I actually find it quite interesting trying to find a conclusive answer when arguments are reasoned and justified such as FA's.

I read the newspaper Monday morning and it said it missed and then showed the draw for the next round and we was in it so that's good enough for me

Boots n All just showed an analysis of it that the sky techs have been working on. Strangely enough there stills from behind the post are at what appears to be the exact same point as mine so they've obviously reached very similar conclusions in their calculations.

They also played a video with an indefinite post stretched up and the angle from behind showed that the ball doesn't once cross the outward plane of the post from leaving Brough's foot.

Job done then. After all that we were too generous, it was not a drop goal, Brough turned his back too soon, I expect a full retraction by all Huddersfield fans around the same time the Bradford ones put theirs in over the none voluntary tackle from Joynt.

It is getting boring now?

I just think a little bit of lateral thinking and repeat viewing can only bring one conclusion and that is that the ball went wide. I have been absolutely convinced having analysed it in depth that it went wide, indeed I think its ludicrously obvious and I'm glad this is now being proven.

Reading some of the inept one dimensional posts that say the goal was good, is a bit like witnessing somebody that's never watched cricket before, give an unqualified and incorrect verdict on an LBW. Once you understand angles and perspective, it becomes far easier to judge, and the loud mouthed knee jerkers become far more irksome.

But it was a good drop goal ...

The odd thing is, as an expert in angles and perspective, you think you could read a one dimensional post. My limited understanding was you'd need a minimum of 2 dimensions to be able to read it.

There is no such thing as one dimensional????

In the context of a post on a forum? Well, it would need length, for a start. Each letter occupies some.

But there's your one dimension used up. In terms of height, my word processing software only goes down to 1 pt and that's hard to see. But that still does have that second dimension. With a magnifying glass, perhaps. But the software doesn't have a zero pt. If it did, that I imagine it would be tough to read The rest of this post is in one dimensional text:

time is one dimensional