IN - or NOT?

[dantheloyalroyal]

Only evidence we have suggests it was more than likely a goal

I'm sorry, where's this evidence?

[bigmike]

Either way the lino was a good 10 to 15 yards away from the line and could not have been certain so he should not have given it.

That's just something trotted out by managers looking for an excuse. It has no part in the laws of the game. The refs have to give what they think happened, and that's it. There are no decisions they have to be 100% sure about.

We will have to Agree to disagree then... If an assistant referee is good 10 to 15 yards behind play and gives an offside chances are that the referee will overrule him because he is not in a position to give the decision. The assistant cannot have been certain that it was a goal he guessed ... If he continues his carrer guessing he wont get very far.

[bigmike]

Only evidence we have suggests it was more than likely a goal

I'm sorry, where's this evidence?

The evidence that we have clearly shows that the whole off the ball did not cross the line... for a ball to be compleatly over the line the centre of the ball on the bounce needs to be a good 7 to 10 inches over the line. It certainly was when i did my Referees exam.

The Assistant Referee got this one wrong but he wont be worried. Why would he ??

[dantheloyalroyal]

We will have to Agree to disagree then... If an assistant referee is good 10 to 15 yards behind play and gives an offside chances are that the referee will overrule him because he is not in a position to give the decision. The assistant cannot have been certain that it was a goal he guessed ... If he continues his carrer guessing he wont get very far.

Firstly, I've never seen an offside decision overruled by a referee. What I wanted to say, though, was how do we know the lino wasn't sure? In his mind he could've quite easily been sure it had crossed the line.

[rabidbee]

Couldn't be sure from where I sat in Y24, although I thought from the way the ball came back out that it couldn't have crossed theline.

Was sat with an ex-ref, who was adamant that, whether or not the ball went in, the lino was in no position to call it with any certainty.

[bigmike]

We will have to Agree to disagree then... If an assistant referee is good 10 to 15 yards behind play and gives an offside chances are that the referee will overrule him because he is not in a position to give the decision. The assistant cannot have been certain that it was a goal he guessed ... If he continues his carrer guessing he wont get very far.

Firstly, I've never seen an offside decision overruled by a referee. What I wanted to say, though, was how do we know the lino wasn't sure? In his mind he could've quite easily been sure it had crossed the line.

He was not in a posistion to be certain that the ball crossed the line

[Wycombe Royal]

Only evidence we have suggests it was more than likely a goal

I'm sorry, where's this evidence?

The evidence that we have clearly shows that the whole off the ball did not cross the line... for a ball to be compleatly over the line the centre of the ball on the bounce needs to be a good 7 to 10 inches over the line. It certainly was when i did my Referees exam.

The Assistant Referee got this one wrong but he wont be worried. Why would he ??

But you can't say for certain that 7 to 10 inches of the ball is not over the line mainly due to the fact that the ball distorts its shape as it bounces and also because it is bouncing on grass, not concrete, and therefore the lower part of ball (ie the bit that touches the ground) will dissapear into the grass as the grass is approx 1 inch long (total guess there).

[dantheloyalroyal]

We will have to Agree to disagree then... If an assistant referee is good 10 to 15 yards behind play and gives an offside chances are that the referee will overrule him because he is not in a position to give the decision. The assistant cannot have been certain that it was a goal he guessed ... If he continues his carrer guessing he wont get very far.

Firstly, I've never seen an offside decision overruled by a referee. What I wanted to say, though, was how do we know the lino wasn't sure? In his mind he could've quite easily been sure it had crossed the line.

He was not in a posistion to be certain that the ball crossed the line

It doesn't matter about being in the right or wrong position. He was certain he had seen it cross the line, otherwise he wouldn't have flagged it a goal.

[kwik-silva]

Never in (GU8)

[rabidbee]

He was not in a posistion to be certain that the ball crossed the line

It doesn't matter about being in the right or wrong position. He was certain he had seen it cross the line, otherwise he wouldn't have flagged it a goal.[/quote]

You don't think his positioning has any bearing on just how certain he could have been?

[andrew1957]

The ball simply cannot have been in. If it had been 100% over the line it is impossible for it to hit the post - as the angle it was travelling at would have taken it into the side netting.

I can see no way that the ball can have been over the line as it defies the laws of geometry.

[Svlad Cjelli]

The ball simply cannot have been in. If it had been 100% over the line it is impossible for it to hit the post - as the angle it was travelling at would have taken it into the side netting.

I can see no way that the ball can have been over the line as it defies the laws of geometry.

Spin, imparted when it hit the crossbar. I could see it spinning like buggery from where I was.

[Snowball]

Firstly, I've never seen an offside decision overruled by a referee. .

The first goal we conceded this season was ruled out at first as "offside"
and the ref over-ruled the linesman. Maybe you weren't at that game.

[dantheloyalroyal]

Firstly, I've never seen an offside decision overruled by a referee. .

The first goal we conceded this season was ruled out at first as "offside"
and the ref over-ruled the linesman. Maybe you weren't at that game.

I was. Good call. I'll take back what I said.

[Ian Royal]

The fact is, that even with replays and still images you can't be certain that the ball was or wasn't completely over the line as demonstrated by the fact that the poll shows 36%/36%/28%.

The officials are human, doing a difficult job in difficult circumstances and IMO you simply can't fault them for giving a goal when it is very clear that the vast majority of the ball is certainly over the line.

It is a fact that what you see is not necessarily what actually happens as generally the brain simply can't process information fast enough to cope so it projects what it believes should be there. So it is quite possible that the lino was absolutely certain the ball was over the line. Just as plenty of people on this thread were absolutely certain it was in from their seat.

The fact that video evidence doesn't show the majority of the ball on the line or pitch side of it, means that IMO you really can't blame the officials for giving it.

It's only the glaring errors where it's absolutely clearly on the line or on one side of the line with inches to spare, that you can justifiably complain of being hard done by.

[andrew1957]

The ball simply cannot have been in. If it had been 100% over the line it is impossible for it to hit the post - as the angle it was travelling at would have taken it into the side netting.

I can see no way that the ball can have been over the line as it defies the laws of geometry.

Spin, imparted when it hit the crossbar. I could see it spinning like buggery from where I was.

I am confused. From the video links I think those who think it was in think it crossed the line BEFORE it hit the post. You seem to be implying that it crossed after it came back off the crossbar. Please can people clarify WHEN they think it was over the line.

In my opinion it is impossible that it crossed the line BEFORE it hit the post as I mentioned above and from where I sat it definitely did not cross the line after it came back down off the crossbar.

[brendywendy]

if all of hobnob, bbc, talksport cannot agree if its in or out after a million freeze frames, then i humbly postulate that the lino could never have been able to make his decision based on anything other thanguesswork concious or subconcious.

that said, it was a goal, swings and roundabouts and that

[Leamington Royal]

It's a scientifically proven phenomenon that the human brain sometimes makes us think that we have seen things that we cannot have seen. Our own vision is translated by what our brain perceives. The referee could be, in his own mind, certain that he saw it go in, particularly if his expectation was that it was going to go in.

Given the job they do, surely referees should be aware of this phenomenon and be able to make ajudgement call rather than accept every linesman's decision as accurate. I think the lino's non-alignment with the goal line would be strong grounds to challenge the validity of the lino's decision. Was it actually poor refereeing by D'Urso not to at least discuss it with the Lino? e.g. How far over do you think it was? and where were you standing?

FWIW I don't think it was in (Y23) - but then that's what my brain was hoping to see.

[Terminal Boardom]

Lino gave it. The referee agreed. It was a goal. Get over it.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

Firstly, I've never seen an offside decision overruled by a referee. .

The first goal we conceded this season was ruled out at first as "offside"
and the ref over-ruled the linesman. Maybe you weren't at that game.

wasn't that a "not interfering" or "came off a Reading player" type judgement though, rather than the ref insisting the guy wasn't actually ahead?

It is very rare to see a ref overrule a linesman insisting that a player was level.