Ukraine’s Shot Against England That Crossed The Line But Didn’t Count [VIDEO]

IMG 1793 600x448 Ukraines Shot Against England That Crossed The Line But Didnt Count [VIDEO]

Ukraine scored against England on Tuesday evening, but the goal didn’t count because the officials ruled that the ball didn’t cross the line. Except that it did.

Slow-motion replays (and photographs) reveal that Ukraine’s shot, which hit England goalkeeper Joe Hart and then flew into over the line before being scrambled away by John Terry, did in fact cross the line. Despite a goal-line official being within yards of the incident, none of the Hungarian officials said the ball crossed the line.

Here’s a video highlight of the incident as you can clearly see the ball crossed the line:

szólj hozzá: Ukraiinan "over the line" goal not counted

If there is any justice in the game, the attack that Ukraine was on when they scored the ghost goal included an offside pass, which wasn’t called. So if the goal had counted, England would have felt hard done by. Plus, the goal is a little bit of a role reversal from the 2010 World Cup when England clearly had a shot that crossed the line, but the referee didn’t award it in that match.

What do you think? Should goal-line technology be introduced into soccer? Is it waste of time to have the goal-line officials in place if they can’t even spot when a ball has crossed the line or not? Share your feedback in the comments section below.

This entry was posted in England, Euro 2012, Leagues: EPL. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Ukraine’s Shot Against England That Crossed The Line But Didn’t Count [VIDEO]

  1. Lyle says:

    Bad day for the assistant referees. No harm, no foul tough maybe.

  2. MannyG says:

    FIFA/UEFA need to get with the times. Goal-line technology should have been in-place by the 2008 World Cup. If this was a business, it would have failed ages ago for failing to innovate and expand (e.g. into America). No fan should have to turn off their TV or leave a stadium feeling cheated.

  3. Styles9002 says:

    Clearly a goal but I think the first phase of that play was off-side as well, so it appears two calls were missed.

    Regardless, the assistant referees had a less-than-stellar performance in Donetsk today.

  4. Andre says:

    There really isn’t a valid reason not have goal-line technology in a tournament like this. W/R/T this particular goal though A, offside on the way in and B, it wouldn’t have changed the outcome of the group as England would have had 5 points, France 4, and they beat Ukraine head to head which is the new tie-breaker.

  5. BA14 says:

    I can’t really blame the official for not calling this a goal. The angle we look at is above the goal and we can see it crosses the line barely. We don’t have a view of the official and who knows if the white sock of the England player skewed the vision of the ref. It is too close to call to hammer the official over this one.

  6. dust says:

    FIFA are onboard with goal line technology, it took way to long but they are finally on it.
    (This is not a defense of Blatter, he is a complete moron who incompetent’s even eclipse’s that of George W Bush).

    UEFA are not on it whatsoever, it was a struggle to get him to agree to the 5th official also, Platini has some serious issues, he denies there is a need for goal line technology, and has shown that he feels racism is not as bad as wearing underpants with ad’s on the waistband. He’s lost it, he more like inspector cluso without the blind luck…isn’t there something that can be done? isn’t there a recall process or something? maybe impeachment? This has gone on long enough.

    UEFA are investigating Germany for their fans giving Nazi salutes & banners and symbols from the same right wing establishments, when they played against Denmark. What are the chances they get a fine less than Bendtner for his impersonation of an ad board in the same game.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jun/19/euro-2012-germany-charged-uefa

  7. scrumper says:

    I really can’t understand how the official behind the goal missed that. I thought he simply bottled the decision. However, listening to BBC Five live they indicated he seemed to be on the line looking around the pitch side of the goal post so had a distorted view. Don’t know, but I would imagine they’ve been instructed to only make a call when they’re 100% convinced.

    However, if the game stopped for a review with goal line technology would they also review the offside call that wasn’t given? The beauty of football it’s non stop and it creates passion and excitement. Refereeing good and bad is all part of that. So I’m in the unsure camp on this one.

  8. The Gaffer says:

    One of the biggest differences between having a goal-line official versus goal-line technology is the element of surprise. Who would have expected the ball to bounce near the line and, in a flash of a second, be cleared by John Terry? It’s not as if the goal-line official saw that coming.

    The benefit of goal-line technology such as replays is that the incident can be replayed over and over again, and played with slow-motion and freeze-frame. These are all huge advantages that technology has over the human eye, which can only see something in a split second.

    Technology, in this case, will always win. The sooner we move to goal-line technology for goalmouth incidents like this one, the better.

    I feel sorry for Ukraine. I know how hurt and incensed I felt after England had a ghost goal against Germany that could have changed that game. It’s a horrible feeling to feel cheated. (And yes, it should have been offside in the first place, but it still doesn’t change the hurt many Ukrainians must feel).

    Cheers,
    The Gaffer

    • coachie ballgames says:

      amen!

    • Tony says:

      “And yes, it should have been offside in the first place, but it still doesn’t change the hurt many Ukrainians must feel”

      Hurt about being out of the tourament, the aggreviance they feel over that unawarded goal should signifanctly subside after the see it should’ve been offside anyway. I’m sure we’d have been nowhere near as annoyed as we were with Lampard’s unawarded goal if it should’ve been offside anyway. Regardless, goal line technology should have been implemented long ago.

      If I was a fan of Ukraine I’d be most frustrated with the very lackluster performance against France.

  9. Guy says:

    Platini is worse than Blatter. Wait. Did I just say that? Impossible, non? Maybe not after the Euros. What a maroon.

    Clouseau reference is spot on. One of my favorite scenes: “Does your dog bite?”……… :-D

  10. Smokey Bacon says:

    Imagine if that had been in extra-time during the final and Ukraine had gone on to lose. There will be a riot one day because of BS like this. I think the idea of an extra official behind the goal has now been proven not to work. The only option left is goal line technology. Somehow they have figured out how to to me how many kilometres Gerrard ran, how many passes, how many tackles etc and other useless sh*te. Surely they can tell me if it was a goal, which it clearly was.

  11. Javier says:

    Let’s all try to get goal technology implemented at least for the goal line. Follow the link and sign the petition at change.org.

    http://www.change.org/petitions/michel-platini-fifa-president-allow-goal-technology-for-the-goal-line-it-is-only-fair-play-to-do-so

    Don’t forget to tell your friends!

  12. Gaz says:

    As alluded to by others, goal-line technology is worthless if assistant referees are to miss two successive offside violations.

    Giving an official on the side-line a camera that can replay in slow motion and a means to immediately communicate to the referee would solve both problems. Do away with those two referees behind the goals, and have one man’s responsibility be this alone.

    A walkie-talkie to the referee’s ear is easy enough, but where the hell are we going to find cameras capable of slow motion at a football match? :)

    • Frill Artist says:

      Herp, derp. Goal line technology uses sensors not cameras.

      • Guy says:

        You might want to reword that.

        There are two systems currently being tested by FIFA. Goalref, which uses magnetic waves andHawk-Eye which uses high speed cameras. Apparently, FIFA will choose one or the other.

        Take a deep breath (or do some research) before jumping on people’s posts to “correct” them.

        • Gaz says:

          If that was directed at my comment, it’s not what I was getting at anyway.

          To sum up, I think that goal-line technology is silly. We need technology that will assist referees in all decisions. I just think that having a dedicated camera-official with a walkie is the easiest way to accomplish this.

  13. connor says:

    the pass was off side their for the goal wernt going to be counted because the assistant ref didnt rase the flag so thats probably why they didnt give the goal so it is FAIR ….. COME ON ENGLAND!!!!!!!!!!

  14. connor says:

    england !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  15. Frill Artist says:

    The player was offside. End of story. Anything occurring after what was a blatant offside is worthless. It’s like scoring a goal after the final whistle has been blown.

  16. Richard says:

    Goal-line technology would have alerted the officials to the fact that the ball had crossed the line (using a system like Hawkeye) but the goal would have been incorrectly allowed because it was offside in the first place. Platini’s experiment with five officials has failed spectacularly in my opinion – two decisions missed (offside, goal) in one attack. If you look back to what happened in 2010 (http://sportsblog.bethubb.com/the-goal-line-technology-debate-again/) Blatter was still faffing around over the issue and we haven’t really made any progress.

  17. daS says:

    offside

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>