3rd minute of the match, the ball barely clears the goal line but the Additional Assistant Referee standing a few yards away does not see it. The ball is cleared out by a Celtic defender to a Juventus forward who blasts it in. On replay, the Celtic defenders leg would have blocked the AAR's view and there is no way he would have definitively known the ball crossed the goal line. Fortunately for Juve, the ball went directly back to them for a goal. Also, the ending of the first half looked like a Sunday morning adult league with a lot of pushing and grabbing off the ball on set pieces.
How much time between clear and blast? He might have seen it and reported it while the blast was going in, therefore it looked like he wasn't aware of the first cross and the referee was only signalling the second.
It was only seconds in between. Below is the only link I could find of the goal that hasn't already been removed. It does not have the great angle that was seen on FSC, where you can clearly see the ball go over the goal line, but you can see the AAR's reaction: http://theoriginalwinger.com/2013-02-12-video-celtic-juventus-champions-league-highlights
Well it looks like he doesn't think the ball went over the line the first time, I agree. The video does nothing to prove that it's over the line. It's at an angle in both replays and a player blocks it in one. I don't see how anyone could think this is conclusive.
Again, this is not the same angle shown by FSC during the match. The second replay shown on the only video link I could find online gives the appearance that the ball was cleared off the line, which it was not. The replay during the game, on a different angle, showed "green" between the ball and the goal line. In the original post, I was only pointing out how difficult (or impossible) it is for these guys to tell if it is a goal even from several yards away, for the reasons noted above, when we have video technology and can sympathize with anyone in that position.
You can have green and still have the ball breaking the plane of the line, because it's round. I'll keep looking for a better replay.
Thankfully it wasn't an issue because goal was scored a few seconds later. Heres the video. http://msn.foxsports.com/foxsoccer/...25b&from=foxsports/foxsoccer/videomodule-home Watching it again a few times, I'm starting to think that maybe the AAR did think it was in. The ref brings the whistle to his mouth on the clearance but being a world class ref and seeing the ball was about to get put into the goal, decides to hold off. The first replay, at first it looks like the AAR didn't react until after the ball went in for the 2nd time, however, he does appear to turn slightly towards the ref and takes a couple steps back. We'll probably never know if he thought the ball was over the line or not, but I'm leaning towards the fact that he did think it was a goal.
That certainly looks in for me, and it doesn't look like the angle would change that...but that's the tricky thing about angles. Yeah I'm with Code here, we just don't know what the AAR saw or what he was thinking. Unlike an AR, we don't have a nice flag that comes up and makes a dramatic signal.
It's very possible. However, it would be an amazing ability for him to be able to see through the defenders calf.
Anything close against Lennon's Celtic is a goal for me. The way he treats referees is nearly worse than Fergie.
The defenders leg is on the ground. His eyes are six feet off the ground. Its not the line he judges with, its the post. I don't think obstruction is an issue.
Even taking that into consideration, in my opinion, the defenders leg is still going to block his view and he's not going to be 100% sure if it was a goal.
I was simply liking the fact that he pointed out that seeing "green" does not mean the ball completely crossed the line. Geometry is wonderful.
Even this doesn't convince me. I mean, it LOOKS like a goal, but it's possible, from that angle, that the outside edge of the ball could be above the back edge of the goal line, despite the fact that the part of the ball that's touching the ground is beyond the line.
Yet another example why having the AR and the AAR on the same side of the field is a stupid idea. If they were on opposite sides of the goal there would be two different goal line perspectives which would greatly increase the chance of getting goal line decisions right.
The rugby tackling on corners is driving me crazy. Does anyone think we will ever turn the page on that type of defending? I think it is a far worse problem than diving.
Agree. And it shouldn't convince you, or anyone else, because you're not looking directly down the back of the goal line. This is a simple matter of geometry. The discussion I would be interested in is, do you award the goal when, like this, it looks awfully damn close to being a goal, but you can not absolutely say for sure.
Agreed with Bubba, unless you are positive the entirety of ball passed over the goal line you do not signal a goal. From that one photo, I have my doubts the ball is fully over the the goal line. Looks to me accounting for the angle the photo was taken from that perhaps 40 percent of the ball is completely past the goal line.
Ba humbug. You can talk about angles all you like, there is green ground between the ball and the line and thus automatically most of the ball is past the line. Am I sure all of the ball is past? No, not at all but 40% is laughable tbh.
Somebody get the ghosts of soccer goals past, present and future for scrooge and show him a world where the referees call all goals like this as in based on intuition. Pele bless us, everyone.
I really do get where you're coming from, but apply what you're talking about to an on-field decision-making process that has to be done by the Referee. Why does the chance of getting it right increase? The chance of having SOMEONE get it right would increase, but how would that help the referee? The AR in this play has more or less the same angle from the goal line that we have in the replay, and we're debating whether it's 40%, 98%, or absolutely in. Plays like this would yield a "GOAL!" from the AAR and a "NO!" from the AR (or vice versa) at virtually the same instant in the Referee's headset. One of them got it right, but as a referee, how in the world are you expected to make a decision with that info? What if the AR and AAR see the play differently, even if they are both on the goal line where needed? As a referee in that position, there's a big part of me that wants one decision to be made, and no matter who makes it, we sink or swim with our teammates. I think there are flaws with the AAR system, for the record, I'm just not convinced that putting them on opposite sides solves everything.