

    With that name, im not entirely sure where your allegiances lie, but i would take a refereeing class if you truly believe that.

    as a certified (but currently nonpracticing) referee myself, i can tell you that a deflection on a shot in any case ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY does not change the offside call.

    i can also tell you that it SHOULD have been called offside because gallas clearly INTENDED to go for the ball, and regardless of whether Shwarzer would have gotten there or not is irrelevant, because the keeper is given the benefit of the doubt in saying that the offside player did, or could have thrown him off by lunging for the ball.

    I really hope none of you get your offside rules from MOTD, because Alan Shearer was flat out wrong in saying that[among everything else he says]. That being said, since Shwarzer didn’t appear to be affected by Gallas, it’s not a big deal in this particular instance.

  3. tom says:

    So clearly offside. I was there, in fact you can see me in footage of the goal I was that close. Not only did Gallas intend to touch the ball, according to mr tight trousers himself Jamie Redknapp during his ‘analysis’ live on sky of blackpool vs man city, he DID touch the ball. That aside (as no-one even mentioned that as a possibility before Jamie’s under reported revelation) the intent is key and it is for this that the goal should have been ruled out. Shearer and Tottenblog appear to be cut from the same cloth, probably a cloth imported from Mongolia, because as to suggest they know the rules when they don’t displays a dazzlingly high level of idiocy.

    Besides this how many times does a ref ever over-rule a lino in that situation? It happened TWICE in this match, yet another key detail that MOTD find oh so convenient to dismiss to perpetuate their desired narrative. Little old Fulham shafted again, brilliant.

    The fact that melty face’s son knew about Gallas touching the ball means obviously king administation himself knew about it too yet he didn’t have the decency to say. I like tottenham and hope you enjoy the ride but prepare yourself for an inevitable Redknapp induced bankrupcy court battle.

Leave a Reply