Goal-line Decision, Redux. (From Ed)

Regular readers of this blog will recall that we have discussed the issue of goal line decisions in two previous articles, posted on October 28, 2010, and May 18, 2011. We are now induced to revisit the subject due to an incident in the Bolton v. Queens Park Rangers match in the EPL yesterday.

 

This was a very critical match since both teams are facing the dire prospect of relegation and the consequent loss of millions of pounds in revenue should relegation occur.

In this match, as can be seen from the photo, QPR (red shirts) had the ball over the line legitimately for what should have been a goal. However no goal was given because neither the referee nor the AR was able to see and verify that the ball had indeed crossed the line. This was crucial incident since it directly affected the outcome of the match, which was won by Bolton 2-1.  As expected, this incident has brought up the thorny concept of some sort of goal line technology to assist the match officials in incidents of this type, which was discussed at the most recent meeting of the IFAB earlier this month.

But is it really needed? Let's examine the particulars of this incident.

The ball was played in from a corner kick on the left, and headed into the goal. At a corner such as this, the referee is positioned at the top of the penalty area and so cannot view the goal line at all. However the AR is positioned on the goal line at the opposite corner flag and should have a good view directly along the goal line. In this particular case however, his view was probably blocked by the Bolton defender positioned just inside the post and also by the goalkeeper himself.

In UEFA competitions this season, and some others elsewhere around the world, an additional Assistant Referee is positioned on each goal line to help in situations like this. (See the blogs on October 28, 2010 and August 18, 2011 for our views on the AAR subject.) However he is positioned on the right side of the goal, (the same side as the AR) and so in all likelihood would also have had his view blocked by the players if they were in use in the EPL. Further more the AAR would also block the view of the AR !

We believe the answer to this dilemma is to encourage the referee to take up a position on the goal line for corner kicks as always was the case in previous years. This will allow him to have an excellent view of the goal line, and if he had been in that position in the Bolton/QPR match, I have no doubt that a goal would have been given. An additional benefit of this position is that the referee is close enough to observe and by his presence, have an inhibitory effect on, all the grabbing and shoving that routinely takes place at corner kicks these days.

And yes, we know that this position is considered "old school" in many quarters. We categorically dismiss such naive beliefs.

THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISION TO GET RIGHT IN A SOCCER MATCH IS WHETHER OR NOT A GOAL HAS BEEN SCORED.

I have put this statement in all CAPS for emphasis, as I believe that this trumps all other considerations. We know that the concern with having the referee on the goal line is that he will be behind play if the ball is cleared out on a counter-attack. We challenge that claim with two points: 1) the counter attack is a low percentage event and 2) most top level referees are now fitter than ever, and should be able to sprint out that extra 18 yards a few times in a game without much difficulty.

How many more good goals will be missed before this is realized?

 

Comments

[Steve Horton]

I'm just curious what the rationale is to have AR and AAR on the same side - especially in this situation. It seems counter-intuitive to put them on the same side of the goal for this exact reason. The three can triangulate the ball/action better if AAR is opposite from AR in any situation.

[Response: The rationale escapes me too. There was some thought that having the AAR on the other side made the referee alter his diagonal to the center. See our previous blog on this subject last year. EB]

[Sandip Vyas]

The point about technology to assist reducing refereeing clangers is noteworthy. Most weekend league matches around the world will not have such resource available in the first instance and pragmatically could use eyes closer to the goal-line.

Several years ago, refereeing solo in O40~2 and Mens Amateur Div3/4 matches, standing on the goal line on CKs helped me make the right decisions, especially on ball going out of play, and in goal. Not surprisingly, I did not have any disagreements from the players on both teams, and they had wondered where I was. They adjusted, and took the ball on counter attack, but could not sustain it, and as you have observed, the counter attacks during a match are few. Assessors, and the D&G chaps have advised me 'never' to be near the goal area on CKs in a DSC system, as I am most likely to get behind in the counter attacks, although I had not fallen behind in those matches. So at this time, it is difficult to ascertain what the consequences will be in continuing to risk furrowing the assessors and D&G counsellor's brows by effectively going against the checks and balances they have put in place.

Are there any places where this practice is encouraged?

[Response: positioning is always supposed to be flexible. Yes, some assessors, but not all will not be happy with some positions. I note you are at Santa Cruz. There is at least one assessor in NCal who would not mark you down! EB]

[Manuel Ortiz]

As far as I am concerned, old school works. I am stll going into the penalty area when there are fouls against the defenders and I call them, and the complaints are rare. The instruction to stay outside the penalty area are not always effective because you are missing an important part of refereeing. PRESENCE. In my opinion, keeping the referee outside of the penalty area is just an excuse to avoid conflict. -MO

[Colin]

It should be noted that taking the position near the top of the area is only a recommended starting point of reference. Problems arise when Referees choose to maintain or rather "freeze and watch" play develop once it is kicked into play rather than moving as is often necessary. This is the matter that needs to be addressed more than equating that the blame is where one starts as opposed to where one is able to finish to have a view of this or similar incident requiring a deeper and/or wider angle.

[A.]

To get all instances of "ball over the goal line" decisions correct, the most important refereeing decision, technology is needed. No two ways about it.

A worse case than even the one highlighted in this article occurred in the big match in Italy a few weeks ago between Milan and Juventus. The AR was on the goal line for a corner kick with an unobstructed view and still managed to cock up the decision, which was massively over the line.

[Jeff]

Ed -- what about the referee's view into the goal mouth, to see the fouls that could occur there? When going solo on OTH games, I often change my positioning on set pieces as I learn what works and what doesn't in given situations. I used to go to the goal line on corner kicks and close DFKs, so that I could watch for offside and goals. What I tended to miss, being on the backside of the play and the players, were fouls on the other side of the body and even handling (potential denial).

[Response from Ed: You are absolutely correct to vary your positioning. All positioning in solo games or with ARs is a matter of compromise, as it is physically impossible to cover everything. You have to try to select the positioning that has the highest probability of seeing as much as possible.]