The refereeing at the Battle of Britain was terrible.

@Christopher Johnson : i mean that for example the Portuguese team had to move location of the game with England from where they were based with hours notice and arrived exhausted for the game…. one of the examples of the bias of the organization

@@cmarq817 If it had gone ahead in Liverpool then England would have had to travel to Liverpool and be exhausted

@@purpledragons1146 the locations were set before knowing it was England playing… The change was not fair

@@cmarq817 The change was fair. The time of the game was actually changed to give Portugal more time to rest. The real reason the game was changed so it could be held at a larger venue so more money could be made from tickets. Perfectly understandable reason especially since Portugal vs England was a very attractive game

@@purpledragons1146 (Excerpt from THE GUARDIAN) On 13 July, two days into the competition, the Jornal do Brasil reported that “the English have failed completely in their organisation of this great competition. They have taken no trouble whatsoever to offer good service … and have substituted instead concern for something else: for charging excessively for all the poor and inefficient services they manage to offer. The greed and lack of organisation of the English is evident everywhere.”

Don't disagree with ya, but can you give me the source to the Argentina warmup thing?

@@godwin- they dont have a source lmao

Still think its hard huh? Idiot

@@Dryhten1801 yes, looking in the mirror? England had the best opportunity ever to win the Euros because they were seeded in the best side of the draw, they avoided France, Portugal, Belgium, Netherlands, and only got Germany and Italy at the end. Even that, they choked.lol

If you want to talk about fixed tournaments and Argentina in the same comment why not talk about the 1978 World Cup. Argentina needed to beat a solid Peru side by 4 goals to get out the group stages and they did so. Peru's goalkeeper was born in Argentina and after the game Peru recieved a large amount of grain

But you are forgetting the goal that was a goal in the 2010 World Cup. When the ball certainly crossed the line. But the referee didn't give it as a goal. If Jeff Hurst goal was a controversial goal to be given. Then the fact that that wasn't given in 2010 was a down right disgrace.

​@@callumhughes6448even if Lampard's goal was given england would have choked at some other stage

@@anandakrishnan1857 You are most likely correct. But you cannot be certain because the goal was never given. Who knows what could have happened if the goal was given. That could have been the catalyst which started England's tournament in 2010. But that has always happened in football. Just look at last year who knows what could have happened if the goal that Japan scored against Spain was disallowed. Germany could have gone all the way. But instead Germany were knocked out at the group stages.

England have actually been world champions 4 times. Before the WC started the Olympic tournament was considered to be the World football championship and England won that 3 times !!!

​@@william_marshalGreat Britain team,not England alone. The three olympic titles should be shared between England,Scotland,Gales and Ireland.

I thought the same thing too

more like History has just *ALMOST repeated itself in the *UEFA EURO 2021:P

Well Italy took care of that

It was a soft penalty but there was contact in the box in the semi-finals of the euros.

france took care of that tooa

Sure, it’s not like he punched the ball in the back of the net 🤷🏻‍♂️

​@@bassiejazzyes, he punched the ball, but think of is at karma for England, british fabs are like: "OMG Argentina is such a evil country 😭😭😭" because of one handball right? Well now imagin the germans. ¿What would they say? I think something close to this: "OMG England is an evil country they didn't disallow their goal 😭😭😭". And these aren't all the examples, i am nlt trying to say i wouldn't feel angry in this situation but come on, you robbed Germany and now karma got you guys back deal with it, its football in like 3 or 4 wc Argentina probs gonna get their karma too.

Maradona was the finest cheat you could say the 🐐 GOAT of cheats

@@colinlatham5566 God save the queen

​@@colinlatham5566that's the only reason he's any good

No. The problem was that the game evolved significantly in Europe, in the early 60s, and Pele was used to playing against farmers

He only got a beating against Bulgaria in the first match. He didn't play in the second match and Brazil were well beaten in the third match Vs Portugal without kicking Pele !!!

@@MrJoromekiq1The best players were in brazil

The FIFA President was also English and all the fixtures were carried out under closed doors before the officials arrived.

@@ninosciambarella9587 Do you realize how silly you sound.

Red cards didn't exist in 1962. It wasn't illegal for Garrincha to play the final

When the 4th "goal" went in there were people on the pitch so that shouldn't have stood either.

They never call that in a Finals game. People being on the pitch is usually ignored bc every team does it basically. As much as it’s a rule, calling the goal back would be worse. Also would you really want to win on a technicality? Meaning winning the game bc the other team had players on the field. I would take it yea but I definitely wouldn’t argue about it trying to get a goal waved off. If the ref sees it then it’s different. If he doesn’t see it there takes a lack of pride to argue it.

@@ohhhhh6269 It was fans on the pitch when Hurst scored the final goal.

Scott W well that’s different. I thought it was players. Yo my name is Scott too! 2 Scotts don’t make a right! Lol Gone in 60 Seconds quote lol

Lies again? Marine Soldier 13 Alphabets

For kicking chunks out of Pele.

Nonsense. In the second half of the semi-final against England, Portuguese captain Mario Coluna remonstrated with Eusebio to go out and win the game for Portugal, instead of restricting himself to taking corners, free-kicks and throw-ins.

England beat Portugal 2 - 1. Now tell me how England cheated ?

​@@william_marshal The 1966 World Cup final was hosted by England, who defeated West Germany and Spain easily. It has been the center of many conspiracy theories over time that have tainted FIFA’s reputation for success with each new day; it would only get worse when Joao Havelange claimed in 1998 throught out Folha de Sao Paulo “In three matches played that year Brazilian national team play without any black players on their roster which led them to lose all contested headers against Europe. The 1966 England versus Portugal semi-final was a magical moment in World Cup history that is often forgotten today. The game had been scheduled to be played at Goodison Park, where the Portuguese national team resides but “at last minute” FIFA (though some say it’s English FA we’ll go with) granted an accommodation for their weary guests - requiring them only two hours travel time from Liverpool instead four five plus hour trip if taking coaches which most likely took nearly as long then getting there when they arrived on British soil late into evening after playing several matches during tournament days past without sleep or rest! Sir Stanley Rouse, the then president of FIFA rejected Portuguese request for arbitration because he thought it would be “the greatest betrayal in sporting history” if football’s world governing body agreed with England and awarded them host nation duties over his home country. The match between England and Portugal was scoreless up until the 30th minute when Bobby Charlton scored his team’s first goal. The 2-1 victory came from another two goals by ENgland in addition to Eusebio scoring a penalty kick late into second half additional time; all after being down 1-0 early on.”

England, who defeated West Germany and Spain easily

Mate. If was FIFA who rigged the 1978 World Cup, in order to quell an uprising. What changed things as far as on field rigging of games is concerned was the game in 82 between West Germany and Austria, otherwise known as 'The disgrace of Gijon', where Algeria had beaten Chile 3-2 in their final group match which had kicked off earlier than the West Germany v Austria match to finish on 4 points. As is well known, West Germany took the lead after only 10 minutes v Austria meaning as things were at that point, both West Germany and Austria would qualify at the expense of Algeria. Both teams then stopped playing and passed about, punting occasional long balls into the opposition half for the rest of the game. It was after that, FIFA declared that the final group games would kick off at the same time in order to avoid such an incident again. It was nothing to do with modern media or more overseeing of FIFA.

I Personally don't think that the world cup was fixed, was there some controversy and dodgy decisions in that world cup, but to say it was fixed I would say is false. England that world cup played there usually style, but there was some shred of tactical genius in play, a 4-1-3-2 (4-4-2), which was done to help negate the 4-2-4, there pragmatic style provided an antithesis to counties like Brazil and Germany, but we where at times blunt upfront. The refs for that world cup where poor, alot of dodgy calls where made and most of it was against south American nations. There was some controversy on England's end but it was so for other European countries. Other countries like France, Uruguay and Brazil just to name a few suffered from referee decisions. With the Argentina game there was alot of antics from the Argentina side, the English said after how despite them having a lower foul record, there where still the dirtier team as their antics like fouls when the ref isn't looking. When it was Milan vs Estudiantes de La Plata a couple of years later, the Italian got beaten up all over the field, the Italians said that "The English where right", so with that I feel there is some element of truth to what the english players where saying. Then the Rattin decision, I believe that the ref lost his cool after getting hounded by the south Americans all game and eventually just sent someone off. What Rattin did afterwards was not cool and not leaving the pitch, shows his childlike behaviour, he's still bitching on about it into his old age. The teams although afterwards respectfully swapped shirts, but Ramsey's interfereing with the shirt swap was not respectful at all. Ramsey's comments after got twisted, it was seen as racist in south America, this helped create an international fiasco and south America felt they had been wronged and cheated out. Despite that some south American players still show respect and love to England and the players say how England where good that world cup. The Portugal game in my opinion really sew the seeds of conspiracy. The venue change last minute caused the Portuguese team to arrive to the game not fully refreshed due to them having to travel more to reach the venue. FIFA actually changed the venue, not the organisers. I think thats why some say it was fixed. The final Vs Germany became one of the most controversial of finals, that ghost goal I feel dirtied their achievement, it was a bad call during a 50/50 decision, close but not enough. I'd have preferred it alot that they hadn't had won it that way, my dad said this "you don't win a world cup like that". But I do feel it gets overblown quite a bit though. Overall the tournament had a lasting effect on football: England became a world power for a while with the euro semi final and 1970 fantastic team. England Argentina game became a set of games always full of moments often controversial, the long ball style became England's go to🙁. Red and yellow cards became used to stop foul play after what happened to Brazil. Brazil regrouped and became more resilient to physical styles of play. England's use of pragmatic styles showed how it was still used throughout Europe, with Inter Milan notably using a pragmatic style around that time.

You forgot to say in the semi finals location was change in favor of England force Portuguese players make a bigger trip and missing practices because of it

100 % FIXED

Yep, marketing.

We know it was, no need to ask.

France got their revenge by humiliating England 7-1 in the 2018 final.

Never beat us in a war though.

You were lucky to win the quarter final being 0 - 3 against North Korea !!!

@@william_marshal how?

@@epiccheseed work it out yourself !!!

@@william_marshal exactly, you're so stupid you're saying random stuff and expect people to figure it out themselves

Wrong ... not at Anfield the home of Liverpool F.C. but Goodison Park the home of Everton F.C. in The City of Liverpool.

Anfield was not a venue at the 1966 world Cup. Matches in Liverpool were played at Goodison park !!

Modern technology shows that the ball was over the line by at least 2 inches. Compare that with the ladies WC 2023 when Swedens winning goal against the US was only 3mm over the line !!!. In case you hadn't noticed, even discarding that third goal England still won 3 - 2 !!!

What about 82 when the German keeper nearly killed the French midfielder and he was not even booked.😮😮😮

@@NorthallertonMackem Harold Schumacher. It was one of the worst acts of violence I've seen on a football field. Patrick Battiston lost two teeth, broke three ribs and still suffers from backpain, and the referee gave a goalkick. Rather glad Italy won the final. But then, I did put a sneaky bet on Italy winning the world cup that year and everyone laughed at me as they were pretty awful in the group stages and were lucky to qualify. I had good odds and I was laughing after the final. Northallerton. As a southerner, I know it well.

It won't be their only World Cup...

England didn't steal the World Cup they won it.

@@callumhughes6448 With the ref's help lol. The final should have been Portugal vs West germany. Either that or West Germany should have won the final. But England decided to rob not only one but two games to win the WC.

@@thelusogerman3021 I state it again England did not rob the World Cup they won it. But I will use your analogy and apply it to another tournament. 1986 England should have had a draw against Argentina. But Maradona and his hand had others ideas, Argentina went on to win that tournament. But i do not see no outcry saying England was robbed. I guess God really did you this hand in that match. Another unbelievable decision was in 2010 when England was also robbed of a goal against Germany. John Terry shot did cross the line and there was no ifs or buts about it. That Ball did bounce across the line where as was jeff Hurst goal was a bit more obscured. I guess we can chalk that one up to being a bad decision, but the 2010 goal that was a down right disgrace of a decision. As was the hand of god decision.

@@callumhughes6448 bro in 1966 England cheated against Brazil , Argentina , Portugal and Germany you wana talk about one goal? England shouldnt have even made it to the semi finals. Its not a coincidence its the only world cup they won. It should have been Germany or Portugal winning but with Eusebios performances i would say Portugal would win.

I think the linesman was from modern day Kazakhstan and I believe he has a stadium named after him.

@@NorthallertonMackem not Kazakhstan, from Azerbaijan

He's American, they can't speak English !!!

It was Geoff Hurst not Peters

Peters, don't you mean Hurst !!!

There has never been an 'England' team at the Olympics - they have only ever competed as part a Great Britain team.

Sure.... keeping dreaming of winning another world cup..... will never happen and you will keep waiting and bashing other countries

@@amitaly2812 CHEATS

@@EricPollarrd loosers.

E

Because at 4-2 the game is over. If it had been 3-2, which it was really, the Germans would have still had something to play for.

England's fourth goal was scored on the break in the last minute with the West Germans desperately pushing forward in search of the equaliser - that obviously wouldn't have been the case if it had still been 2-2.

The World Cup always seems fake, I hope I'm wrong. The last one I just didn't want Messi or Ronaldo to win it, so I could trust it more, but Messi did.

Where was the handball in the build up to West Germany's equaliser?

@@scottw.3258 he's right. Have a look at "l'équipe"of 1966. You will see iz

@@jeannotschumacher1024 What? So you think it hits the German No.3 in the hand/arm? Is that what is being claimed as 'handball'? It's nowhere near his hand. The initial strike hits him on his lower back.

England were not the best team and would not have won the World Cup had they not had home advantage. However they deserved to win the final on the day, the third goal was over the line (just) and any idea that the tournament was fixed in their favour is frankly ludicrous and doesn’t bear scrutiny.

Two illegal goals in the final? But thank god for maradona 20 years later. Fuck england

"Some people are on the pitch," so under the rules of football, the referee should have stopped play. So the game finished 2-2. Then as it was in those times, it would have been a toss of the two-headed coin, which England, of course, would have won.

@@kennytaylor3986 "The 1966 WC final would have been replayed if tied after extra time. In the event, no replays or drawing of lots was necessary." So no fella you are misled!

@freddysquirenaranjo4859 Misled? By the fact that there were two illegitimate goals in a 4-2 win would have meant that England wouldn't have won the World Cup. It's a self-evident, basic arithmetical fact. What would have emanated from tossing a coin, cutting a pack of cards, or a replay that would have transpired after the 2-2 that should have been the result are entirely open to conjecture. Nothing misleading there.

So West Germany would still have been pushing everyone forward in desperate search of a goal and got caught on the break in the last minute if it had still been 2-2? Think about it.

@@paulwilliams8389 Never I'd the conjecture, think about the arithmetic. 😄

Lmaoo thats why the foreigners always win it ? nd u guys win one through bribes only way u guys can win it

England have done nothing but moan since. Every 2 years there's an excuse for their failure at a major tournament.

Record books say 2-1 to Argentina in the 1986 quarter final yet England haven't stopped moaning about that since.

Cheating all the way.

Absolutely no chance 😂

Hardly

Several teams in 66 were better than England, such as Hungary and Brazil.

@@charcolew Nah.