Whitey Grandad

I was 16 at the time and we watched it on a 14" black-and-white 405-line television" It's not that long ago that if you went to a game of football then all you had were memories, no video recordings, no highlights just endless debates in the pub after the match. Match Of The Day would cover just the one match. (I preferred Brian Moore and The Big Match on ITV myself). There was a sports writer for a Sunday paper who used to cover the Arsenal and who spent the whole of the game in a pub outside the ground. He used to write his report based on what he heard from the fans after the game. There's nothing to beat being at a live game of footy in a real English football ground with all that goes with it. This premiership rubbish they show on Sky is a sanitised, sterile product that bears no relation to the real game - 'jumpers for goalposts' and all that stuff.

The more I look at that goal the less it looks like the ball was over the line. What convinced me at the time was that the other english forward (Martin Peters?) who was there did not even bother to stick the ball in the net and make sure, he turned starigt round and celebrated. (Anyway, it was 4-2 so it didn't matter in the end)

Video refs in rugby very often come to the wrong decision.

There must be one set of laws for the game that is universal throughout the world and at all levels. The example you quote is clearly poor judgment by the officials, but it was a clear-cut case. Television replays are notoriously inaccurate and I have lost count of the number of times I have heard so-called experts saying phrases like 'there was no contact so it wasn't a penalty' or 'that ball was clearly over the line' or 'he was the last man and should have been sent off' when they obviously know nothing about the details of the Laws of the Game. Let's be clear about this: technology is not 100% accurate and a blurred and distorted two-dimensional video image from 80 yards away is not the answer. Let's just stick an independent person down on the pitch-side and let them practise over 100's of games and let them use their best judgment.

There are many points here and they have all been debated to death before. Two-dimensional video evidence is often worse than the close-up eye-witness who is better able to judge momentum and movement. There must be one set of laws for football at all levels and in all countries so that rules out the video referee. There have been many false decisions in rugby where this has been used. The 'Hawkeye' that is used in cricket is presented as technical fact when it is only a mechanical prediction of where the ball is likely to go. Interpretation of 'Interfering with play' is the big problem. The referee is in the best position to judge whether a player is interfering but the assistant on the line can only judge whether the player is in an offside position. The definition of 'interfering' has changed several times in the past few seasons. As an ex-fullback, I would prefer that we went back to the old methods.

Is that a euphemism?

Footballers and other professionals (such as musicians) who earn a lot of money in a short period are allowed special dispensation for their pension payments. These are not allowed for the likes of us. Damned shame, though, that such a promising young professional should have his career cut short. Sadly he is not alone in that.

The insurance premiums are guite high so some clubs run their own 'insurance scheme', that is they save on the premiums and take a chance. I believe that Arsenal used to be one of them. Likewise Hampshire County Council reckon that they are big enough to handle the risks and got caught for about £18m a few years ago when the Sony building at Basingstoke went up in flames.

You could see that??? We couldn't see anything :-(.

We had two seats in row B too! We were just to the right of the left-hand goalpost as you looked upfield, so we had stand support & drainpipe, goalpost, goal net, goalkeeper between us and the action. That and the slope of the pitch meant we were looking at the game from about knee-height. And we were getting wet from all the drips. Had a good view of our three goals, though, which made up for the poor view but as to what was happening at the other end, it was all a bid of a blur. I had one senior and one full-price but £18.50 was a lot for a seat with no view.

It's ironic that I was dry-side but my view was blocked by a big drainpipe.

Yes, that did occur to me after I had hit 'submit'. :-( So... That'll be next year then!

That would be next season then

When is the final?

The other rule is 'always play your best team'.

The other.

What is the trophy anyway, a tin of paint?

It all started to go wrong when the home clubs kept all of the gate money. Then Sky came along and the rest is history....

You are probably right. The Woolston to Fareham link is usually being worked on at the weekend.

Any night except Wednesday and I would be there. It'll have to be Sky Plus for me.

Whe you put it like that it's amazing how far we have come since the end of last season. We have Lambert and Connolly for less than we sold Dyer and McGoldrick, and their desire and hunger is quite refreshing.

Is that you on the left in the dress Wes?

The important question is... If you had to pay good money for him, would you buy him for the club?

Standard adult of £20 - £22 (category C). I think it might have been a special offer of 2 successive games for £30 total. Basic adult tickets range from £20 to £30 depending on location and the category of the visitors, so their prices are not bad, but we are talking about 'Wigan'.

The 7-days no longer apply: 'the suspension will now be automatic as opposed to the current seven day rule.'