Real Madrid booked their place in the Champions League final on Wednesday night after they managed to overcome local rivals Atletico Madrid 4-2 on aggregate.
Credit to Atletico, though, who after trailing 3-0 from the first leg looked like they were a team possessed in the opening 16 minutes.
Playing the last ever European game at the Vincete Calderon stadium, the home side took a 2-0 lead through Saul Niguez and Antoine Griezmann that had Real on the ropes.
Article continues below
The atmosphere in the stadium was reaching a fever pitch and it seemed like Atletico might 'do a Barcelona' and pull off an improbable comeback.
However, Isco's tap-in just before half time gave Real a crucial away goal and all but ended Atletico's dreams.
Article continues below
But, should they have even been in the game at that point?
Footage of Griezmann's penalty - which Keylor Navas got a hand to and almost saved - is doing the rounds on Twitter and many users believe that the goal should not have stood?
Why? Take a look for yourself below:
As you can see by the slow motion, zoomed in replay, it appears that the French forward does indeed hit the ball twice before reaching the goal as he attempts to strike with his favoured left, but his right foot slips and deflects the contact.
Most fans will know the set piece taker can not touch the ball for a second time after the initial first touch. This led to a lot of people on Twitter saying the goal should have been disallowed, but there were counters to that argument.
Many believe that if it is not done intentionally then the goal can still stand. Case and point would be Bolo Zenden's penalty in Middlesbrough's 2004 League Cup final victory over Bolton Wanderers.
The Dutchman did exactly the same thing when he scored in the final, but as The Guardian reported: "The double contact by Zenden should have invalidated the penalty and seen the award of an indirect free-kick to Bolton. Remarkably sharp eyesight would have been required to discern with confidence what had happened and Riley's failure to react is understandable."
So, it would appear the rules, according to The Guardian, would state that Griezmann's effort should not have stood.
But, without video technology, it's tough to expect a referee to catch that on his own accord. It took several replays and different angles to get a clear picture of Griezmann's after all!
What do YOU think? Should Griezmann's goal have stood? let us know in the comments below.
Do YOU want to write for GiveMeSport? Get started today by signing-up and submitting an article HERE: http://gms.to/writeforgms