A&H

7.9 for AR or not?

Ciley Myrus

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
Thoughts on this, more from observing point of view. The first shot, for me, goes in, but for the purpose of the post, lets say yes, it does go in
The AR does not give the goal on the first shot. Regardless of what happens next, in this case the goal is scored beyond any doubt, are we marking down the AR for not giving the first effort? (as said at start of post lets say yes, it does go in?)
Afterall, he has technically missed a goal........does the fact it was scored beyond doubt milliseconds later get him out of jail and we let is pass, or, are we saying, sorry but you still missed the award of a goal?

 
The Referee Store
Andrew.Rainsbury said:
View attachment 2626Looks a cracking call to me without the aid of GLT. 👏
Click to expand...



The point of my post is not, is it a goal or not. The point of the post is, its a goal yet missed by the AR (and the AR was not on the goal line to make the first call, this post is not a judgement on the AR personal ability).
Do we ignore the match changing error?
Does it not count as match changing because milliseconds later its a goal anyway?
Does anything count officially record wise/bookie wise as to who scored the first shot (we are again saying for the point of the post that the first shot is a goal)
 
Ciley Myrus said:
The point of my post is not, is it a goal or not. The point of the post is, its a goal yet missed by the AR (and the AR was not on the goal line to make the first call, this post is not a judgement on the AR personal ability).
Do we ignore the match changing error?
Does it not count as match changing because milliseconds later its a goal anyway?
Does anything count officially record wise/bookie wise as to who scored the first shot (we are again saying for the point of the post that the first shot is a goal)
Click to expand...

Apologies, missed your point 😬
 
Why would the AR be on the goal line rather than where he should be?

If you watch the clip, as soon as the GK spills the ball, the AR sprints to get on the goal line from his correct position by which time the GK has recovered.....

Not sure he could do much more......
 
Padfoot said:
Why would the AR be on the goal line rather than where he should be?

If you watch the clip, as soon as the GK spills the ball, the AR sprints to get on the goal line from his correct position by which time the GK has recovered.....

Not sure he could do much more......
Click to expand...


I dont expect the AR to be on the goal line and am not asking him to do anything more ! Am asking IF its a goal and it WAS missed by the AR are we marking down.

I thought I had made my original post obvious, but clearly not.....wish had not asked now !! Engulfed by tangents now !
 
i understand where you're coming from, and i think the answer is yes.

if you miss a SFP challenge (completely miss it, no advatage signalled etc) but the team score seconds later i'd expect to be pulled up on it, same for getting a dogso call wrong in similar cicumstances.

you cant be rewarded (or not penalised) for getting something wrong just because the team still scored
 
I would say no, you can't mark the AR down. He was in the correct position in the run up to the shot and couldn't be expected to run at the same speed as the ball. As he had an angle on this it would not have been an accurate decision. Angles are not our friends.
 
PP62 said:
I would say no, you can't mark the AR down. He was in the correct position in the run up to the shot and couldn't be expected to run at the same speed as the ball. As he had an angle on this it would not have been an accurate decision. Angles are not our friends.
Click to expand...



On the basis he has missed a goal, he must be marked down...
 
Based on that clip, no way I am marking the AR down. If anything I am praising the AR for going with the shot, following it, and continuing to go when it goes to the GK and continuing to go when he spills it.

None of the angles show ball over the line. It might not have been in, it might have been mm, the post might have obscured those mm.

And what was the overall impression? Ball is in the net, AR is on the goal line. There has been no stupid missed goal like Roy Carrol!
 
Ciley Myrus said:
I dont expect the AR to be on the goal line and am not asking him to do anything more ! Am asking IF its a goal and it WAS missed by the AR are we marking down.

I thought I had made my original post obvious, but clearly not.....wish had not asked now !! Engulfed by tangents now !
Click to expand...

But in the video you posted, the AR is in the correct position so the onus isn’t on him to be in a position to make that call......therefore he hasn’t ‘missed’ anything.

Whether it was a goal or not is irrelevant because the AR is not expected to be on the goal line to make the call given the position of the other players.....once it becomes apparent that the GK has hands of jelly, the AR does his best to reposition.

Don’t think you really understand what you are asking......so what chance have we got?
 
If it was over the line then under the marking system its a match changing decision called wrongly.

Post is clear as day. Question is, if the first shot is a goal, and its not given, is the AR responsible.
 
Do you send off a player for DOGSO if a goal was scored immediately afterwards? Despite the wording of guidance a goal was actually denied from an opportunity and the goal that was scored was from a subsequent opportunity. Although he is not sent off he is (likely) cautioned.

A similar concept here. The AR will not get deducted marks for missing a match changing incident (because it was a missed goal but a goal was scored immediately after). But he will get deducted marks for missing a significant incident (if he missed it) which won't be as big of a mark.

For completeness I think the AR did everything correctly here including not giving the ball over the line flag.
 
Last edited:
Simple question: If the AR misses a goal being scored but one is moments later, does he get marked down?
Of course. He still made the error. The fact that the same outcome was reached anyway doesn't mean an error wasn't made. The real question is whether it's still considered a match-changing error (which would render the assessment a 'fail' essentially. That's a tricky question and I can see arguments either side. Personally, I think the decision should be looked at in isolation - the fact that the game conspired to make him look good doesn't change the nature of the error.

On one hand, we need to consider whether the AR had a chance of seeing it. Almost impossible to spot from his expected position, then it's not really his fault. Not spotting something doesn't necessarily mean the official has erred. So, with this footage I can't decide whether the AR should be held accountable for this particular decision.

But I certainly would be marking him down for the fact that he was slow to react and slow to move - took him about 3. 5 seconds to cover approximately 14 yards. You can see that he's certainly not sprinting when he hits the goal line.

So while the close margin might work in his favour, the fact that the AR should have been much closer to the goal line will hurt him. Of course, as an assessor, unless I'm completely certain it was wrong, then this first decision was correct - though I'd still be commenting on the slow movement.
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
took him about 3. 5 seconds to cover approximately 14 yards. You can see that he's certainly not sprinting when he hits the goal line.
Click to expand...
That's a bit harsh. He is facing the FOP, he has to turn and transition to sprint, before he reaches much speed he has to hit the breaks. Imagine reaching goal line at high speed, he will end up overshooting it by 3-5 yards before he is able to stop. I agree he was slow to react though (only a little) . I can give him the benefit of the doubt on that one for his view of the kicker/kick being blocked and being unable to read the shot.
 
Personally I would not be marking down here. Understand the point being made in the OP, but I think that would be hypercritical and downright unfair.

It would require an almost forensic dissection of the incident to say the ball is over the line and a goal scored, and it is virtually impossible to tell at real time and with the naked eye.

It's not on the same level as Bristol City v Crystal Palace where the ball went all the way in, hit the rear support inside the net and out again, and neither has it been clearly and obviously hacked out from behind the line.
 
The last couple of replies have been along lines of the sensible thoughts that i was merely trying to provoke in the name of an intelligent discussion , so thank you
 
Ciley Myrus said:
The last couple of replies have been along lines of the sensible thoughts that i was merely trying to provoke in the name of an intelligent discussion , so thank you
Click to expand...

What you mean is it’s what you wanted to hear rather than being told you’re talking ******** expecting a AR to be penalised for something that he couldn’t be expected to call given the wider context of the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top