Question Number: 16410

Law 10 - Method of Scoring 8/24/2007

RE: Youth - Saturday Mornings Under 16

clive gregory of Templepatrick, Co Antrim Northern Ireland UK asks...

The ball goes over the line...just.. and the keeper palms it away. The Referee doesn't give the goal as he didn't see it cross the line.But the keeper - sportingly - runs to the ref and says yes it actually cross the line! What does the referee do ? No goal or Goal !!

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

Commend the keeper on his honesty, but then allow play to continue without scoring the goal. Seems unfair, does it not? But if we start listening to players to make the calls, we get on a slippery slope. What happens if 10 minutes later this keeper, having previously demonstrated his honesty, now says, "Ref, #9 fouled me on the way in to the goal." Can you believe him and disallow the goal that you just allowed?

Law 5 says, in part, "The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play are final."

And then Decision 3 to Law 5 says, "Facts connected with play shall include whether a goal is scored or not and the result of the match."

It's up to the referee to make sure he can tell that a goal was scored or not. Without neutral assistant referees that can be a daunting task sometimes.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

An intelligent referee will pay attention to a player's admissions against interest. If a ball leaves the field for what the referee feels is a goal kick, but the defenders say it was out on them instead, why would a referee insist on the goal kick? We do make mistakes, and sometimes we cannot see everything. Our job is to make sure the game is played in as fair a manner as can be managed under the Laws, such that the skill of the players can be displayed and enjoyed by all. When they help us to make this happen, accept the gift.

Answer provided by Referee Ben Mueller

Wow seems like there is a little disagreement from my colleagues here. Here is my 2 cents....if the keeper really feels it went in the goal and a goal should be awarded. He could kick the ball into the goal himself and give a goal to the other team. Then the referee is NOT invovled in his decision. Sort of like the time I was coaching and the ball clearly went off the post and over the goal line. The referee signaled corner kick and refused to change the call. The other team simply took the kick, but intentioanlly kicked it over the goal line giving us a goal kick, I agree with Gary that we cannot listen to the players on a call of this magnitude. You made the decision based on what you saw and also, maybe the keeper does not understand the law that the full ball has to be over the goal line. Maybe part of the ball was hovering on the goal line and it did not fully cross. Why is the keepers judgement better that yours?

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

And me. I say award the goal without the keeper doing anything but telling the referee the goal was scored. If all players were as fair and honest as this keeper, we wouldn't need referees. We all will change the direction of a throw if the team we award it to says it went out on them, so why is this any different. Kudos to the keeper

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Any and all information that can be used to assist the referee in getting something right should be used. If the referee uses the goalkeeper's confession to award a hard won goal he should take time to praise the gentleman for his honesty. Not only that, but I would approach him after the match and shake his hand and mention his name in my match report.

Remember, if he is unsporting, his name will be in the match report -- I see no difference in mentioning this sporting behaviour.

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

What if it was not just, only looked just, the keeper was unaware the curve of the ball was slightly brushing the line? When Maradonna scored that cheating WC goal with his hand he pretended to celebrate it as a good goal and told his countrymen to celebratewith him to convince the referee to allow the goal as they too did not understand the referee in not calling it off. Now in this case we have an opposite where a player feels obligated to not deceive and as an integrity option he could be commended but as a keeper to his team is it something he is sure they too will appreciate?
I know it is unlikely but a goal is a sacred event in soccer!
What if the keeper is wrong?
On field markings I have seen some faded and squiggly lines act as the goal line.
What if the keeper was paid to throw the game?
Or had a bet placed on the outcome?
What if the referee felt there was a slight foul by the attacker but since the keeper had ball possession he allowed play to continue?

I would not rule out awarding a goal that he claimed occurred but my AR or I did not see. I will often look to body language or who appears to be the less crucially involved in an outcome of a doubtful ball out of play. But consider!
Imagine after a save at a goal line scramble and the keeper stands up with ball in hand and calls out I saw the ball cross the line it was a goal. As a referee I call out I saw the ball in contact with the line but if you think it was a goal then show me the ball across the line. If he felt strongly that the goal MUST be awarded and play was allowed to continue the keeper could boot or throw the ball into his own goal to show it was a goal beyond any doubt! If we COULD rely on what players actually stated as a truth then referees are not needed. AS to the comment we will change a decision based on the honesty of a opponent at times yes at times no. I have seen a red coach go ballistic over a throw in that I correctly awarded to a white player who claimed it had gone off of him only to have a red player tell him he is out to lunch the ball actually ticked off him after the white player had touched it. Both the red coach and white player were wrong and the red player and I were spot on. We MAKE the decision as referee, if it is in the interest of the match to change a decision based on what a player says we certainly could consider it but certainly not obligated to act on it!
Cheers