Monbon

Great info: I didn't know that. Thanks_ I always admired Caldwell.

Go Brazil!

Yep, Macca, I understand all that. Souness and another Brit commentator did, howeve,r point out that to the naked eye the ball was out and called so. He then asked the simple question of why it took the VAR dudes so long to 'manufacture' their Euclid derived 'explanations'. As I have intimated, much of life is in the eyes of the beholder...

I come from the same place, way out west, near your hangout. Believe me, it wasn't fun being a migrant in 1956... And I vividly recall my dad being shocked at the carload exodus to the Derrimut on pay day when the 'Shouts' were long and aplenty. My dad went once and after his first beer he was ready to go back to work...

Yep: once again, context is everything. And, yes, he was a magnificent advocate for post war immigration, however, the context is called The White Australia Policy, which existed until very recently in our history.

I think it's all about contexts and of course it's true that there is no need to stereotype Aussies as beer gluggers and no more, but, for example, in my father's context, the question asked of him was a stereotypical Aussie attitude in the area I was brought up in, and if I counted the number of times I was called a reffo and told to go home, if you see what I mean....And, I assure you, to be a 'wog' in the 50's and 60's was no fun, nor was it fun to be among the first boatload of Vietnamese, and it wasn't all that long ago that Mister Dutton was telling Australians that it was unsafe to walk the streets of Melbourne because of African gangs, nor was it all that long ago that Calwell said, 'Two Wongs don't make a white'. That's the context...

No. Please enlighten me...I mean that in a friendly way.

Well said, Durango. Racial prejudice is unfortunately just one aspect of human nature. No amount of common sense or education will ever change people who are prejudiced, mainly because it has been drummed into them since they became conscious. Stupid people like John from Epping should be ignored and, in the end, neither Lyon or Watson will ever change the warped minds of the Johns. I've also learnt that arguing with prejudiced people is futile, as is attempting to get them to see the light. Remember, that until Copernicus came along, the Western world believed the earth is flat. Some of them still do. ( I also suffered racial prejudice at school, and I remember my father answering a question from one of his Aussie Co-workers thus: How come you new Australians can afford a house when you've only been in this country two years? My father answered, Because I know the difference between a bank and a pub. Our first home was built by a Jewish builder in 1958: he and my dad made a great team.)

Look at the photo: it did. You and others have been blinded by 'science', Geometry indeed! There is grass between the ball and the line: where on earth can a ball's shadow or such be deemed part of the 'whole ball'.

The photo I posted shows the ball clearly over the line. Whenever the connection was made is irrelevant: the ball is OVER THE LINE.

Also, Hardtack, I'm not implying the Japanese cheated: Var certainly did and the fact that the replays were put into Amnesia territory only adds more smoke to the fire.

And what they showed us was hocus pocus bulldust about Geometry. That was many hours later, presumably after Doctor Shot and Euclid had been consulted. I can clearly see with me own 4 eyes dat there is grass between the ball and the line: Ah, I know, that was the doctored shot. I guess the saying you can fool most of the people most of the time is probably true. Most salient, is the point Souness and Neville make, that the protocol of screening the replay straight away was conveniently put into the amnesia corner.

Anyhow, since when has any footballer NOT looked at the ball and the line, but I'm going to take the shot anyway - you heard of Wayne Harmes? Asked about the lack of replays shown by FIFA, Walton said: "Well that is very peculiar, because at the start of this tournament, for offside decisions it was that those decisions would be shown automatically to the stadium so the people in the stadium could see it, that technology is still available for the people in the stadium. "I’m at a miss as to why they haven’t showed it yet. They’ve got their reasons and only time will tell. I do think the evidence will appear sooner or later whether that ball hasn’t crossed the line." Whilst Walton is confident evidence will eventually be made public, a baffled Souness said: 'We’re getting close to an hour since the incident. The longer they don’t come up with a picture, that last bit would show me that ball is out of play. Initial pictures appeared to show the ball had crossed the line© PA "The longer we don't see that picture which shows conclusively that it's not gone out of play, you’d think there’s something untoward going on. It has to be. "There’s 80 million Germans, right now, going mad that shows that ball didn’t go out of play. I think every TV studio, pundit, people doing your job [presenting] is waiting, why, nearly an hour later are they not showing it?" He added: 'This is not subjective, this is a black and white situation. Show us the pictures." Gary Neville, meanwhile, felt the incident marked a wider problem with communication over decisions at this World Cup. He stated: "From the very first day of this tournament, I don’t think we've been able to communicate big decisions properly to fans at home and even at us, even how decision are being overturned. Footage seen by VAR to overturn the decision was not shown during or immediately after the match© AFP via Getty Images "The goal was disallowed and seen something we haven’t seen in this studio, around the world, we can’t get the angle of what VAR have seen." Souness continued: "Every television studio, every pundit has an interest in this World Cup will be wanting to see the picture where at the end where this happened. In real time, as it happened, the ball went out, the pictures we’ve seen shown the ball went out. "Why aren’t FIFA showing us something which is so controversial that it just cost the Germans dearly. Why are they not showing it to us? This is enormous, 45 minutes later, why aren’t they showing it? Clear it up for us, please."

You can do anything with 'shots'. There are also 'shots' which clearly show a gap between the ball and the line. It is all in the eyes of the beholder: like I say, there were many Pommie commentators - Souness one of them - who called this spade a spade, as regrettable as the hand of god and the infamous 1966 English/German farce. In fact Souness puts them all on the same level.

Interesting that nobody has mentioned the goal from a ball on the other side of the line gifted by VAR to Japan. They are invoking geometry and all kinds of total bunkum to justify what is blatant cheating: even Pommie commentators are jumping up and down.

Or his mum will move to Perth.

Won't argue with that: Ilove the guy, I wish him all the best...

I note the face palm from Lord Nev: don't get me wrong, it's not a put down, I know someone who knows him, he's a great lad, but he didn't manage to hold on to his marking opportunities. That's an unfortunate fact which would be difficult to argue with. I wish him all the best, but I can't see that aspect of his game improving. Then again, and this is something I'm not privy to, Sam was possibly pulling down the same one-grabbers when he was at Jefferson's stage and I'm aware that because of the sheer pressure AFL games applied in AFL football, Jefferson's marking capacity will be tested. Peace, brother.

Unlike some recent Demon Forwards - I emphasize 'some', I am referring to a recent defector who I saw kick a swag against Box Hill, who marked 3 in 20 after that - this lad can hold a mark. A commodity not to be sneezed at.

More to the point in this discussion, is the simple fact that Melbourne's forward entries were a bloody shambles and the ostriches who plan the Forward Line strategy need to learn that only fools keep making the same mistakes with an expectation that some day, something might change. Here's hoping. And as for Jackson delivering Bell's expectations? Let's wait and see, but methinks he's doing something akin to spitting into the wind.

Which means ipso facto, the two Pells are not related.

They 'umpire': none of them would know much about footy: some of dem don't even know da rules!

Ya know the saying, Even dwarfs started small.

Hawkins wasn't getting a kick in those days...

And we've got Gawn, Fritsch, Petracca and Oliver and Pickett