The Myth of the Optical Illusion

In years to come, when you're old and grey (if you're not already), you will tell of a story set at Vicarage Road... in a time before linesman were replaced with 60mph "Offside Robots"... before "Goal Line Lasers"... before referees were so scared to give a decision they played on until someone broke their leg, but that leg would be mended on the pitch with a "Magic Sponge". Okay, not everything will change. But you will tell of a story... The Goal That Never Was.

There is no word in the English Dictionary that can justify the extremity of what happened on Saturday afternoon. Put simply, the Officials got this all wrong. To those of you that haven't seen the incident, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llpuzHfH7No enjoy (before YouTube removes it).

There are several reasons why this should never have happened.

1. The Referee's Assistant is claiming an optical illusion took place, in which he saw the ball enter the net. Perhaps this is true, we do ALL MAKE MISTAKES. However... if he did see the ball cross the line, why would the Reading player then hook the ball back out of the goal? Perhaps the Referee's Assistant here should have taken some time to think before flagging.

2. Where was Stuart Atwell standing? Stuart Atwell is the youngest Referee on the circuit, and many have spoken highly of his ability. This incident will hinder his progress, as he has given the goal ENTIRELY on his Assistant's belief the ball has crossed the goaline. Atwell should have taken on board the views of the Watford players, the Reading players, the Fourth Official... and more importantly... his own view! Where was he placed to not see the ball was only ever 4 yards wide, or off the crossbar?

3. The Reading players have cheated. I'm not going to mince my words, they have cheated. Steve Coppell post game argued he would be willing to do whatever it took to resolve the situation. Giving a goal away would not have been the correct thing to do, replaying the game would not have been the correct thing to do... but someone... ideally everyone... speaking up at the time would have helped common sense to prevail. Reading have cheated.

I have tried to make this comparable to an alternative situation, to attempt to justify the actions of the Reading players. Perhaps if a player had handled the ball on their own goal line to prevent a goal, but the referee never saw it. That would equally be cheating, but would we be less accusing to the Reading player? Would it be more acceptable to cheat to prevent a goal than it would to create a goal? Or are Reading innocent in the whole incident? Am I too expecting of honesty in modern day football, when we have diving and cheating on a regular basis?

The media has jumped on the technology bandwaggon following this Atwell (given there's no word sufficient, I thought about creating the word Atwell; noun - ridiculous decision based on an optical illusion). I, however, suggest the incident only further argue the need to stay away from technology. I am a strong believer that human error makes sport brilliant. Human error, in instances such as this, gets everyone talking, it gets a reaction out of everyone, and whilst Watford have suffered this time around, human error or "luck" has a way of evening itself out over a period of time. We all love to see goal line disputes, and the following arguments that follow.

If England were ever denied a perfectly reasonable goal because of a refereeing decision, who am I to argue? If it wasn't for a dodgy refereeing decision, we may have never won the 1966 World Cup Final.