Swings and roundabouts......

[Madmonks]

1966...the ball doesn't cross the line...goal given, the ref and linesman's decision is enough for every England fan.
2010...the ball crosses the line...goal not given, the ref and the linesman's decision is not enough, England fans call for compulsory video replays...will England give back the cup from '66 if retrospective evidence proves the officials were wrong in BOTH games? Live with it!

[joggerjayne]

You're right.

We live with it.

Officials make mistakes, sometimes.

[Madmonks]

thanks jayne

[Canary42]

The difference is that in 1966 the teams were well matched, and it was a shame one side had to lose. Yesterday's game was very one-sided and it would have been a shame if England had won.

[flip_flop]

The technology wan't available in 1966 - so much so that almost 50 years down the line there is still some doubt.

There could be no doubt about yesterday's goal - it was a clear couple of feet over the line.

The technology today is available - in fact, all you needed yesterday was for the ref to ask the official watching it on TV whether it was a goal - this would've taken seconds.

The only two people in the stadium yesterday who didn't see that it was clearly a goal were the ref and the linesman.

Germany were the better team, but the goal making it 2-2 could have changed the whole pace, tempo and outcome of the match. These tournaments are too important not to have technology for something as fundamental as whether the ball crosses the line or not.

Unfortunately Canary, there are many instances where the better team loses.

I can think of two straight away - Germany v England in the 1990 World Cup and Germany v England in the 1996 Euros.

[Madmonks]

Flipflop, anyone who saw the game from '66 could see there was no doubt, the whole ball did not cross the line, no goal was scored. That could have altered the result as well, but it went in favour of England that time so no complaints there then? The technology exists but we would not be having these entertaining exchanges if it gets used. Do you want to end up discussing the weather, Coronation St. or, God forbid, Eastenders?

[cc1]

The difference is that in '66 it's impossible to tell if it was the wrong decision and don't quote technology, it can be proved to be in and out, depending on who's doing the computer graphics and who's paying them. It's a bit like who shot JFK, yer pays yer money and yer gets the "right" outcome.
Yesterday the ball was clearly, irrefutably over the line, I could have fitted the Flymo in there.
The "referee" has a history of poor decisions and doubtful morality, even according to his own FA, why on earth was he there at all? Will he take any further part and will he remain on the FA lists?

[flip_flop]

But the point, madmonks, is that the ball on Sunday was very clearly over the line by some considerable distance.

cc1 is right - it depends on who you talk to or who does the graphics to 'prove' the ball was or wasn't over the line in 66. Some say it was some say it wasn't.

This 'was it/wasn't it' debate simply could not happen for Sunday's goal.

[Madmonks]

The linesman didn't see it cross the line and neither did his labrador!
If technology is to be used then lets hear it for the Irish and their complaint about the 'Hand of Frog'.

[Madmonks]

http://bet72.com/news...as-not-over-the-line/