Added: 4 years ago
From: flyer1111
Views: 107,938
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (1,447)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • 1:17 foot marginally touches the line

  • I'm english and no try, his toes (literally his toes) scrape the line before coming up, the ref should have looked at the grass and seen the mark where his boot scraped across the line...however I remember the ref having a word with pieterson (or however you spell it) for playing the 9 illegally (hence the penalty) and so should have at least awarded a yellow card if not a penalty try for a try saving infringement...

  • Tait was amazing! We need more players like him who can make a break like Tht!

  • Wow that's a try lol

  • The angle from 1:12 shows it to be a try, although that alone wouldn't have won England the WC. Still, 9-8 with 40 mins to play would have been interesting.

  • Pause it on 1:17 - make up ur mind

  • @JayEmAreProductions You sir, are obviously blind, stop it RIGHT at 2:53 and you will see his foot on the line. His foot is lifted yes, but lifted OFF OF THE LINE = NO TRY. BOKKKKKKKAAAAAAAA!!!!!!

  • @jockofthebush That's not actually the rule unless he was touching the ground at the level of the line or outside of it

  • Try.

    

  • 1:38 to 1:40 shows clearly its not a try, you can see the mark left by his foot on the line

  • Ref still sour from 4 years earlier

  • WANKER! REF! 

  • Pause at 2:54 its a try, all im gonna say is wilkinson would have missed the conversion anyway!

  • I remember watching this 4 years ago screaming at the television that it was a Try lol unfortunately watching this I have to agree with the TMO, his toe hits the line before he lifts it and before the ball is grounded

  • @deytora I'm really not sure that it did. Doesn't matter, we mightn't have won the game anyway, the referee's call stands and we lost and deserved to and we were poor at 2011 RWC. Hopefully we'll be better next time

  • Gomersal should have dummied and gone over...he was on the line and everyone was looking to the overlap on the left...

  • God, English commentators are so biased towards England.

    Can't commentate fairly.

  • @ashfi1994 probs coz it was a try?

  • It is UNBELIEVABLY close, but as much as I HATE to say it, it was the right call, his toes are touching the line JUST before he raises his foot, no try. :(

  • try.

    

  • Awesome Matthew Tait!!!!!!!!!

  • The commentators seem to have briefly taken leave of their senses when claiming it's a try (understandable during a WC final). They're concentrating on the fact that Cueto's foot was in the air when he grounds the ball, forgetting the fact that his toe clearly touches the line before he raises the foot! Watch 2:52 - 2:53 and you can see it.

  • It took me 4 years to look at this again and it is so a try!

  • It could have gone either way depending on how u see it but i agree 100% with the commentators, DEFINITELY A TRY.

  • fuck off all you cunts who think its a try.

    the foot goes out before it hits the line.

    england didnt deserve to be in the final they played like fucking twats and hope they all die of cancer.

  • @101vonny little bit disgusting

  • Makes me sick every time i see it. The foot is heading towards the line but his foot is raised before it hits the line and the ball is down. Clear try

  • the ENGLISH commentators got it wrong. its clearly a no try as you can see the tip of his boot hit the paint before the ball goes down. its totally obvious

  • I am an England fan and you can just see the toes touching the floor (at about 1:18) - it's just a shame that the commentators were saying "try!", so I was angered at the time. But, looking back on it, you can tell that they are wrong.

    I also heard that a later independent investigation determined that the final decision by the referee was correct. In any case, South Africa were the better side, not just on the night, but throughout the tournament and were deserving winners.

  • @Sandheaver The foot was inside the field of play , then the ball is touched down it was a try and if you look at 1:18 it confirms the fact. And it was said after that it was a try and that they got it wrong!

  • Every time I look at this, I come up with a different decision.

    Therefore in my opinion it shouldn't have been given, or perhaps it should have been.

    Anyway 'spilt milk'.

    As for the Aussies who call the English whingers- Pot calling the kettle black.

    Some of you could give Arsene Wenger a run for his money!

  • whats the point of video if the referee makes mistake! Try, of course, the foot was above the line

  • we was gona lose anyways got outplayed but if this was last minute oh shit i wud of..i wud of..done nufin..:(

  • TRY.

  • Are you guys stupid?? Can't you see his toes were in touch before he lifted his leg? Jesus christ of course it wasn't a try

  • @yamebebe i know aye...the commentator is a dumb its clearly out...what about the effort from the south african? nobody thinks of that!

  • You're wrong it is a try watch the angle! If we'd got that it would've spurred us on to get more and not get cheated out of another world cup victory!

  • shit, there is still english fans whining about it 4 years after!!?

    it was very short, it is cruel but it touched the line, very slightly, but it did

    i understand the pain but don't be bitter. not australian plot here

  • @zisssssou how can you blame them for being pissed off they were robbed of two consecutive world cup titles?

  • This was a crappy call, and anyone who knows anything about the sport knows.

    There's no excuse for the video ref not to give that a try. They see exactly what we see here, and we clearly see a fair try that should have been awarded.

    I hate loosing in general, but seeing justice not being served like this, really does take the love of the game out slightly. I've always, and will continue to, despise referee's.

  • is stuart dickenson the rugby unions version of steve ganson can anyone tell me

  • another example of stuart dickinson's incompetence

  • Clearly a try u blind or something?

  • Pause the video at 1.17. Foot in touch before ball is grounded. No try, right call by TMO. Its a no brainer really

  • @mcdb06 there's nothing conclusive to say the try couldn't be awarded therefore wrong decision... ur wrong

  • @brookesyful Yes there is. 1.16-1.17. Foot in touch before ball is grounded. Clearly not a try. How is this still up for debate???

  • @mcdb06 u cant be sure

  • @brookesyful Yes u can. Foot is in touch

  • @mcdb06 It's obviously not a no-brainer you div or else they wouldn't have spent ages analysing it before coming to a decision.

  • @adamclark1972uk It was a close call but the foot was clearly in touch. The fact that people still argue that it was a try is beyond me. There have been loads of controversial moments in rugby but this certainly wasnt one of them. Right call

  • @mcdb06 Actually it's almost impossible to be sure whether the foot was in touch or not. The foot seems to lift just before reaching the chalk. You cannot say it was "clearly in touch". If it was so clear, it wouldn't have taken so long for the video judge to decide. The best you can say is that is was a very close call.

  • @adamclark1972uk It's clear to see when u pause the video at 1.16-1.17. The foot hits the line before raising. The TMO was under huge pressure but kept his nerve and made the right call

  • @mcdb06 Well, by 1:17 the foot is already in the air, with a clear gap showing. The foot is already rising at 1:15, in fact.

  • @adamclark1972uk Disagree completely. It's not rising at 1.15 its slididng on the ground. Slides onto line at 1.16-1.17 and then rises

  • @mcdb06 If you look you will see that the heel of the foot starts to rise at 1:15. You cannot say with certainty whether any part of the foot is still touching the ground when it slides over the line.

  • @adamclark1972uk You can see that his toe is touching the line at 1.16-1.17.

  • @adamclark1972uk The toe is touching the line at 1.16-1.17

  • Australian TMO..... revenge for the 03??? jk of course let's go England lets win it 3 time in a roll

  • i think the foot kisses the line before it's hoisted into the air, such a close call but probably the correct decision which is amazing under so much pressure to make a call

  • this is a great example of the bad luck/decisions England get in world cups in almost every sport :/

  • This is a case of the TMO answering the wrong question. The ref asked him, "Is there any reason that I can not give a try?" This means he needs conclusive evidence to rule out the try - it was 50/50 so he should have awarded it. If the question was, "Is there any reason that I can allow the try?" Then he would have been right to disallow it. On the basis of the game I think SA would have won the game but it would have been closer, BTW I am an England fan! Roll on 2011 and 3 finals in a row!

  • I'm an Aussie, and I f(kken hate England... but that was a TRY!

  • It was a try and I was gutted at the decision back then, but also SA did deserve to win so I fully respect their victory.

  • 01:16 its still touching the grass i think.

  • If it's inconclusive, or there's an element of doubt, which I believe there is, surely you should go with the original decision the referee makes - rather like in cricket with the lbw rule?

  • Im English, if you look at it at 02:52, you can see Cueto's foot only just hits the line before he brings it up, so they got it right

  • @woodywoody07

    sadly its true...but its fractional the difference...should have been given anway as a penalty try...due to slowing it down by SA at the breakdown///

  • Ive just watched this try over and over and over... the best shot is from ground level at the rear. It is NOT a try. The players foot touches the line and then lifts up. However if you look at his upper body at the exact moment you can see the players arms/ball still in the air. As soon as a the players foot TOUCHES the line, the ball is out of play

  • Couldn't believe this wasn't given. If the try had been given, as it should have been, the entire momentum of the game would have changed. England were the real winners of Rugby World Cup 2007.

  • @Snookbone : Sorry snookbone, that really was not a try and we were not the real winners of the world cup. Give the winners the credit that they really did earn.

  • @rebeccajd3 it was a try, all the way a privte and neutral company looked at it afterwards and confermed that! but evon if we had one the match because of that try, which we probably wouldnt have, we wouldnt have deserved it, for that tourniment south africa deserved it, just as england deserved 2nd

  • @rebeccajd3 The evidence is there, it was a try, and while England may have eventually lost by more than 7, you have to consider momentum, which you understand if you have played this sport. England would have had the momentum right up till the end of the game and won, and considering their gutsy performances in the previous games, were the only team that deserved to win. At any rate I will never give any plaudits to the dirtiest team in World Rugby, who should never be allowed to play anyway.

  • @Snookbone Ok Snookbone, if you say so.. hahaha

  • it's NOT a try and im english, stuart barnes is wrong the left leg didnt go up just at the right moment, it touched the line, then went up. look for yourself

  • I'm still not sure, but it looked like a try. Rolland should have given a penalty try anyway, there is no way Berger didn't do it to stop a try

  • dont think iv watched this since it happened, oh my god i cant believe he didnt give this

  • blind fool! how can this be illegal!! corrupted referees

  • at 1:46, his foot is on the line. No try. How hard can it be?

  • TRY for ever

  • If his foot touches the line it's OUT. IT DOES TOUCH THE LINE....... OUT!!!!!!!!

  • Even though Mark Cueto didn't score it. It should have been a penalty try as South Africa deliberately tried to kill the ball

  • Im irish and i say try .

  • I think its a try, but it could have went either way. England weren't good enough to win that year anyway so who cares

  • tbf why didn't England attack the open side?!

  • bloody try

  • Yup. His foot just grazes the touchline before he lifts it. He is in touch but only just so no try.

  • @Akseliglooo3 ......yeh . correct. i tink de commentators bias got de better of him there. he dint want to believe he clipped de line

  • @123445706 To be fair it is a very close call. I don't blame him for believing it was a try. What annoys me is English fans blaming the Australian TMO and calling him biased.

  • TMO DISSION PENDING......................T­RY

  • You still would have lost.

  • theres no way thats a try haha

    freeze frame at 1:16 and its easy to tell

  • Absoloute F***ing TRY!!!!!!

  • Try!

    

  • TRY TRY TRY TRY TRY TRY TRY TRY TRY TRY

  • TRY

  • what a run from mathew tait and it was a trie

  • I think that it wasnt a try because his foot was not quite lifted in time but thats my opinion after replaying over and over again.

  • Suck shit England you faggots.

  • @sydneymassive Sorry about the last 2 world cups.... convict

  • @tomi1990 Convict and proud. Enjoying the shit weather you pasty little turd?

  • @tomi1990 I live in Hong Kong... expat my convict cousin. Now go worship your Ginger Female PM

  • I haven't heard anyone mention the fact that the referee gave a penalty and not a line out after the try was disallowed. I assume this was for SA deliberately trying to kill the ball when Mathew Tait was tackled. This obviously prevented a try being scored and the referee should have no other option than to give a penalty try if it's not a line out.

  • @travellingmansk Great point...well spotted....although the penalty award was also correct if he felt a try was not certain......but I agree with you Penalty Try!!!!

  • Comment removed

  • That should have been a try and its ridiculous that the Aussie shit commentator did not award it..we would have won nevertheless but it really took away from our victory. Not happy that this wasn't awarded, I speak for all South Africans when i say we love rugby for being rugby not just for winning, which is why great efforts like this should be rewarded justly...bad call, very bad call

  • @TheSpringbok23 Well said springbok.....good sport....and your right you would have won the match anyway quite simply because you were the better team on the day....regards from England

  • @TheSpringbok23 Your a tank.

  • @TheSpringbok23 Shocking comment there

    

  • @TheSpringbok23 ...but it's blatantly obvious it wasn't? check at 57secs? christ you people do have either shit sight or shit brains.. it was clearly a no try?!

  • @TheSpringbok23 what? are you serious? his foot touched the line, its clear as daylight that it was the right call. Are you blind? lol

  • Help! Some guy with the partial handle "Churchill" posted Josh Lewsey's try against France in the RWC 2007. I think he or YT took it off. Can anyone else post it?

  • that was a try

  • commentators just say it was a try becoz they from England hahaah

  • Clear no-try, the view from behind at 1.16 clearly shows it rising from the ground after the line. great decision by TMO.

  • And Mike Cat Smiling, you needed a South African in the team to try a beat us.

  • Not only was his foot out but also his knee, before the ball was placed. The English must be blind, we don't like it either but accept at least 3 refs decisions.

  • @TheNo1dutchman Why is the English such soar losers, always complaining. The latest is the soccer world cup that they didn't get, now everybody is corrupt.In 2007 we beat England 4 times so tell me who deserves to be the world champions.

  • @EPIC1CROTCH his foot wasn't

  • Was a try, clearly you can see his foot 'JUST' manages to lift up.

  • @MrScrototem Sorry about that. In this years world cup we'll beat you guys more convincingly so that you guys can have NO excuses;)

  • It's very clear that it's not a try.

  • The try that never was.....................

  • from an english point of view, it's a try

    from a neutral, there is a slight boot touch on the line

    harsh, but that's the rule

    for rugby in general, woul u prefer to see england winning in the most ugly way (vs france and australia) or south africa which was the most complete team of this rwc with argentina, france and AB.

    springboks dominiated the final and deserved the victory, end of the story

  • stupid prick! that was a try!

  • That was a try, the ball never went into touch, and that's what the ref and tmo said.

  • Penalty 15 - 6 SA / try+conversion 15 - 10 SA

  • 2:52

  • clear try

  • clear tru

  • 3:15...English royalty swears...

  • your all gay geeks

  • Try - definitely!!

  • Try all the way

    

  • That was a try,no shock the aussie went against us.First time I have watched this since I was at the game!It hurts.

  • TRY

    

  • TRY

  • his toe clearly brushes the line!!!nd im nuetral

  • The grass on which the line is painted constitutes where the line ends, the end of his boot came off the grass in the middle of the white painted line, you have to say no try

  • Vid Ref remembers 2003 and the result is not too far from what you'd expect from a sour grapes lsoer.

  • pause at exactly 1:48 and u'll see what i mean :(

  • robbed.

  • Should of been given. Benefit of the doubt should be given. We're talking millimetres here, and an event so quick it's intangible to the human eye in real speed. Video evidence was meant to improve the game. The linesman was ONTOP of the try, there was no need to go to video either.

  • @ben0wn4g3 absolutely, the game is about scoring tries. Like offside decisions in football, the benefit of the doubt should be given to the attacking team. 

  • @ben0wn4g3 of course there was a need, his foot grazes the line meaning he's out. it may be pain full to watch but it was the right call, you can't give the benefit of the doubt in such huge matches...it has to be clear

  • but it wasnt a try!

  • Who's that fucking royal wanker in the top right corner at 3:13? The kid in grey..

  • @rockingrugger that kid is a faggot haha i guess you cant get used to royalty!! hahah

  • @langa209 Hahaha, true. I'm cool with the rest of them, but who the hell is he?

  • The credit here should go to Matthew Tait who nearly beat the worlds best ever defence by himself and to the south african squad for making the tackles. The try wasn't a try and england should really have taken it right.

  • @EPIC1CROTCH hopefully we will get redemption and win the next world cup :) but no doubt we will stuff the six nations

  • @SneakyNinjaTyler Are we stuffing the 6 nations so far?

  • @rockingrugger Depends on who we are :P England YES!!!!!!!

  • @SneakyNinjaTyler And there are 15 rotund (mostly) irish blokes between us and a GRAAAAAAND SLAAAAAM :)

  • @rockingrugger We'll do it im sure :) got some faith in me :)

  • @SneakyNinjaTyler Oh dear... didn't quite get there, did we? Those 15 fat irish blokes were a bit too much for us, weren't they.. So disappointing!

  • @rockingrugger I know but ohwell we will get the world cup i still believe :D

  • @SneakyNinjaTyler At least we won't have the added pressure of going there as favourites :)

  • @rockingrugger We will still be the ones to beat tho :)

  • Comment removed

  • @EPIC1CROTCH @ChristophskiSav is right his left foot JUST touched the line only just tho so it was a close call so i think it went the right way, i was going mad when it was given as no try at the time but then saw the replays and it was right in my opinion his foot is taken out of play

  • @EPIC1CROTCH

    Maybe but it seems really weird that it was in the exact position where the England players boot touches the whitewash. And why would a touch judge move his foot across the whitewash at that angle? The ball was clearly still in the air when he touches the line.

  • So close - I think he lifts his leg in the air before it crosses the touchline and then touches the ball down before his knee hits but his boot could have touched the line before he lifted it and the benefit of the doubt goes to the defence so the right decision. (IMO)

  • @EPIC1CROTCH

    It wasn't, unfortunately it touched the line, and so no try.

    If I remember rightly later on they showed the line and there was a mark on it which could only have come from his boot. I really wish it was a try, I do, but they got it right this time.

  • As an England fan I said it while I was watching it as it was happening, and I'll say it again now, that definitely was NOT a try. Correct decision, unfortunately.

  • Try every day of the week

  • Fuckkkkkkkk dw we still got this world cup but we need to bring our best players. Wilkinson, sackey, danny cif. who cares if there not playing in england. I think the England boss is a prick if he dont select them.

  • its 2011 and if england gets to the finals again we will make up for it :)

  • in my opinion it wasnt try look at 1.16

  • in my opinion it wasnt try

  • why do people STILL go on about this? 1:15 is enough for me.

    you're almost 4 years behind the time still going on about this disallowed try, shut up