McDermott slams officials after loss
Replays suggested Fernando Torres, right, was offside when he scored Chelsea's third goal
Reading boss Brian McDermott confirmed he confronted the assistant referee he accused of costing his side a famous result against the European champions after their 4-2 defeat at Chelsea.
McDermott's Barclays Premier League new boys were on course for at least a 2-2 draw in their opening away game at Stamford Bridge when the officials allowed an offside-looking Fernando Torres goal to stand.
Admitting he had made a beeline for the assistant who kept his flag down after the final whistle, a "gutted" McDermott said: "He (Torres) was offside and it was not a good night for him (the assistant). It's not been a good night for me, either."
He added: "I just said to him he'd got it wrong. My gut feeling was that it was offside, and it was clearly offside. Unfortunate for him. He said he'd have a look at it. He can have a look at it. That's life.
"People makes mistakes, and he's made a mistake. It's just a shame it was for such a crucial goal because we would definitely have got a point. I'm really disappointed for the players. We didn't deserve to lose the game. I thought we were going to win it when we got to 70-odd minutes."
Indeed, npower Championship winners Reading held a shock 2-1 lead until the 69th minute, having bounced back from Frank Lampard's penalty through Pavel Pogrebnyak and Danny Guthrie's first goals for the club. The latter came courtesy of a Petr Cech howler but it was not only the Chelsea goalkeeper and officials who messed up.
Reading keeper Adam Federici had a nightmare of his own for the second time in five days to gift Gary Cahill an equaliser.
Chelsea boss Roberto Di Matteo said he had yet to see Torres' goal, which also allowed Branislav Ivanovic to kill off Reading on the break.
"I looked at the linesman straight away and he gave it straight away, so I can't comment," said Di Matteo, who was pleased to see his side go top of the Premier League for the first time since November 2010.
He said: "We are very pleased with six points after two games. I was very happy with the team performance for long periods of the game. We lost a bit our composure after Reading scored the equaliser and second goal, but we'd started off very well, with some great football, and finished off very strongly."
related stories on msn
on the tv highlights Mcdermott talked quite calmly and matter of fact about the goal being offside, it was a mistake, and had possibly cost them 3 points. He didn't shout or make any insults about the linesman, just said there had been a mistake. Possibly he had acted more loudly and aggressively to the linesman on the pitch.
Just making sure this sensation headline do not lead to FA investigation and touchline ban, for what I heard as reasonable post match review, as opposed to a Fergie rant which goes unpunished. Well Done Reading- keep playing good style of football and you'll be alright.
BTW- with offside is it measured as 'any part of the body' being offside or does it have to be 'feet'? because Torres' body was leaning forward and offiside but I thought his feet were level?
I just new that some decisions would be missed when I saw who the REF was. Sorry, but Mr. Mason was his usual useless self again at The Bridge. Surprised he gave a penalty as he usually give absolutely nothing.
It's time for officials to cross polinate across Europe. With English and overseas officials sharing dities in different leagues within Europe. That's the only way that we will eventually achieve consistency.
When English teams go to Eurpoean countries to play, they often get penalized for things that they would get away with at home. When foriegn players come to England they can't understand why they don't get a lot of decisions they would get in other leagues.
As for offside the rule states that there must be clear daylight between the two players.
The rule also needs to revert to it's old interpretation. This phasing rubbish only adds to the confusion.
An attacker is still interfering with play in my book if he's offside in the first phase and then given onside in the second phase, simply because the defender has to take him into consideration.
W'eve seen plenty of incidencies of attackers standing offside at free kicks to obcstruct the view of goal keepers, then a goal being allowed because they have not touched the ball.
It would also seem that only certain teams are allowed to take quick free kicks (Arsenal Spring to Mind) and others get theirs pulled back. I think in the interest of fairness everything should happen on the instruction of the referees whistle. Not a player making a split second deal with the referee.
Does this fat muppet, with his favourite food store sponsoring his team, and no doubt himself. really think Reading would have won or even drawn this game regardless of the officials decision for one goal, Chelsea beat Reading by two goals, so fat boy have your poxy goal back, you still lost 3-2.
McDonadls are looking for a team, and in your case a fat bloke to sponsor, so get you skates on.
FOOD READY !!!!
if football had rugby technology you would also have seen Chelsea reach the 2009 CL final.
"IF" is the biggest word in the English language
Christopher Williams, or is it Chris Burford
You are turning out to be a right idiot, and not afraid to show it either! How do you know Reading would have won? That is impossible for anyone to say, not to mention highly unlikely.
The ref bribed because a debatable goal was allowed to stand? What planet are you on?? Are you going to claim this every time a dodgy decision is made or only when it benefits Chelsea? No prizes for guessing the answer to that.
Had a silly, tipical reply from Sean a Man U. fan, who states so - called facts regards when Man U. are or were tops.
Whatever this has to do with preferential treatment 'they had and have got from Refs and FA alike will of course baffle every one.... Unless of course he is refering to how and when they were and got top WAS with the bias and unfair treatment given them and points that Man U didn't deserve or were entitled to. Ah sean now I see where you are coming from. Of course everyone else knows that points ngiven by these governing bodies DO and DID mean that is why so very often they were Top!