DC/Chivas [R] - AR positioning

[blech]

Chivas freekick from top of thre area at approx the 83/84 minute mark. First time I've ever seen a shot literally hit directly in the corner where both posts meet. Anyway, it bounces down right at or behind the line. Chivas calls for goal. No goal awarded. The AR was with the offside line, so approx 12 yards up at the time of the shot and still 8-10 yards up from the line when the ball hit the post(s) and came down. The CR was a little to the side, between the wall and the shooter, so even further from the goal. After watching multiple replays and messing around with the TIVO slow-motion, I have my opinions about whether or not the ball had fully crossed the line, but I was more curious about the positioning. Whether right or not, doesn't seem ideal not to have someone on the line.

My pregame to my ARs is to stay with the offside unless/until I wave them to the endline, but I'll typically wave them down in this kind of situation and take the offside line myself. How do you typically handle it? Anyone know what is common at the MLS/professional level? I've actually never ended up with a tough call in the games at my level. Seems like it would be even more important at the professional level where the players can hit these kinds of shots and hit the ball with more power and spin which can make the call tougher. Any thoughts on this play? In general?

[Ref Flunkie]

I think I remember a recert discussion on this and the general view from the instructors was to NOT have the AR go down to the endline. I can't recall their exact reasoning, but I think it was more due to the fact that having the AR on JUST goal/no goal duty and having the CR focusing on the offside would prevent the CR from doing his main job and being in the best position to find any fouls on the kick. I personally would not wave down the AR, and would likely take a deeper position of my own so I had a reasonable view of the end line, while allowing me to be in position to see fouls if the kick is short/blocked/etc. In my opinion, this particular call was so close, I think they would have argued it even if the AR had been on the end line.

[GlennAA11]

In the youth games that I do I prefer to have the AR on the goalline in this situation so they can act as goal judge. Chances of offside are relatively slim unless one of the team happens to be called the Red Bulls, and the referee should be able to keep track of offside along with everything else happening in the wall.

[Statesman]

Modern positioning suggests the referee himself take up the goal line, as he has to watch action in the area behind the wall anyway. Poor decisions by the referee crew.

[raleighsocref]

I find some of the comments here odd.. Recent instruciton from the United States Soccer Foundation says that the CR should be in front of the play there looking into the wall and the 18. The AR should be in line with the 2TLD.
There is no more waving the AR down to the goal line and the CR taking the offside. I guess I just find it odd that people are stating otherwise.

[Ref Flunkie]

Modern positioning suggests the referee himself take up the goal line, as he has to watch action in the area behind the wall anyway. Poor decisions by the referee crew.

So you would go all the way to the end line as the CR, or somewhere in the middle of the area? What is your max distance from goal for the kick to use this position? I know, it's probably a "feel for the game" thing and if the shot is likely to come or not.

As for the "surprised by responses", the only reason I remember hearing this is because someone specifically asked the question. The information would not have come to us if it had not been asked. I doubt this is on the top of the list of things to tell referees during the classes, considering they are lucky to even tell us the law changes most of the time.

[raleighsocref]

So you would go all the way to the end line as the CR, or somewhere in the middle of the area? What is your max distance from goal for the kick to use this position? I know, it's probably a "feel for the game" thing and if the shot is likely to come or not.

As for the "surprised by responses", the only reason I remember hearing this is because someone specifically asked the question. The information would not have come to us if it had not been asked. I doubt this is on the top of the list of things to tell referees during the classes, considering they are lucky to even tell us the law changes most of the time.

There is a power point that you can download off of the USSF site that covers this. It was also covered in every re cert class we did here where I live. It has been a subject of conersation at the college clinics that I have attended in the past year. I guess I just thought it was covered at all re certification classes in all states.

[Statesman]

I know, it's probably a "feel for the game" thing and if the shot is likely to come or not.You got it.

Referees watch for three things during a free kick near goal:
1. Offside
2. Fouls
3. Goal scored

For each kick, rank those based on likelihood and position yourself accordingly. High chance of a goal with lower chance of a foul, get on the goal line. High chance of foul with low chance of goal, stay with the wall. Adjust your AR as you need to get maximum coverage of all three. If that means sending him to the goal line then by all means do so, but don't make a habit of it. Chances are there is a better position to take while leaving offside to him and still covering the other two.

[blech]

[/B]

There is a power point that you can download off of the USSF site that covers this. It was also covered in every re cert class we did here where I live. It has been a subject of conersation at the college clinics that I have attended in the past year. I guess I just thought it was covered at all re certification classes in all states.

you're correct. i just looked, and slide 24 is a fairly close ball position to where today's free kick came from.

i'll obviously have re-think and adjust my approach (which is why i like and appreciate this this forum). it's interesting to me that this is the recommended position as it's definitely not my first instinct for a free kick in that area. by my thinking of what the ref team is most likely going to need to determine and considering statesman's list, it's (a) a shot on goal as the most likely outcome (almost a certainty), then (b) a potential offside on someone following in for a rebound, and then (c) a foul situation, which seems least likely when the ball is this central, at least until you get a rebound. i never personally liked to drop behind the wall myself for fear of being left out of position and scrambling if the shot got blocked by the wall and play countered back the other direction, but given the likelihood of the shot on goal it made enough sense to go ahead and get the AR down there in most cases. i'll adjust to follow the powerpoint, but can you or someone else elaborate on the reasoning and contrast it to how i've been thinking about it. thanks.

[Ref Flunkie]

Is this the link to the presentation you are discussing? It sounds like it from blech's comments about slide 24

http://images.ussoccer.com/Documents/cms/ussf/doc_6_344.ppt

That does seem like an awful close position to the ball/play. Perhaps this will differ for us folks who mostly do youth and low level amature matches where players are likely NOT going to be bending the ball around the wall at 100 mph and hitting the top corner of the goal. It seems to me that in this presentation, they are forcing both officials to focus on the wall and players and give neither of them a shot (no pun intended) at acting as a goal judge. I like Statesman's list and at least positioning one of the officials to have a CHANCE at judging the goal in or not.

[KCbus]

I'm basically with Statesman here.

In any scenario, regardless of who the shooter is, it's for more likely that you're going to have either an offside or a foul, than a shot that hits the inside of both posts, lands perilously close to the goal line and spins out. So to have an AR concentrate on the least likely of the three points of interest doesn't make much sense to me.

There are occasionally close calls like this, and they're part of the sport. I don't think there's anything to be done. Besides, even if the AR was on the goal line for this one... is it a guarantee that he would have called it a goal? We still don't know for sure after a bunch of replays!

[nonya]

The referee should be in front of the wall simply because of a "quick out" situation. Especially towards the end of a match when he may be tired, and can not get back upfield quickly enough. A very simple solution, at that level, is to get two more officials to act as goal judges and have them sit on the end line opposite to the AR.

For youth games, depending on my AR, I can handle offsides and fouls by myself in the center and would prefer to send my AR to the goal line. In a high school varsity good match or higher you have no choice really but to have the AR take the wall.