Jump to content

What are your thoughts on officiating this weekend?


Canesoverhere
 Share

Recommended Posts

socref1...I'll give you this. Your loyal

 

If you think calling a non-goal on a ball that is 2 yards into the goal (England), then you may have just centered a game I watched two years ago.

 

I respect your opinion...but i feel pretty confident the winds of change are upon us.

 

F-I-N-A-L-L-Y ! ! ! !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

socref1...I'll give you this. Your loyal

 

If you think calling a non-goal on a ball that is 2 yards into the goal (England), then you may have just centered a game I watched two years ago.

 

I respect your opinion...but i feel pretty confident the winds of change are upon us.

 

F-I-N-A-L-L-Y ! ! ! !

 

Actually you don't know me because I only referee high level matches. I haven't done a D2 tournament game in ages. As for the England-Germany game, if there is doubt, referees are instructed not to make the call. The ball was in the net but the human eye is different than the camera (Elizabeth Lambert probably has a better life if no camera dogs her play). The AR probably was slightly out of position and it is only through slow motion replay that commentators and pundits were able to proffer an opinion. Their opinion doesn't matter, since they are not on the field. It is the intelligent person that understands the way things are and the wisdom they are for a reason. If FIFA decides anything, it might be to add additional goal judges, however they will be very careful not to disrupt the flow of the game. I wonder if Maradona is rethinking his strategy. The referee called a pretty good game and Germany showed the world, and the US, really where change needs to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a little surprised recently to read the rusults of a poll which showed that fans in Europe and Latin America favor electronic monitoriing / replays even more than Americans. And a solid majority of Americans favor some electronic replay.

 

I predict that at the very least you will see electronic confirmation of goals in the next world cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the discussion by the "experts", the goal line official failed and the electronic monitoring did its job correctly. FIFA has already shared that after what has taken place they are going to re-visit the electronic monitoring. THe question lies in how deep will it be implemented.

 

Coach...no worries, I doubt it will be that deep. And to answer your question why? When 80,000 people in a stadium witness a ball going over (by YARDS) the goal line and the entire viewing audience (xx million) and the only moron on the pitch shares "no goal"....that's the reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the discussion by the "experts", the goal line official failed and the electronic monitoring did its job correctly. FIFA has already shared that after what has taken place they are going to re-visit the electronic monitoring. THe question lies in how deep will it be implemented.

 

Coach...no worries, I doubt it will be that deep. And to answer your question why? When 80,000 people in a stadium witness a ball going over (by YARDS) the goal line and the entire viewing audience (xx million) and the only moron on the pitch shares "no goal"....that's the reason.

 

The view from the cheap seats is pretty good for you Canes. Try being down on the field and dragging your butt around with world class athletes. FIFA will probably do two things to placate your type: 1) ban replay on the jumbotron as they have in the quarter finals 2) experiment with goal technology that will not disrupt the flow of the game. I doubt very much that some sort of instant replay- game stopper will be allowed that will go into some protracted review or TV time out period. The game was meant to be played with little interruption. Remember, as coaches and players are imperfect, so are officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read this thread with interest and thought that it could be a good place to see what discussions for improving the game by improving the officiating could be suggested. I was hoping that the discussion would not become defensive and degenerate into becoming insulting and offensive. I am not an expert but have loved this game for nearly 45 years as a player, coach, and ref. I have seen many changes to the game and the rules during that time with an eye on improving the game. That said, I am always still looking at ways to improve myself and make sure that I do not have a negative impact on the game. Also, I watch other refs and try to learn the best practices from them. Should FIFA use post situation electronics to make decisions and if so how that can be done without imposing unduly upon the flow of the game will take better brains that I have. However, FIFA has referred to video replay after games to make judgments on situations. When Tab Ramos of the U.S. was elbowed deliberately to the forehead by a Brazilian player his skull was fractured. The Brazilian player was red carded in the game. After the game, FIFA reviewed the video replay and issued further sanctions against the player. In a qualifying match (I think the year was '93), a keeper who had caught the ball and cleared players from the box was standing with the ball held palms up in one hand while waving at his players with the other hand shouting instructions. An opposing player struck the ball from behind with his forehead while in the hand of the keeper knocking it loose. He then won the ball on the ground and shot it into the goal. The ref allowed the goal. It was the winning goal. The keeper's team protested that the keeper was standing there holding the ball and in possession and the striker did not have a right to knock the ball away from him. FIFA reviewed the video of the game and upheld the decision of the ref in the game. The ruling was that the keeper, even though he was holding the ball in one hand was not in possession of the ball because there were not two points of contact with the ball. So, can video be used? Yes, but the instances that I know of have been post game situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read this thread with interest and thought that it could be a good place to see what discussions for improving the game by improving the officiating could be suggested. I was hoping that the discussion would not become defensive and degenerate into becoming insulting and offensive. I am not an expert but have loved this game for nearly 45 years as a player, coach, and ref. I have seen many changes to the game and the rules during that time with an eye on improving the game. That said, I am always still looking at ways to improve myself and make sure that I do not have a negative impact on the game. Also, I watch other refs and try to learn the best practices from them.

....

 

Nice post. Two things are certain as a part of the game:

 

1. People will continue to bash officiating.

2. Number 1 will not change on this forum.

 

That being said, without being defensive, the only thing one can do to not get worked up about the imperfections in the beautiful game is to accept the things they can not change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not overcomplicate things here....all we need to know is, did the ball cross the line...no shakespeare, not a lot of intellect required here. We just want you to get it right...most of the time. By the way, we are paying you to make the accurate call.
.

 

This is progress for you Canes, and I am encouraged that one day, you might be able to look beyond the shortcomings of officiating on principle for the greater good.

 

First off, I apologize to readers on Coach T for what is a long missive but it is important and thank you for your patience. This will be my final say on this thread which I do not believe belongs in a section on Girls High School. I am not being personal or judgmental to Canes either. I know we differ on the roles of the official, and it is not complicated. My view as a referee, is to be invisible on the field. We differ on levels of expectations. You see, I don't expect officials to be perfect, as reasonable people, which I believe Canes to be, do not as well. However I do expect them and myself to strive for it.

 

It is one thing to admit that humans can not be 100% perfect, however acknowledge they get it right "most of the time". So when it isn't perfect (some of the time), why is the expectation otherwise? It seems contrary to show understanding of simple human limitations, and less capacity for understanding when limitations manifest into poor performance.

 

We all know Lampard's ball was in the net in England-Germany as a point of fact, no doubt thanks to instant replay. However in the minds of the referees on the field, their decision or no-call at the time, devoid of technology, was justified, given what they saw or didn't see in that split second before the keeper scooped it up instantly. If technology were not present, the notion of human imperfection is not validated. The simple fact that the human eye can not differentiate as well as a high speed digital camera is common knowledge.

 

I will not argue personal motivation, however it is a mistake to reason that compensation is justification for perfection as an ideal (we pay players millions and they are far from perfect). If I referee pro bono, as I do in AYSO games, (which are entirely staffed by volunteers), I expect to give the game and players the same level of service and commitment regardless of compensation. For those games, it is about the joy of the game, and the player. Payment for services rendered is a sign of professionalism however one need not be paid to be "professional".

 

For any AYSO National Referee, a seasoned volunteer (with no less than 5 years referee camps, workshops, courses and assessments) the last step in the training is about "professionalism". A professional referee is one that takes his task serious, regardless of pay. An MLS referee makes about $600 a game, and has a regular job that pays the bills. A UEFA referee is a full time job and career, making about 80-100k Euro per season.

 

This does not make our best US referee, Terry Vaughn (in my opinion), himself a FIFA referee, no less capable than his European colleagues. He or any other USA FIFA referee, was not chosen for the WC. Referees chosen to work the World Cup are paid very well and must undergo rigorous physical and mental testing. There was an arduous selection process. Many have shown great calm in the face of extreme adversity. This is the world's pressure cooker for referees.

 

The greatest referee in the world, Pierluigi Collina, now the head of UEFA referees, backs the extra official on the goal line for World Cup. Maybe this will relieve some pressure, and preserve the integrity of the game.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010 ... -officials

 

Is it a perfect system? No. Don't let the lack of perfection sully your attitude about officiating in general. It is a difficult task. It is a skill none the less. Some of the best officials in the world were out there (and some of the not-so-best) and as we get closer to the end, the cream will rise to the top in that endeavor also. It might be true that an international referee from a small third-world country (that starts with "M") could hardly muster up courage and conviction at the moment of truth. But they play very good soccer there, so they must have referees that know how to call the game.

 

Why FIFA chose not to invite US referees is an indictment on the politics of the game, and the gap the world views the US soccer mentality. I guess they feel we as a country are neophytes in our understanding of the international game, and somehow soccer and refereeing in the US, aside from the national team, that plays internationally, just doesn't measure up. For us to change this mindset, professional soccer must change. It is slowly moving in that direction, with more international teams playing in our country, albeit for exhibition.

 

Maybe we as a society have not shown the world we can embrace the professional (men's) sport as well as the rest of the planet. Even our women's professional game is floundering, as the near empty WPS All Star game showed. Maybe FIFA grows tired of the US having the money, and wanting influence on how the game should be played or paid as "entertainment", although FIFA would be naiive to think the WC was anything other than business. The MLS had a directive to national referees working games that this sport was "entertainment" and some players were untouchable, i.e. fans came to watch them. FIFA shows no such consideration. Thomas Mueller is not playing against Spain.

 

Referee's are not paid to be perfect. Referees are paid to judge. Sometimes the judgment is imperfect, it goes with the territory. Nevertheless they are paid to do something a machine can not do. Technology can show points of fact, and in some cases it is cut and dry. But most decisions in soccer are not the clear cut goal/no goal, offside/not offside. Most of the decisions are the "no calls" to allow flow versus control. fair or foul, or what type of justice to mete. (I believed the Ghana player that fouled US in the box should have been sent off for DOGSO). FIFA acknowledges this as judgment, or "opinion", something a machine or technology can not provide.

 

Law V gives the referee the power to use judgment or "opinion" quite liberally as an integral part of the game. The use of "advantage" is very much unique in this regard, and a power of the referee. One of the ESPN commentators, I believe it was Alexi Lawless, that said it is the subjectivity and "opinion" of the referee that differentiates this sport from all others, and is in fact "part of the game".

 

Most sports require officiating to be black and white, by the book. Soccer has 17 very brief laws, but Law 18, the unwritten "Law of Common Sense" allows opinion to flourish for the Spirit of the Game. Yet some refs are officious and anal retentive, and tyrants and do a disservice to that spirit. This one aspect, to have "opinion" means there will be differences, and where there is differences, there is controversy. Rendering opinion need not be inconsistent.

 

In soccer there are matters of fact, which referees do make decisions, and technology has shown or contradicted (after the fact), and matters of opinion, which are the domain of a human decision maker. There is nothing wrong with everyone else having an opinion. However in the end, it is the referee's opinion that matters. The only way FIFA will eliminate controversy, is to eliminate referee's "opinion" and subjectivity. To do so would destroy the game.

 

All judges are paid to render opinion and decision based on their understanding of the facts at hand. Soccer referees are ordered not to render opinion and decision when there is doubt. This is the point many miss. They might have a different perspective than the pundit. Were they wide and deep enough? Were they in the right position? These are the things referees constantly work on, so that they can make the right decision. Many believe hat paying someone indentures servitude, and by not delivering somehow entitles rebuke and harsh criticism. This is why many referees leave the youth ranks - parents berate them because their precious princesses come up short or when the referee doesn't see it their way from the armchair.

 

People do not in general, enter a court room, and expect a judge, whom is elected, and paid with their constituents taxes, to hand down a favorable decision or opinion without examination. If so, they will be disappointed most of the time. It is not a perfect system as well. Sometimes the guilty go free and the innocent are punished given imperfect information despite further study later on to reverse that decision. This is a fact. And before I get lambasted for that analogy, just remember it is probably the closest reminder that a human being using their brain and skill for decision making, albeit imperfect, still outweighs any technology all things considered. Why? Because machines can not think (yet).

 

If patrons are looking for reversal or appeal procedures in soccer, good luck during the game. It might come after by the governing body, but not during the game. The technology used in tennis to determine ball in or out of play, accompanied by prolonged disruption in play, will not work for soccer. Spirit of the game, and flow is sacred and before FIFA interjects any technology in the name of making better decisions, they will work very hard to preserve that which is good and beautiful in soccer. Remember, people are imperfect and we strive for perfection. It is only when technology and retrospective analysis shows another view after the fact, then we question human imperfections.

 

My suggestion to you Canes is to not get worked up over poor officiating, as you have shown time and time again on this forum over the years. I doubt you do it for the sake of argument or a demonstration of logical acumen. I genuinely believe you are sincere in your desire for perfection across the board, as you probably are exacting in your private and professional life (which could be a liability as well as an asset). If you continue though down this road with officials, you will be disappointed as long as you watch the game. Because people always fail to measure up to our expectations, as well meaning as they may seem.

 

I leave you a parting gift, one that I hope will be lasting and positive for you over the years to come as you watch your children, grandchildren, college, professional, recreational, high school or club game: It is simple. You will find more contentment with soccer if you let the officiating go, and accept it for what it is, for better or worse, knowing you can not change it, or the person's "opinion". Sure you can disagree, and even verbalize it, that's expected and natural. In the end, the game is in the hands of someone outside your influence or control - even if you are the team manager that pays them. Because their mind is made up in a split second, before the first cackle of dissent is heard (its all white noise to me when I hear it). If you do that, you will find you will enjoy the game much better, and an official's shortcomings will be more palatable to deal.

 

Peace.

 

Socref1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • Recent Posts

    • McKenzie had no trouble with Huntingdon.  
    • Has BA landed any cornfed cowboys to block up front?
    • Yea I agree I will say tho I was a big “ v “ fan if an  opening ever did happen I think it would’ve been good to see him have a shot coming from a power house like Oakland. I’m sure he’s learned a lot from Kevin.  I bet he would bring a really good offense scheme IMO But after all this I just dunno anymore.  Whatever happens with the rumors an such if it did come to and opening I think this messes it all up.  The board members dreams are slowly slipping away now. I haven’t lived there for awhile I just hear what I hear, but my question is would there be any good potential candidates?? That’s why I don’t understand why people want b s out so bad who else could do any better ?? IMO there’s nothing attractive about it? As I stated earlier I went to the last game last year and taking a leak in a porta Potty is pretty sad and still nothing being done they say .. 
    • I have a sophomore that can do 177 (preferred) or 192. Sent you an email.
    • speaking of board members how can a man get arrested 12 days ago and still be head coaching a team in TC school system? looks like your right about the tc board members. I bet it would be different if they had a kid on the team 
×
  • Create New...