Scores Rennes en direct
5 December 2010 | à 15h53

Guy Lacombe’s selective memory

Guy Lacombe's selective memory

To excuse the defeat of his team this Saturday, Guy Lacombe reminded the press of Mr Thual’s decision to award (unfairly according to him) a penalty for Nampalys Mendy’s hand in the penalty area, at the 63rd minute.

Reckoning that his players had « played the way they had to » while Rennes had “refused the play”, Lacombe explained that Mr Thual’s decision may well have been influenced by Frédéric Antonetti’s words after the game between Marseille and Rennes (read previously).

«After Marseille, they did their best so they could get a penalty like this one, the former Rennes manager affirmed. It really is a shame to lose on a game incident like this one. We did not deserve to lose tonight”.

Replying to his predecessor on the Rennes bench, Antonetti pointed another “incident” that Lacombe seemed to have forgotten. “You talk about that penalty, but you don’t mention the penalty on Montaño, which is even more obvious”, the manager reminded. A few minutes after the goal, the Rennes striker fell in the penalty area, visibly held by Monaco’s defender Adriano.

«There could be a debate », Antonetti recognises however. Indeed, the rule is leaving a part of personal interpretation to the referee, by stating that a foul has to be whistled if the player “touches the ball with his hand deliberately”. Did Mendy hand the ball deliberately? Mr Thual saw it this way.

As for Guy Lacombe, does he remember asking for a penalty to be awarded in really identical circumstances? In Aprils 2009, during a… Monaco – Rennes, the manager and the whole Rennes staff, Pierre Dréossi included, had criticised Mr Poulat’s decision not to award a penalty for a handball – similar to Mendy’s – by a Monaco player in his penalty area. “The referees had too much influence on that game for us to hope any sort of positive result”, Lacombe complained after his team lost (1-3). A year and a half later, the referee’s decision is different. Lacombe’s words, however, remain the same.