A&H

Goal Nets

RegalRef

Politically Incorrect
Interesting, no doubt one in a million event today, but worth sharing.

U18 ladies game, blue v red & black. Know the blue team very well, red only done once before.

Red team mixture of knob head coach and aggy teenage girls, nothing but morning and generally hard done two.

Only previous game with them saw 3 yellows for dissent and manager sent from FOP for his nonsense.

Anyway, 20 minutes into game, blue corner comes in, great header by blue girl, softly floats into top corner, just below the bar and hits net, before bouncing down.

I whistle to award goal, and queue the moaning from players that the ball didn't cross the line, blah blah blah.

I explained the goal was given as it hit the net etc, as expected, it fell on deaf ears.

It did set me thinking though - this was on a council pitch with goalposts that are just that - goalposts only. No supports for the Nets etc, so nets were attached to the crossbar and went straight down to the ground, to form a triangle when viewed from side on.

So technically, I can't be sure all the ball crossed all the line to start with, but obviously had nets been back from the goalposts would have no doubt.

Thoughts?
 
The Referee Store
There's do doubt to would have gone fully into the goal had the nets been held back by any sort of support.

Obviously if it hit something like a drinks bottle that was just behind the line I won't be giving it, but in this instance I felt it appropriate.
 
It's what they deserve for being moany gits! And yup, if it was only the net that stopped it crossing the line then I'm with you in giving it ..
 
It's what they deserve for being moany gits! And yup, if it was only the net that stopped it crossing the line then I'm with you in giving it ..

Hang on a minute......are you really saying that you would award a goal where the ball didn't cross the line, simply because of the manner of the obstruction?

Really?

Game changing decision and its not getting given unless I am 100% sure....same as penalties.....never getting one unless I am 100% sure of what I have seen. Simply cannot guess at these types of decisions.
 
There's do doubt to would have gone fully into the goal had the nets been held back by any sort of support.

Obviously if it hit something like a drinks bottle that was just behind the line I won't be giving it, but in this instance I felt it appropriate.

Would you disallow a goal for something like this?
 
There's do doubt to would have gone fully into the goal had the nets been held back by any sort of support

Obviously this is a situation you try to avoid before the start of the game .. but on council pitches, probably far from easy to do so.

are you really saying that you would award a goal where the ball didn't cross the line, simply because of the manner of the obstruction?

Yes. In this specific parks football situation. Where the OP makes clear that there is no doubt that the ball would otherwise have entered the goal. Much like when playing on a 3G pitch with overhanging wires, agreeing with the captains pre kick off to simply continue when the ball hits the wires from open play .. this too can easily be game changing but it's a necessary adaptation to take into account the unavoidable peculiarities of a particular FOP
 
The goals at our pitch (council) are exactly the same. How was the net pegged? Was it tight at the back or loose? This could have an effect on your decision as the net, if loose enough can blow underneath the crossbar and therefore be on the line... I'm sure that if this was the case, you'd have noted it in your inspection.

I had the same on Saturday, balls goes over the line and behind the post... (I cant see the goal-line as there are too many people on it trying to get rid of the ball), from where I am positioned, I view the ball coming into site from the other side of the post.. I look at the CAR who is too busy texting... I award the goal to be met with a few jeers from supporters and defenders... It was only after the game the keeper came and said to me "good call, it was about a foot over"... Probably the same for you :)
 
Lesson learnt last season - smae set up, gave the goal as net was hit.

Cost me my promotion.

Improvement for this season - nets and positioning. 28 games and that one decision cost me!
 
Not the assesor - team gave me a score of 61 so as to avoid a low-score explanation (60or less), but brought my average mark down so was 0.1 below the cut off.
 
The goals at our pitch (council) are exactly the same. How was the net pegged? Was it tight at the back or loose? This could have an effect on your decision as the net, if loose enough can blow underneath the crossbar and therefore be on the line... I'm sure that if this was the case, you'd have noted it in your inspection.

I had the same on Saturday, balls goes over the line and behind the post... (I cant see the goal-line as there are too many people on it trying to get rid of the ball), from where I am positioned, I view the ball coming into site from the other side of the post.. I look at the CAR who is too busy texting... I award the goal to be met with a few jeers from supporters and defenders... It was only after the game the keeper came and said to me "good call, it was about a foot over"... Probably the same for you :)

Nets were very tight - that was part of the reason it bounced down instead of in I think. There was so much tension to keep them back it was more like a springboard, but if they hadn't been net would have been hanging on the line as described.

Think it's one of those that you can't really win either way. You don't allow it and the scoring team are (rightly) kicking off. You allow it and defending team will kick off.

Given the same circumstances I think I'd do the same. Worth considering though if you're about to play a game on a pitch with goals like this what you will do in your own mind should it happen before you blow the whistle...
 
The only question that needs to be answered is....did the whole of the ball cross the line?

If yes, then goal. If not, then no goal.
 
Reminds me a bit of an incident that happened in one of my son's games a few years ago...

Goals were plastic Samba goals. They are great for a couple of games, get abused, people fail to put them together/dismantle properly and eventually the bar becomes saggier than a granny's.....

Couple of minutes from time, home team player has a shot from outside the area that hits the bar, close to the post and bounced a couple of feet back into play before being cleared. The whole goal vibrated with the power of the shot. Home team parents scream goal, young referee about 15/16 years old waves play on. A couple of parents then decide to take issue with the referee's mentor who had accompanied him to the game. Mentor was trying to explain to them exactly why is wasn't a goal, when one of the parents replies "But it has to be a goal because the net moved!" :D

Parents/spectators/players/coaches ignorance of the laws of the game never fails to amaze me! :confused:
 
Reminds me a bit of an incident that happened in one of my son's games a few years ago...

Goals were plastic Samba goals. They are great for a couple of games, get abused, people fail to put them together/dismantle properly and eventually the bar becomes saggier than a granny's.....

Couple of minutes from time, home team player has a shot from outside the area that hits the bar, close to the post and bounced a couple of feet back into play before being cleared. The whole goal vibrated with the power of the shot. Home team parents scream goal, young referee about 15/16 years old waves play on. A couple of parents then decide to take issue with the referee's mentor who had accompanied him to the game. Mentor was trying to explain to them exactly why is wasn't a goal, when one of the parents replies "But it has to be a goal because the net moved!" :D

Parents/spectators/players/coaches ignorance of the laws of the game never fails to amaze me! :confused:

Reminds me of them blow up iGoals. You ever heard of them?
 
I don't post on this site much, but enjoy reading all the different opinions. It seems to me that the attacks on Padfoot here for being "black and white" are symptomatic of a worrying stream of opinion that constantly surfaces here. People ignore mandatory cautions for dissent or refuse to send off for DOGSO in the name of "Law 18" or "game control". Guys, some things in football refereeing ARE black and white...the Laws tell us so. The problem with this kind of "creative refereeing" is that it causes immense problems in consistency. Every time a referee decides something that contradicts a clearly expressed Law of the Game, he replaces certainty with his own opinion - and since a hundred refs have a hundred opinions, players are bemused and confused as to what the actual Laws are. Believe me, there are enough places in the Laws where refs DO have the right to decide "in their opinion" without adding more. If the ref (or neutral AR) does not see the ball cross the line, it's no goal....no ifs ands or buts. This is a basic tenet of refereeing and to see Padfoot mocked for saying so is frankly appalling.
 
But it's not really that much of a debate is it?

It's a basic fundamental of the game....either it crossed the line or it didn't. No grey area to be found.
What are doing in this situation (beyond the not giving the goal part)?
 
Back
Top