Officials: Let The "Net" Decide Playoff Goals

[letemplay]

A part of me lost love for the game today. During overtime in the NCS - ED White match, an AR made a very subjective decision to score a goal on a cleared ball by an ED White player on a corner kick attempt by NCS.

The goal decided the match...2-1, NCS.

The AR decided that the ball broke the entire plane of the goal when the ED White player who cleared the ball was outside the plane of the goal. The ball was then played off frame by an NCS player which should have resulted in an ED White goal kick. There was no motion on the part of the AR at the point the ball was played out that it was a goal nor did the AR have a good angle to make such a decision. Players from both teams did not feel the ball crossed the plane of the goal. In fact, both teams were setting up for an ED White goal kick with no argument for a goal being scored by an NCS player. The AR took the liberty to convene with the CR to make this decision.

This was a hard fought defensive match between two evenly matched teams on a rain drenched field. Like most matches this evening, it rained for the entire match. There were golden goal periods still available. If no goal was scored in the golden goal periods, there were still "kicks from the mark" available.

Why make such a subjective goal decision in a playoff match? It was tough to see senior girls besides themselves in their final high school match due to a subjective decision by an AR, not because they lost the match.

Officials, make every effort to be objective in scoring goals in playoff matches. Why not let the "net" decide goals in playoff matches?

[sokerfan]

I was having this discussion with someone during the Lafayette / Northshore game. There was a hand ball in the box (not called) by the NHS player and she was able to clear the ball from in front of the NHS goal, thus and advantage. Since early in the season at the New Orleans & Mandeville tournaments the refs have been telling the coaches they would not call incidental hand balls in the field or box unless there was an advantage. No problem, but in this instance there was "an advantage" then it should have been called. By not calling it the ref has just helped decide the possible outcome.

Whether it be early in the game or late in the game, a call that is NOT made has the same effect on helping to decide the possible outcome as if the call HAD been made. Just the other way. So for those REFS who have the mentality that I WILL NOT decide the outcome of the game, by not making that call you just did.

As far as a judgment call like the ball crossing the line or not, we will not know what his eyes actually saw. I would hope that if the AR is not sure, they would not award the goal. But we can only hope they call what they actually SEE.

[wild2120]

letemplay - Were you on the goal line so that you have the same view as the AR? I seriously doubt it, so I guess your post is probably more subjective the the call by the AR.

As any ref will tell you, the "net" does not decide if a goal has been scored. That is not in the FIFA rules states. Do we need to have an amendment to change FIFA rules for a HS playoff game?

I understand... You think your team was robbed. It will feel better next week or next month.

Finally, I've got some news for you... Officiating any sport requires the official to make "judgement" calls. Sokerfan is right, handling the ball is handling the ball throughout the entire game. Tbest officials strive for consistency from start to end

[happyjack]

From your description of the ARs position and "non-motion" and further convening with the center, it sounds like the mechanics were correct and the AR did what he was supposed to. If that means that a goal was scored, then that is what happens. One of the primary roles of the AR is watching the ball and determining if the entire ball crossed the goal line between the goalposts. fans and players are often engrossed in looking at play rather than the ball and that often gives a different perspective over what the AR saw. Wasn't at the game so I am simply stating what the AR does

[furriner]

As an aside, letting the net decide can't work. Some schools use the newer square nets that do not hang at an acute angle. that would be an unfair advantage.

I say let's introduce expensive goal line technology at every school in the State. Instant replays on giant screens would have to be compulsory. From the description above, the official was in the right place looking along the goal line. He was probably the only person with that angle, and as such, the only person who could make the call.

I heard the EDW keeper made some incredible saves during the game though.

[wild2120]

Feb 10, 2011 8:30:05 GMT -6 furriner said:

I say let's introduce expensive goal line technology at every school in the State. Instant replays on giant screens would have to be compulsory.

The Louisiana HS soccer could be just like the NHL (every goal reviewed by LHSAA's "Toronto" HQ).

If we would go to that, I think the video feed should be reviewed by aliceshoe. Alice is the only one who could be trusted to make a goal/no-goal call from video.

[happyjack]

We are at the point in the season where every loss is the fault of poor officiating. Somehow though the winning team never attributes their victory to the officials but the losers only blame them. Never a missed opportunity, missed PK, bad defensive play, solely the officials fault

[cardsinhand]

Feb 10, 2011 12:26:44 GMT -6 aliceshoe1 said:

Net is not always true anyway...am sure several of us here have seen ball hit crossbar, clearly lands in goal on the ground, and ball has backspin and comes out. GOOOOAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!
.

That reminds me of this one time in a World Cup match this happened and the AR missed it. People went nuts! A travesty! A goal was scored (even though it didn't hit the net) but the replay showed the AR missed it! Should have been a goal!

Moral of the story, Louisiana HS referees are better than FIFA World Cup referees. Why you ask; because they were out working in rainy weather, 35 degrees, and 15 N wind in south LA for (depending on where they traveled from) minimum wage! When you pay for our decision (which is what we are hired to do) that is what you get. Our decision. As Happy said it sounds like procedure was followed and a decision was made. In other words, they did what they were paid to do and that doesn't always make everyone happy (no pun intended here).

On a side note, glad to know I was not the only idiot to work a match last night. ;D

[itsthetalons]

I was out there and it was cold and wet.

[happyjack]

And I'll be out in it again tonite

[xavi]

Ditto to the refs that worked games last night. At the Lakeshore game the conditions were about as far away from optimum as it could get. Fortunately, like the NCS match it was on turf, so despite the constant rain the field condition was as good as it gets in constant rain. FWIW I spoke to a NCS parent just minutes after the match and they felt it was a tough call to see from the stands. The player who served the corner in, and would have had a down the line point of sight believed the whole ball crossed before it was cleared. They said the whole sequence was a bang, bang affair with maximum effort by both sides. In addition I heard nothing but praises for the E.D. White team and how they played. In particular I was told defensively they played a gem of a match, diffusing much of what NCS wanted to do. As hard as it is whenever there is a close call, we have to let the referees make them. In soccer they never always go the way we want.

[Steven Gerrard]

Alice, I was an AR when the ball crossed the goal, hit the back decending bar, and bounced out right away. It happened so fast, no one was sure what had happened. Not sure if it ever touched the net, but I immediately turned to run up field to indicate that it was a score.

letmeplay, I feel for you if it was a bad call. You hate to see something like that decide a game.

As a ref, if I am an AR, I can tell you that I don't call it a goal unless I actually see the entire ball cross the goal line. If someone suddenly blocks my vision and I am not sure if it crossed or not, then no goal. I can't guess. I need to call what I actually see. As to the AR in your game, he may have been following the same standard and, for whatever reason, he felt like he saw the entire ball cross the line. Typically, they are at a better angle then anyone else in the field, and you have to trust their Judgment. So, perhaps he was correct? I guess we will never know. It is hard to get over, but you will. Good luck to your team next year.

[bhssoccercoach]

I'll give you one more crazy situation that occurred in our first round game against McKinley. Game went to PKs. A McKinley player stutter-stepped on her PK attempt, scored, and the AR waved the flag indicating a foul? by the shooter. Goal was waved off. McKinley coach (also a referee) consulted with head ref and it was determined (correctly) that they still had a re-take from the resulting call. I argued (and the ref agreed) that the rule was that a re-take was the right call but that the original player could not take the re-kick. The subsequent PK was shot wide, we went to the 6th shooter where McKinley scored and our shot rang off the crossbar. We lost the game, but I think the referees handled everything by the book, as it should be. It was a bit ironic in that I was able to practice my girls once in the week preceding our game and a lot of focus was on PKs. The girls weren't focused in practice and we paid for it with a loss AGAIN in the 1st. round. Teachable moment for the girls that will be back next year.

[mckinleygirlscoach]

That was a heck of a game that was and way to finish wth pks! I have to say that referees calling or not calling a goal is tough for anyone to take. I have to go ahead and point out all of the "wrongs" with my player's pk being called a nogoal. First of all, it is the referee's responsibility to monitor the player and would be the one to call the stutter step, not the ar. Her job was to watch the keeper and to indicate if the ball completely crossed the line. Whatever the case, she called it andthe referee allowed her to make the call. I did have a real problem with the referee saying there was no retake. I was relieved when he discussed it with me and agreed that a retake was to be taken. There was no reason for the same player not to be allowed to retake the kick. Yes, the rules stated that she should have been cautioned, but she was not and 5 kicks had been taken since the call. She was not a cautioned player and should not have been treated as one. ( Unbelievabe that he got that from the opposing coach! The opportunity to caution had passed) I am glad I decided to give up the arguement even though I know I was right! We were all freezing and it was obvious that the referee felt confident in his decision and it was time to put an end to the game. Oh and as far as practicing pks...... I was glad to hear my girls did take this serious. The top 5 kickers had been practicing on their own time! Thanks again coach for the great hospitality and great sportsmanship showed by players, fans, and coaches.

[happyjack]

Actually the ARs duty on PKs is what the referee told them in the pregame. It could be to watch the goal, keeper encroachment, and infringement by the kicker as well. An infringement is an infringement regardless of which member of the officiating crew recognizes it and opts to penalize for it.

[bhssoccercoach]

Had a discussion with the ref assignor yesterday regarding the incident. He is of the same opinion as you McKinleycoach, and I believe you are both right. You know I wasn't going to let your best shooter step up and bury another with some argument from me! btw, thanks for the compliments. I also was very proud of my parents and players. I have had to explain what happened a half dozen times now.

[letemplay]

Gerrard, you're at the understanding level of the post. I'm licensed at a high enough level and was watching the position and posture of the AR to make this post. I also know where the ball was from my angle of observation. This post is not about a parent crying about a loss, but an awareness to those calling playoff games. At this level of play, as Gerrard noted "If someone suddenly blocks my vision and I am not sure if it crossed or not, then no goal"!

[happyjack]

If you're registered at a high enough level then I'd suggest you go reread the referee code of ethics. Unless you were directly behind the AR and on the goal line, you didn't have the proper angle. And at ncs there are no stands on either goal line, so chances are you werent there.

[dulac]

Feb 9, 2011 23:23:12 GMT -6 letemplay said:

Why not let the "net" decide goals in playoff matches?

This statement makes no sense.

[soccermom11]

Seems you always need clarification of statements made. What letthemplay means is that the ball should cross the line and go into the goal to score a goal. He didn't mean that it must touch the net, as some of you are thinking. I was there and the AR was not in a good position to see if the ball crossed the line. Both teams continued play, so the girls did not think the ball was across the line. The AR didn't decide he was going to confer with the CR for about 1 minute after the play. If it the ball really crossed the line he should have called it immediately.
The refs gave a yellow card to a player who had her jesery pulled and was elbowed, not the one who did the pulling and elbowing. They also let the goalie take out a player while she was out of the box and didn't give a card. When calling a playoff game refs need to be consistant with calls. I'm all about calling fouls and giving cards when necessary, but it has to be called both ways.

No one is saying that the refs lost the game for EDW, they had chances to score and didn't finish. Both teams played a good game. Just saying that refs need to do a better job when calling playoff games.