Guys… We Gotta Talk About The 1966 World Cup

You forgot to mention that England played all their matches at Wembley. No other teams had that luxury.

England talked so much after every failed tournament. Imagine if they won, the talking would be endless.

I am from Argentina and remember the World Cup in '66. Both Argentina and Uruguay were known to be brutal in their play. Simply put things were different at that time, so it is always difficult to judge today. I, for one accept that England won and enjoyed the final. Nice work to you, very interesting indeed. Thank you for pulbishing.

Good, fair analysis. One mistake, though: the handball that you claim that favors Germany was not a foul, according to the Rules of the Game in 1966. A hand ball wasn’t necessarily a foul 10 years ago and the one in the final was completely unintentional. Also, what they did to Pelé was brutal and one can argue that he wasn’t protected by de referees to stop Brasil… but that part of the argument is debatable. I respect your opinion. Great video

0:14 My Grandpa was young during this World Cup and he actually went to it back then. It was his first World Cup he went to see in person. He even saw the final I believe. Although he’s been dead for 13 years now so he’s not around. Although my grandma was around during this World Cup too and she’s still alive today. Although she didn’t go to this World Cup in person

A calm and collected analysis, based on evidence, and trying to see from various perspectives, is always the way to go.

This makes perfect sense perfidious Albion strikes again.

All in all, reasonably fair, but I have some objections. 1. The handball in the final was clearly involuntary and thus not an infraction according to the rules at the time. 2. The Suarez handball you mention is in no way comparable, because Nigeria (I think that's who it was) was awarded a penalty kick. The complaint here wasn't that there was a handball, but that it wasn't punished. 3. Regarding the Hurst non-goal, while I agree that it very likely wasn't a goal, it's also true that with the slow video frame rate, we don't actually have picture with the ball actually on the ground. 4. The treatment of Pele was outrageous. Particularly since they had done the same thing to him four years earlier. He was the best player in the world at the time, and the opponents were clearly attempting to injure him. 5. A sending-off for language is ridiculous, and was even more ridiculous at the time, when the game was much more physical than it is today. How can it be perfectly fine to butcher Pele, but complaining too much about calls (never seen that before) gets you thrown out?

19 European refs and 4 South American ones

Argentina is probably the most corrupted World Cup winners of all time. All 3 tournaments where they won weren't without a sort of scandals: In 1978, they won because of intervention by the military junta, who were ruling the nation at that time. One notable scandal included how Argentina managed to reach the Final in an unfair way by trashing Peru 6-0. In 1986, the so-called "Hand of God" goal scored by Diego Maradona vs England. And most recently, even though they had won the 2022 World Cup, many world fans other than Argentina were worried because Argentina did this in a disgrace fashion. Most of the games involving Argentina were actually fixed by FIFA, including the Battle of Lusail. Not to mention, the most recent racial abuse scandal against French Black players by Argentine midfielder Enzo Fernandez continued the allegations of Argentine Football after they beat France in the Final.

Only 2 goal hat-trick in World Cup history

Context is key. Great job!

It was arranged for the tournament to be played in England, fair enough. But for England to play all their games at Wembley, is that fair? A bad taste? The ref bias in the final. It's not just Argentina and Uruguay, it leaves a bad taste in your mouth if you're a Scot too. We've had to put up with how wonderful they were, ever since. Every major tournament we get reminded about how wonderful England are and how they've won the World Cup. After all this time it's pathetic that they keep bringing this up.

Yo i like your content, nice explaining to the perspectives of two sides

Short answer: yes Long answer: yes

I gonna sum up the video, "south americans were wrong" 😂 english defending the english, no surprises here

Brilliant video. Why don't more people look at things from both sides or all sides in all life events !? The world would be a better place if they did

The Pele incident is pretty harsh. Those kind of tackles especially above the ankles is a send off even on those times

Unfortunately I am old enough to remember it and there is an important point missed here regarding South American and certainly Northern European football. Today the game is truly international in the sense that footballers from all over the world play all over the world. In 1966 other than the World Cup this didn't happen. Rules were interpreted very differently, what was acceptable in SA was not acceptable in Europe and vice versa.This led to the sort of matches such as England v Argentina and W Germany v Uruguay making it very difficult for referees. (Even worse was the infamous 'Battle of Santiago' in the previous tournament.) As for the Brazil issue the general feeling was that they were kicked out of the tournament and the press certainly went after Bulgaria, Hungary and Portugal for their tactics. The sympathy in the country was with Brazil. However it is also true that those kind of tackles were not at all unusual.

nice little roll over seems like the argentinian was making a Tarantino movie