Question Number: 1965

Law 10 - Method of Scoring

Al Patrash of Livonia, MI USA asks...

Regarding question 1956 - I have always BELIEVED that a referee MUST SEE the ball cross completely over the goal line and between the posts before he can award a goal. In question 1956 the awarding of a goal was based on an imprint on the ground. Anything could have made that imprint at anytime? It's not that I don't believe the referee when he says the imprint must have come from the play in question, it's simply that if no official SAW the ball pass completely over the goal line, how can a goal be awarded? You comments please...PS. I submitted this question twice but forgot to fill in who it was from the first time. Sorry.

Answer provided by Referee Victor Matheson

OK, the most important thing is for the referees to get the call right. Both referees saw the ball hit the crossbar and bounce straight down, so it is not as if they didn't see the play. The only thing they are not sure about is whether the ball crossed wholely over the line. If the referee believes the imprint is enough evidence to suggest the ball was all the way over the line and awards a goal, I don't have a problem with that. It's not as if the referee clearly knew that no goal was scored and then later awarded a goal based on an imprint. The referee had no clue either way (and no help from the AR). The imprint gave the ref the only clue he had. Get the call right; that's the name of the game. I think the referee probably got the call right.

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 13121

See Question: 15103