Home > Football > It's Chelsea's FA Cup - but would they have survived a video trial?
by Craig Hackney on 20 May 2007
Email this Article (29) Comments
Free £10 bet when you register at
Comments (29)
by J D Smith on May 20, 2007
In reply to the question in this article re the Giggs effort against Cech, I would like to add a little point. When Giggs pushed the ball towards the goal it landed in the arms of Cech and he laid prone holding the ball. Giggs then following through connected with the goalkeeper and pushed his body over the line. The ball was definitely over the line the laws state once the ball is in control by the keeper then you cannot touch him. So accidentally Giggs forweard movement broke the laws of the game. Hard luck for Giggs but the referee should really have blown for a free kick but decided to play advantage to Cech.
by Martin on May 20, 2007
Your stupidity amazes me, Hackney. Cech was moved over the line by Giggs. If anything, it's a freekick.
by klaus on May 20, 2007
at least we got something to argue about, just like semifinal at lpool last year on the russian linesman 1966....was it over the line? did giggs push cech?did esssien foul giggs? did i spill my beer?? who cares the ref waved on...drogba scored ..we won....i dont think manu can complain..they had the rub of the green ( particularly in the pen area) a few times this season.....
by Craig H on May 20, 2007
Just remind me, did the referee or linesman indicate a free kick? No, I thought not. No doubt it should have been a free, but it wouldn't have been the first mistake the referee made in the game. It didn't bother me either way, I only care that Liverpool beat Milan. This game was just to fill in time. Thanks for commenting.
the ref played advantage, as cech hat the ball, \which i suppose makes more sense that having a freekick on the goal line
by Josh on May 20, 2007
How could it have been a goal? Cech caught the ball comfortably and was then studded over the line accidentally by Giggs. If you think that counts then we are going back to many many years ago, when you could charge the keeper over the line. Even with the benefit of technology, it wasn't a goal. Also, to say thatit was against the run of play for Chelsea to score is just fabrication. Neither side were creating chances, but Chelsea were gradually getting on top in extra time. To say "completely against the run of play" shows a total lack of objectivity and a bias towards United which is ridiculous. If you want to talk about technology, talk about technology. If you want to use the context of the Cup Final, use the Cup Final, but you can't bring your own prefernce into it.
by K on May 20, 2007
yes the ball was over the line but it was pushed over. If a goalie has both his hands on the ball and a player of the oppostion pushes him over the line is it a goal? thats what happened yesterday.
by tel on May 20, 2007
claiming an awsome victory on what i saw as a lacklustre tired utd defence who were on more than one occasion guilty of giving the ball to the chelsea attackers. if they themselves (having played actually one more game than utd this season) had not been tired would a realistic score of 2 or even 3 nil to chelsea been seen to reflect the true facts of a game where only utd fans and they tv cronies think utd were the best team. im a chelsea fan and at no time was i ever in doubt of the win, eve when the welsh wizard(tongue in cheek) contrived to kick cech over the line and not bat an eye for the keepers safety--typical thugs
by RepublikOfMancunia.org on May 20, 2007
People have said the goal was disallowed because Giggs fouled Cech. If that was the case, why were Chelsea not awarded a free kick? If the ref didn't let the goal stand because he thought Giggs had fouled the keeper, then the Chelsea keeper would have had a freekick. This didn't happen. The goal didn't stand because the ref and linesman didn't think it crossed the line. They were wrong.
by dixon9 on May 20, 2007
"A legal goal or not, would technology have changed the result?" Surely, there is a form of contardiction here? Any video evidence would have proved if the ball crossed the line AND if Giggs had pushed Cech backwards?
by Essexian76 on May 20, 2007
Sorry fell asleep after 10 minutes, what was the score?
by leno on May 20, 2007
i nearly fell asleep as well, could be worse though, we could have watched spurs.
by Essexian76 on May 21, 2007
Surely not leno, you probably couldnt handle the excitement, you know attacking football and all that, nah, you get your feet up, take it easy and watch a nice easy paced, languid match...as usual
by craig on May 21, 2007
being a man u fan, and considering what happened you would think that i would want video technology, but for me its a big no, i have always maintained that bringing in this would open a pandoras box which could never be closed, once you open this you cant stop it. yes we would of got the goal and yes that would of probably changed our substitution decision, but what would also happen is that every decision would start to be questioned in every game soon it would be, stop start stop start of games and the ruining of our great sport. its a big no for me even if we would of got the ball in the nett i suppose that considering the fact liverpools goal should of never of counted in european semi against chelsea two years ago some chelsea fans may argue for it aswell but not for me.
the shove on giggs to make him go down to force him in to chec whould of been a penalty, never mind the goal so going on about giggs pushed chec over the line is pointless because if you are going to get finnicy it should of been a penalty, i still say though no video teck and the result unfortunatly is the result it should be, no arguement its chelseas, (we still got our trophy back though)
by Fez on May 21, 2007
The ref was smart, he allowed for play to go own because both teams did foul. cech had complete control of the ball when giggs pushed him over the line, and essien did tackle him stupidly.
by George on May 21, 2007
if you had video technology it would clearly show that giggs pushed cech over the line. also it was an awful miss by giggs. Essien hardly touched him. if you watch the replays giggs never once appealed for a foul but only for the ball to go over the line when he pushed cech. you lost craig, just accept it.
george you are a nob.. i am argueing i dont want video tec, read what i have to say, i am ok we lost the f.a.cup we won the premiership, get over your self man, like i say read what i say i clearly state i believe the result was a fair one. you got the goal we did not and a certainly dont want videos deciding matches.. i am not back pedling here i am only stating what i have said already
mate your notes are bang on, the ref did not need video technology, the game does not need video technology, YES THATS RIGHT GEORGE I AM SAYING IT AGAIN TO ANOTHER CHELSEA SUPPORTER, i am on here because the debate harbours around video techology not who won, there are other pagesfor that.. but i am sure george youwill show your mental age by having a go at me again just because i am a manc who supports united even though i have said the result is a fair one. go on show your maturity to the world...
Craig:"the shove on giggs to make him go down to force him in to chec whould of been a penalty, never mind the goal so going on about giggs pushed chec over the line is pointless" read what im saying nob jockey, you're still adament that it was a penalty. im sayng it was'nt and the video technology was a passing comment it was'nt aimed at you, prik!
by Ken on May 22, 2007
I've noticed that a lot of people have blamed Chelsea and Jose for the boring final, but Utd have been in such boring finals recently. Man utd vs Arsenal 0-0, Man utd vs Millwall and lets not forget the one against Liverpool in 96. Even Man utd Everton was boring.
by besley on May 22, 2007
i've seen the game of shefieldUnited against wigan,wigan were totally outplayed by sheffs noweven they've won that game,hardlurk shefieldUnited by loosing the game that U deserved,they can't believe it GO WELL.
by George on May 22, 2007
seriously you are very very stupid. I'll start from the beginning and go very slow for you. i never once said that you wanted video tech, like you said the title of the artcile is about video technology. I simple expressed my opinions on video technology and how it would have shown that it was a foul on the keeper. secondly my next comment was a quote from you earlier, about how you think it should have been a penalty which you stated,(read your own comments) and i simply said it was'nt. you obviously don't think its a fair result because you're still whining about Giig's invisible shove. seriously craig you're pathetic and extremely stupid as you can't recognise your own mistakes you stupid c*nt.
by Craig Hackney on May 22, 2007
Cn I just point out, for the record, that the Craig commenting on this article is not the same person as the one who wrote it. I've just noticed a little bit of tension between the other Craig and George who appear to have a different points of view on this topic. Cheers.
by craig on May 22, 2007
GEORGE, as i have said before if you look at my first coment it read no to video techology, i am presuming that craig hackney does not have the decency to remove georges bad language as well, the point i was trying to make is that i came on here to talk about video technology, the POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT I DONT WANT VIDEOS TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT FOOTBALL GAMES I THINK IT WILL RUIN our game what winding me up about you is you wont let it drop you keep coming back and having a go like a little child just because i am a man u fan who by the way has admitted it was a fair result. you keep having a go, just let it drop, the article is asking fo