England (Score: 2, Funny) by email@example.com on 2014-06-11 13:52 (#21X) I think I remember when the position changed on this. A load of people in England had been complaining due to not having the technology because the English team lost out a couple of times because of it. Then in one game they benefit from the lack of goal line technology and the official position is reversed to now want goal line technology. Some were joking it was just because England benefited for a change that the stance changed. Re: England (Score: 2, Informative) by firstname.lastname@example.org on 2014-06-11 14:46 (#21Y) Actually, in the 2010 World Cup, Frank Lampard of England "scored" a goal that would have tied up their elimination game with Germany 2-2, but it was not acknowledged and the score remained 2-1 (Germany went on to win 4-1 in the second half, but the tying goal, had it been awarded, could have been a significant turning point). Lampard's goal is cited frequently as one of the key examples which turned the tide to accept a need for goal-line technology (although I think FIFA first tried to use extra referees on the end lines, but this approach failed as well). I was not aware of the view that the general stance change only after England benefited from an error. Do you recall the example you have in mind? Re: England (Score: 1) by email@example.com on 2014-06-12 09:29 (#228) Do you recall the example you have in mind?No, I don't follow football myself. I just remember lots of people being snarky about it.