Objectives: Compare overall Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) scores, risk categorisation, specific LESS errors, and double-leg jump-landing jump heights between overhead goal and no goal conditions. Design: Randomised cross-over. Setting: Laboratory. Participants: 76 (51% male). Main outcome measures: Participants landed from a 30-cm box to 50% of their body height and immediately jumped vertically for maximum height. Participants completed three trials under two random-ordered conditions: with and without overhead goal. Group-level mean LESS scores, risk categorisation (5-error threshold), specific landing errors, and jump heights were compared between conditions. Results: Mean LESS scores were greater (0.3 errors, p < 0.001) with the overhead goal, but this small difference was not clinically meaningful. Similarly, although the number of high-risk participants was greater with the overhead goal (p = 0.039), the 9.2% difference was trivial. Participants jumped 2.7 cm higher with the overhead goal (p < 0.001) without affecting the occurrence of any specific LESS errors. Discussion: Performing the LESS with an overhead goal enhances sport specificity and elicits greater vertical jump performances with minimal change in landing errors and injury-risk categorisation. Adding an overhead goal to LESS might enhance its suitability for injury risk screening, although the predictive value of LESS with an overhead goal needs confirmation.