Goal-line Decisions . . . by Ed

        In the recent Premier league match between Chelsea and Tottenham, we were treated to yet another controversial goal line decision. A shot from Lampard of Chelsea squirmed under the Spurs keeper; the keeper turned and dived back towards the goal line and got his outstretched hand on the top of the ball just as it was crossing the line. The entire ball had not crossed the entire line, thus it was not a valid goal.  However the AR¹, who was positioned with the offside line, followed the shot in as fast as he could and indicated that the ball had crossed the line, even though he was still several yards upfield of the goal-line, so the referee awarded a goal.  And on May 17 the Mail Online - Football writer Rob Draper commented without a hint of irony that the assistant referee had been in a perfect position to make the call [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1382147/Chelsea-2-Tottenham-1-Kalou-scrambles-winner-Blues-scrape-controversial-win.html] 

Perfect position?  Sigh . . . .

        This goal changed the result, and was one factor in Spurs being effectively eliminated from the 4th place spot needed for European Champions’ League qualification---a very significant error on the part of the AR.  The incident inspired memories of other well-known goal-line decisions, including the famous one in last year’s World Cup match between Germany and England.  In that game the ball had clearly crossed the Germans’ goal line, but the AR² did not indicate a goal. What is the difference between these two situations, one goal given, one not, but both of which were wrong?

        As a general rule, if the ball is on or just barely over the line an AR cannot signal a scored goal unless he is essentially right on the goal line because it is not possible to give an accurate decision from other positions. Therefore the AR in the Chelsea match should not have indicated a goal.  However in the England-Germany match the ball was over the goal-line by several ball-widths (as was pointed out here at the time), and the AR could have seen its position clearly from his location upfield of the goal-line. But his training had instilled into him the principle mentioned above, so he would not stick his neck out and make the positive decision.

        No doubt he was aware of the goal given in a previous England-Germany World Cup encounter, that being the 1966 Final, in which a goal was awarded to England after the ball hit the underside of the crossbar, and then  bounced down and out.  The referee³ ran over to consult the linesman⁴ and the goal was given.

        Many observers doubt that this was a true goal, especially in Germany!

        But there have been a few other such situations, not so well-known:

        In the Vancouver-NY Cosmos semi final match at Giants Stadium in 1979, a game thought by some cognoscenti to be the “greatest game ever played in the history of the NASL”, a shot also bounced down from the Cosmos cross-bar and back into play.  The linesman⁵ initially flagged for a goal, but after protest from Cosmos players and further consultation with the referee⁶, he changed his mind and the goal was nullified.  He had been in good position to make the call, and it is not clear why the decision was reversed by the referee.

        In a World Cup match in Mexico in 1986 between Spain and Brazil, there was another close goal line decision at the Brazil goal on a ball again bouncing down from the cross bar. The linesman⁷ was initially at the goal line because the ball came originally from a corner on the left, but he had moved out as the defenders moved up. He was then not on the line, and so was unable to make a positive decision for the referee⁸, although from replays it looked like the ball was over the line.  

        Mexico hosted Argentina in a friendly match in 1984 in Monterrey. From a corner on the right the ball curled into the Argentina goal just under the crossbar, where it was caught by the keeper, who clutched the ball close to his chest. Unfortunately he was bumped by a colleague who was attempting to head the ball, and this collision caused the keeper to step back into the goal with the ball still tightly held next to his body. He realized his position and fell forward to the ground, but it was too late. The collision had forced the keeper and the entire ball back past the goal-line and goal-post for a goal. Because it was from a corner, and because in those days referees were encouraged to go deep at corners, the referee⁹ was right on the goal-line and immediately signalled for a goal, at the same time as the linesman¹⁰ who was still at his corner-kick position flagged for a goal.

        So in these situations, we have had some officials in good positions on the goal line to make their decisions; we have some linesmen/ARs in positions where they could not make a positive decision because the ball was so close to the line; one where the AR should have made a positive decision because the ball was over the line by several ball widths; and two where the AR should not have made a positive decision because he was not on the line.

        We may never know the reasoning for the incorrect decision the in Chelsea-Spurs match.  But the linesman in the England-Germany match in 1966 (commonly known as the “Russian linesman” but actually from Azerbaijan) many years later reportedly gave a one-word answer when asked why he awarded the goal . . .

        And that one word was “Stalingrad”!

        Here's a humorous view of that incident:  

^{1 Mike Cairns, England}

^{2 Mauricio Espinosa, Uruguay, who admitted he had missed the bounce of the ball}

^{3 Gottfried Dienst, Switzerland}

^{4 Tofik Bahramov, Russia (now Azerbaijan)}

^{5 Peter Johnson, D.C.}

^{6 Toros Kibritjian, Cal S.}

^{7 David Socha, USA}

^{8 Chris Bambridge, Australia}

^{9 Edward Bellion, USA}

^{10 Robert Evans, USA}