![](https://image-cdn.essentiallysports.com/wp-content/uploads/Sophia-Smith-Mallory-Swanson-Trinity-Rodman-USWNT.png?width=600)
![](https://image-cdn.essentiallysports.com/wp-content/uploads/Sophia-Smith-Mallory-Swanson-Trinity-Rodman-USWNT.png?width=600)
The USWNT finally ended a 12-year wait for an Olympic gold medal after their narrow win over Brazil. Mallory Swanson’s goal in the 57th minute proved to be enough to hand Emma Hayes her first major success with the team. While there is cause for celebration over the win, the legitimacy of the winning goal has been questioned. A sketchy offside call that was not to be has divided fans. But let’s hear what an expert has to say about it.
Here’s how it all went down: Korbin Albert spotted Sophia Smith making a run and sent a through ball her way. But guess what? The Portland Thorns forward was offside! Instead of touching the ball, she let it roll to Mallory Swanson, who was onside—and boom, goal! Now there’s been some serious debate about whether Sophia Smith actually interfered with play. To shed some light on the controversy, we’ve got former referee Christina Unkel giving us her take.
Replying to a US fan’s query, the FIFA-licensed referee detailed on X that in order for Smith to be called offside, they had to look closely at whether she really interfered—like did she touch the ball or affect any defenders trying to make a play.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
Polls of the day
Poll 1 of 5
Do you agree with the referee's verdict on the USWNT's controversial winner against Brazil?
Absolutely
No way
Still unsure
Need more evidence
Do you think Emma Hayes can lead USWNT to Olympic glory in Paris?
Absolutely
No way
Maybe, but it's a long shot
Only time will tell
Whats your Perspective on:
Was the referee right to favor Swanson and Smith, or did Brazil get robbed in the USWNT match?
Have an interesting take?
How do you feel about NBC not broadcasting the USWNT's gold medal ceremony?
Outraged
Disappointed
Understandable
Indifferent
Do you agree with Emma Hayes' decision to bench Alex Morgan during the Olympics?
Absolutely
No way
It was a gamble that paid off
I'm not sure
Sharing her verdict, Unkel wrote, “No touch in ball by smith. And there was opponent nearby she interfered with their ability to play the ball. No offside infraction.” She also added that it was a “‘wait and see’ from the assistant referee perspective before raising one’s flag.”
Unkel’s words carry weight as she has officiated at club and international level and served as State Referee Administrator for the Florida State Referee Committee. Her assessment is also in line with the regulations of the International Football Association Board. The rule clarifies,
“An attacking player in an offside position runs toward the ball and a teammate in an onside position also runs toward the ball and plays it. If the first player does not touch the ball and does not impact any opponent’s ability to play or challenge for the ball, the referee allows play to continue as the attacking team player (Smith) has not committed an offside offense.”
Since Smith was judged to not have interfered with the play, her being offside didn’t matter and Mallroy’s goal stood.
What’s your perspective on:
Was the referee right to favor Swanson and Smith, or did Brazil get robbed in the USWNT match?
Have an interesting take?
No touch in ball by smith. And there was opponent nearby she interfered with their ability to play the ball. No offside infraction. This is a “wait and see” from the assistant referee perspective before raising one’s flag. #offside #USWNT
— Christina Unkel (@ChristinaUnkel) August 10, 2024
It might appear that it was smart play by Smith to let the ball roll to Swanson, who latched on to score the winner. But on a closer look, it was Swanson who made the call. “Leave it! Do not touch it!” the forward shouted at Smith, reading the critical situation well. Had there been even a feather touch from Smith, the offside flag would have gone up. Smith listened to Swanson, and the Chicago Reds star, playing her 100th game for the country ended a long wait for a gold medal.
However, Brazil still had a reason or two to be aggrieved about. Given the stakes and the fine margins of the goal, there was surprisingly no VAR review despite protests. What’s more surprising there were no replays shown to the viewers, inviting accusations of favoritism. It also meant there was more heartbreak for Brazil.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
Brazil left ruing missed opportunity
For Brazil, the final was a chance to give a fitting farewell to their all-time leading scorer Marta, who is set to retire from international football this year. This was also the opportunity for Brazil to win a first gold medal in women’s soccer, having faltered twice at the final hurdle at the hands of – you guessed it- USA.
The South Americans did start the game on the front foot and even had a golden chance to go ahead. Forward Ludmila was alone in front of the goal but directed a shot straight into the arms of US goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher. Their misery was compounded after Ludmila appeared to have scored in the 16th minute only for it to be ruled offside by the finest of margins.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
After Mallory Swanson’s contentious goal, Brazil toiled hard and came close in stoppage time when a header from Adriana looked destined for the goal, only for Naeher to pull off an incredible save.
As such missing guilt-edged chances, debatable calls, and goalkeeper heroics means Brazil’s wait for an elusive gold medal goes on while the USA celebrates a first triumph since the 2012 Olympics.
Debate
Was the referee right to favor Swanson and Smith, or did Brazil get robbed in the USWNT match?