Goal or No Goal?
 

Washington State Cup BU12 Final.

Watch this link: SU West Controversial Goal - YouTube

Goal or no goal? Give your opinion.

FYI, from FIFA LOG Law 12:

A goalkeeper is considered to be in control of the ball:

• while the ball is between his hands or between his hand and any surface (e.g. ground, own body)
• while holding the ball in his outstretched open hand
• while in the act of bouncing it on the ground or tossing it into the air

When a goalkeeper has gained possession of the ball with his hands, he cannot be challenged by an opponent.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/wRu4e2k0eK8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I don't see anything from the camera angle at full speed to make me think the center referee got it wrong.

While a relative rookie in soccer, I do not see that he had control. His own teammate disrupted is attempt to gain control and he was fishing for the ball and never got it.

I was unsure until the last replay. That one cinches is. Good goal. The keeper never controls the ball. Blue knocks the ball away from the keeper as he is reaching for it.

With the benefit of stop motion and enlargement, I am going to say it should not have been a goal. The GK's team mate initially dislodged the ball from his possession. Then the GK again got both hands onto the ball at that point the play should have been whistled dead.

With my assessor's hat on I would question the CR on his level of effort, I would have liked to see him sprinting into the top of the PA when the player went wide and all the way to the goal line. Had he done that he would have been in the camera shot somewhere between the top of the PA and the GA.

Even if the keeper did somehow get both hands on it, which I don't see at all, why in the world would you stop play at that point? IMO the keeper loses possession without a touch from the opposing team until after the ball is away from the keeper. Beyond that, the CR is at the top of the area looking directly at the keeper during the play in question from no more than 15 yards away.

With the ability to stop the action during the 18th second, after the team mate is down near the GK legs and the ball can be seen in front of the blue player's left leg, it appears to me that the GK has contacted the ball with both hands. Based on the team name and the view of the matching tents on the sidelines at the beginning of the clip, the appearance of a second game on the adjoining filed, I am guessing that this is a USSF youth tournament. USSF in the ATR 12.16 tells us that the GK is in possession when holding the ball between both hands or between one hand and any other surface. That is the point in time that I believe play should be stopped.

Again regarding the CR's location. He stopped outside the PA in a spot that appears to leave him "straight lined". Had he gone wider and followed the play and blue #10 into the PA, he would have been closer to the play and had the play bracketed between himself and his AR. #7 Blue stepping through, is what contacts the GK hands, arms and causes the GK to loss contact with the ball, #19 then scores the goal. If you search "goal keeper possession" on the USSF askareferee website you will find Jim Allen speaking of even 1 finger on the ball and the ball in contact with the ground, post or person is to be ruled possession.

In real time with only 1 look do I get it right? I hope so but possibly not.

Why precisely are you stopping play? At no point does blue touch the ball while the keeper has possession. If you stop play just because the keeper has possession, your only possible restart is a drop ball. We don't stop play just because the keeper has possession. Since we don't stop play for no reason, and since the keeper loses possession without blue touching the ball or the keeper, there is no reason to stop play or disallow the goal.

When may a GK be legally challenged?

Once the GK got one or both hands on the ball he now has possession.

Blue #7's foot contacting the GK left arm when he has one or both hands on the ball is a foul.

Even if you do not see the opponent contacting the GK you still have ATR 12.16 "An opponent who attempts to challenge for a ball in the possession of the goalkeeper may be considered to have committed a direct free kick foul."

Once you see the keeper contact the ball with his hand or hands after the touch by his team mate you now have possession and activity by opponents #7 and/or #19 are illegal challenges to the GK in possession.

The restart will be a DFK for the GK's team.

At what point does the keeper hold or trap the ball? There is no point when the ball stops the movement started by the keepers teammate so it is clear that the keeper has failed to hold or trap it so he cannot according to the ATR have possession.

Even failing that, you cannot, as you suggest, stop play because the keeper establishes control. You have to actually have the opponent challenge the keeper to have an offense. If you stopped play when you feel the keeper established control the only possible restart is a drop ball.

You're bending the rules to bail out the defender and the keeper.

In the opinion of the referee is the basis of decision making in TLOG. In your opinion you do not see a time when the GK gained possession. In my opinion I do see a moment in time where the GK does gain possession and is then "kicked" in his left arm or "challenged" after gaining possession. You do not see the challenge by #7, I do see a challenge by #7.

Based on your opinion you are correctly allowing the goal. Based on my opinion I would be correctly applying TLOG as guided by the ATR, and restarting with a DFK for the GK's team.

If I were assigned to assess this game, this would be a discussion point in the debriefing. Why? So that I could explore if the referee crew is aware of points that lead to making a correct decision, no matter which decision they make.

Because it required me to look/replay/stop the action multiple times to come to my conclusion, I would not mark the decision incorrect no matter which way the referee, in his opinion, decided. The thing I would want to come from the debriefing is just how little hand to ball contact is required to be correctly judged possession, especially in a "youth" game.

I was a keeper and I like to think that I protect the keeper as much as the next referee. I have given the foul on a one finger and the ground trap before. That being said, I don't think you have any basis here for an opinion that the keeper had possession and if I was assessing the game, I would mark you down on foul recognition if you disallowed the goal.

ITOOTR does not give license to ignore the requirements of the LotG.

What requirement of TLOG do you feel I have ignored? :confused:

In my opinion I have stated that I see the GK's hand or hands on the ball. After seeing that, I see #7's leg contacting the left arm of the GK at that point we can judge either a kicking foul or challenging the GK in possession. Either one within TLOG requires a DFK for the GK's team.

Again I "see" this using frame by frame advancement and enlargement. I admit that any referee in real time may or may not see that sequence. I am going to give the benefit of the doubt to CR and AR no matter which way they judge. The ONLY reason I would discuss it with the crew is to be sure they fully understand TLOG and how and why they arrived at either decision.

You may be so confident in your judgment using a camera from somewhere behind the touchline half a field away to "mark down" a referee's judgement but when I am assessing, if the referee tells me he saw the GK's hand or hands on the ball, then be contacted or challenged, I am going accept his judgment. Why? because it is fully supported by TLOG, the ATR and the additional instruction found on the USSF approved askasoccerreferee website.

Possession

The only point the keeper has both hands on the ball is when his teammate disposes him. At no point after that does the keeper hold the ball between his hands or between one hand and another object. The keeper is liable for challenge in this situation. I don't believe that either blue player touched the keeper. Certainly, I don't see a kick that rises to careless which means there can be no foul for kicking.

Look, there's the ability to apply the Laws and then there's good judgement. If you are only assessing ability to apply the laws, you are doing a huge disservice to those you are assessing. In one of the areas I used to work, there was a referee who could have quoted the LotG to you backwards. I'm sure he aced every test he ever took on the subject. He was also the absolute worst referee in the area because his judgement was horrible.

It's one thing to say you couldn't tell from where you were how the referee's judgement; it quite another to just accept the referee's judgement when the purpose of assessing is to see if his judgement is good in the first place.