PLEASE! Mark, Rick, etc... Someone explain the rules to these Football fans...

IF THE FOOT TOUCHES THE LINE, WHILE THE BALL IS IN HAND AND BEFORE IT IS GROUNDED, IT IS OUT!
STOP PLAY! OUT!

Where the foot, knee, hip, nose, tongue, eyelash is situated at the grounding of the ball is NO LONGER RELEVANT! Cueto foot touches line before grounding of ball. Try is not awarded. Correct decision. End of story.

How about people talk about the game? Or Englands need for players that can score tries?! If Cueto hadn't been a lumberer then maybe this would all be irrelevant. Habana would have got the 5pointer.

John, Shanghai, China

Jeremy,

Because there was no need for benefit of the doubt. He was out. Period!

dave robinson, cambridge,

to jeremy, what about the deliberate crossing by SA (not given) and the one penalised against England? There's a six point swing for a start and how about enjoying the victory without winding yourself up with the wearisome 'pom-bashing' of the insecure (join an endless line). Well done SA and well deserved. English turnaround - magnificent effort.

Iain, Warrington, England

As a Welshman I have to say,for God's sake England, get over debating about the Cueto "try". Even if it had been given England would have only been 2 more points ahead (don't forget they were awarded a penalty that Wilkinson kicked). I say 2 points as the try would have been in the corner and I don't think Wilkinson would have converted it..

Anyway, much as it hurts me to say it, England were impressive in the commitment that every man in the team showed - especially the forwards. The best team won, but England gained a lot of respect last night.

Martyn Postle, Cambridge,

England showed a lot of spirit in spite of a dodgy decision concerning the disallowed try.
I can't help wondering what the round ball players would have done in the same kind of circumstances.
Well done lads, second in the world's not too shoddy!

Thomas Wilshaw, Coventry, West midlands

i cant be unhappy about last night. to even get there showed huge depth of english strength considering the last four years. SA are deserved world champions. not an attractive game but a huge game. loved it (but who allowed Brownski to even be there considering how much he hates everything english rugby stands for...!). congrats SA

richard, Dubai, UAE

Well done South Africa, commiserations England, a hard fought game with excellent defence but boring as a spectacle..

After all Stephen Jones' criticisms of the southern hemisphere, the W/C record now stands at 5-1 to the South, so the rugby there cant be that bad...also provided the biggest improvers, Argentina, and the most exciting team, Fiji. And I suspect the trend will continue with the new Stellenbosch laws..

And with a name like Stephen Jones, didnt his team exit at the group stage??!!

rob, washington dc, usa/DC

as an england fan watching the cueto incident on south african TV, it was very clear that his foot touched the line and then was raised in the air as he grounded he ball. No try.
Still a great game and great effort by england!

Mike Middleton, johannesburg, south africa

Ah, the highlight of any sporting event involving the Poms - to hear the fundamental excuse for their loss. The "foot in the air" package for 2007 extends the tradition beautifully - being true enough to keep the faithful warm and sufficiently daft (the foot had in fact been out of touch before being lifted) to leave the rest of the sporting world smiling at the good-hearted feebleness of the eel-consuming eccentrics.

jeremy, Koekenaap,

I new the try would not be given as soon as I saw who the video ref. was! It was inconclusive whether Cueto was in touch or not, what was conclusive was that he scored a try so why was the benefit of the doubt not given to the attacking team?

B. Meanwell, Brussels, Belgium

As a South African, I am mighty proud today. Last night the whole place went absolutely berserk as people of all colours celebrated this wonderful win. We see this win as much more and much deeper than just winning the world cup. For our nation, it means a God given tool to further the process of unification that has been - often times very rocky - going on since 1994.

So South Africa is PROUD today. We are proud of our boys, their efforts, their commitment and their fierce will to win. And we cannot wait to receive them home, as heroes. Thank you Bokke.

If I was a supporter of the England team today, I would be very down in the dumps yes. But - I would still be proud. Because let me tell you, your team showed courage, determination, spirit and strength that most teams would never have been able to find within themselves. To come from a rather mediocre start and that crashing defeat aginst the Boks, and STILL end up in the final, took a special team. Salute your boys England.

Riaan Coetzee, Pretoria, South Africa

The Lions had a very limited game plan,so when they got out scrummed.were beaten to the ball at the breakdowns and lost the line outs ,that was the end of them.Jonny as great a player as he is simply had yo carry all the preasure for the team.
As for the Cueto try ,it did not happen ,check out the rear view angle and try and convince yourselves that is was a try.
At that stage the Lions were starting to get back into the game but seem to lose all heart.
This game was won in the opening fifteen minutes,the lions stared very strong, but they took so many big hits which threw them off their intended game plan.Brian Ashton still has to say well played to the Boks.

Ken, Cape Town, South Africa

Was Habana playing? England totally shut him down. A blade of grass and a dodgy penalty decision separated our boys from that cup. England can hold its head very high today... roll on the 6-Nations!!

Jerry, Lagos, Portugal

The World Cup is over, South Africa have the trophy but New Zealand are the best team in the world. Even the IRB referees panel have admitted that 3 errors were made in the last 15 minutes of the NZ v France game. These errors cost NZ the game. Why was an English referee put in charge of this game? I'm not saying he was biased but obviously England would prefer France to NZ as semi final opponents. Similarly why was a South African referee (who as a touch judge also missed "that" forward pass.) put in charge of the England v France semi when obviously S.Africa would prefer England to France as their Final opponents.
Th final was a very boring game. Rugby is struggling as the 4th most popular football code in Australia and it will die if something is not done very soon to implement the "Stellenbosch" rules to make the game more entertaining.
John T
Sydney Australia

John Thixton, Sydney, Australia

II am English and I am proud to read ther comments of my countrymen. They could complain like crazy about the refereeing but every one of them agrees S A were better and deserved to win. What a difference to the posts from S A itself and the comments from the Australian and New Zealand supporters after their teams lost. The S A posts are crowing and Australia's and N Z's are whining - Still !!!.
Its sport - you win or you lose, but you get over it and look to the next game. The Southern hemisphere fans need to grow up.

Riley, Kyiv, Ukraine

New Zealand didn't have the benefit of technolgy in fact no benefit at all when the other team is allowed to play offside. The match ststistics in fact show how one sided the officiating was. Look at the facts don't accept the rhetoric of the so called experts. The ultimate beneficiaries were South Africa and the IRB coffers. Is their a journalist prepared to investigate and tell the truth? South Africa also benefitted fronm poor officiating in their game against France in 1995.

Ian, London, UK

If only Jason Robinson or Paul Sackey had been on the wing to finish Tait's break in the second half, the game and the result could have been very different for England

Patrick, Dudley,

Very objective commentary on the game, but why the hell did he not give us the score?

John M. Whyte, Winnipeg, Canada

I have to disagree that the best team won - only one of the teams on the field last night was capable of making play - of scoring tries (regardless of whether or not the end result was allowed). We should have learnt from the New Zealand lesson that we are foolish to be over-awed by teams whose performance on the field is actually only sufficient - not the stuff of dreams. I'd love to see these two teams meet again in a couple of months time. In the meantime, well done the bocs - enjoy the celebrations!

Tom, Dubai,

South Africa were worthy champions in my opinion, they have played the best rugby all tournament. But I am a very proud Englishman this morning having seen my team show real guts and ambition. To a man the English squad have performed heroically.

steven alex, newcastle, england

Having played and refereed at district level, in Australia, all I can say, is that the game that "Is played in Heaven", has become stilled, just too technical with its laws, and the most boring team sport. Until the law makers reward enterprising, attacking rugby, the appeal for the TV masses, and those who attend games, will just get to the point that this code of football will decrease in its appeal to the sporting public.
The appeal of Rugby, is now totally confined to "Afficiados". The appeal of Football and Rugby League is, in this country, just totally overtaking this game.
Having watched this final at the ungodly hour of 5.00am Australian EST, I can say that without a shadow of doubt, having watched every other WRC final, this was the most BORING!
Frank

Dr Frank Hold, Bonville, Australia

The angle from behind showed he lifted his foot just in time before the line! So it should have been a try. But alas, it wasn't given.

But South Africa are clearly a better overall team. But on the night it should have been a closer finish, rather than fizzling out like it did.

Neal, Leeds, England

It was a very close call on the try but the correct one. When they showed the slow motion replay from behind you could see his left foot sliding across the grass touching the line before the ball was grounded. What happened next doesnt matter whether he lifted his foot or not. He was out before he touched the ball down.

Like one of the commentators said before the game that there was a fine line between winning and loosing when referring to the France game. The same applies in this game. I do think though the key moment was Lewis Moody doing that trip which SA scored from to go 9 clear.

Andrew, Dartford, UK

Great victory to the Boks who beat the Poms at their own game plan but as a rugby game very ordinary. The game was fierce, vicious and very physical and Boks defence more than matched England but as Percy kicked them ahead England lost some of its relentless drive

John Du Bois, Melbourne, Australia

Yes, the refereeing was inconsistent. Yes, it was a try (his left foot is raised over the line and not on it as the ball is grounded. Even then, when the decision is borderline, the instruction to the TV officials was to benefit the attacking side). And yes, we were unlucky at vital moments.

But lets face it, the Springboks owed the lineout and any time you give away 7 of your own, including a great opportunity from 3 yards out, you don't deserve to win.

I feel no bitterness, only pride (and a slight hangover). Roll on the 6 Nations!

Rick T, Dubai, UAE

dont get like new zealand and carry on bleating the foot touched the line before the ball went down everybody has been calling for technology in sport so thats the result

Len Richards, Durban , South Africa

England were far from disgraced and showed great courage and did their country proud.

M Buchanan, Johannesburg, South Africa

Yes, the angle from behind did indicate that his left foot touched the line, but his foot finished in the air. I think this is where there it was not 100% clear: was his foot already on its way up? I couldn't tell from my TV.

Anyway, say we had got the try (+4 points) and the ref had been more consistent (+3 points for a penalty against Habana for deliberately running in front of the kicker), we'd have ended up 13-15. Very simplistic analysis I know, but on balance SA were that bit better than us. Sharper in most areas and, as John of London said, superior in the lineouts where Matfield made all the difference.

Mark, Bugis,

It was hard as a Wallabies supporter to get behind either of the finalists - but as an Australian, the old addage sticks " I support 2 teams - the Wallabies and whoever is playing against England".
On the back of Stephen Jones' obvious glee at the demise of the Wallabies at the hands of England - I finally get my cahnce to return serve. Southern hemisphere teams won both the 3rd/4th place play off and the final. There is only one winner of the tournament and everybody else is a loser - welcome to the club big fella - here, have a slice of humble pie!

Stephen Strangio, Sydney, Australia

"From the angles available to Stuart Dickinson, the television match official, it seemed that he must award the try."

I assume you looked away when they repeatedly showed the angle from behind then? :)

I initially thought it was a try but the angle from behind the player clearly showed his boot touched the touchline before he dotted the ball down. Close call but still correct.

I'm gutted at the loss but SA were the form team throughout the tournament and even though England pushed them very hard, they still deserved to win it.

England were destroyed in the lineouts which didn't help matters. Matfield is in a class of his own and he made all the difference.

John, London, England