Soccer can be a beautiful game, but refereeing is often ugly. When referees apply loose constructionism to the rule book, consistency suffers.
Players like to know what they can and can’t get away with. Erratic refereeing decisions foster player and manager rebellion. Emotionally-laden decisions rooted in a subjective sense of “what’s good for the game” confuses everyone.
Especially when adjudicating fouls and yellow card offenses. It’s nice that referees apply common sense while “managing” a game. But, there’s a cost. Their discretion is inherently subjective often contravening the rules and ensuring predictability. For the sake of consistency, referees should oblige the rules and avoid the hubris of management manipulation.
When referees manage matches instead of officiating, fouls tend to masquerade as incidental contact. As a result, goalies generally get preferential treatment on the field. Though they are not given special dispensation in the rule book.
Soccer’s supposedly a contact sport, and goalkeepers, especially during corners and crosses, inflict much of it.
Nevertheless, if a diminutive striker innocuously brushes against a fumbling goalie, the referee invariably blows the whistle. Conversely, defenders often get away with dirty tricks during corners and may as well be playing rugby rules.
Some apparent fouls simply dissolve into a mirage inside the penalty area.
When certain infringements occur outside the box, the ref is more convinced and usually blows the whistle. However, when the same foul occurs inside the box, it’s suddenly illusory.
The rules make no such distinction. Should referees?
Players will adjust to consistent refereeing. In the meantime, perhaps a few more goals are in the offing. Sure, some fouls are borderline and do require refs to exercise judgement. If it’s an inadvertent “coming together,” they’ll do well to play on and let the game flow.
On the other hand, some fouls are so blatantly obvious that they should be penalized irrespective of exogenous factors such as the player’s reputation or the competitive repercussions. The rule book is indifferent as to the period of the match in which the foul happens.
Neither does it care about the occasion, nor the venue.
When a defender scythes down a fleet-footed attacker on a breakaway, it’s a legitimate yellow card. Whether it be in the first minute or the ninetieth minute. When a player stamps his boot so as to imprint his studs on an opponent’s ankle—yellow card, it’s a yellow card at a minimum.
If the same unruly player commits these malicious acts, that’s two deserved yellows and a sending off. Even if it changes the complexion of the match. Off he jolly well goes to reflect upon his brutish indiscretions.
If sending off a player for repeated offenses or violent conduct alters the ad hoc dynamics of the match, then so be it.
Them’s the rules
It is folly for refs to interject some nebulous notion of fair play into the cauldron by preserving the eleven-against-eleven balance of power.
In the cold light of day, they hover above the relative importance of a particular match. If referees are smart enough to implement some kind of dynamic, contextual, rule-making that engenders perfect soccer justice on the day, they’d probably be quantum physicists.
Speaking of physicists, some postulate that our very observations affect the nature of reality.
This does seem to apply in the macro world of soccer, where opposing managers tend to observe the same match in alternate realities. In the rare case they cannot refute an unfavorable refereeing decision in the post-match interview, they simply exclaim: “I haven’t seen the replay yet.”
This is why it’s imperative that the “man [or woman] in the middle” conforms to the laws of soccer. Not impromptu insights into what he or she perceives as being “best” for how any particular game unfolds.
For the integrity of soccer, there is no place for refereeing hubris.
Matches should be officiated, per the rules, as objectively as possible. They should not be subjectively managed per the contingencies of the occasion.
200+ Channels With Sports & News
- Starting price: $33/mo. for fubo Latino Package
- Watch Premier League, World Cup, Euro 2024 & more
Live & On Demand TV Streaming
- Price: $35/mo. for Sling Blue
- Watch Premier League, World Cup & MLS
Many Sports & ESPN Originals
- Price: $9.99/mo. (or get ESPN+, Hulu & Disney+ for $13.99/mo.)
- Features Bundesliga, LaLiga, Championship, & more
2,000+ soccer games per year
- Price: $4.99/mo
- Features Champions League, Serie A, Europa League & NWSL
175 Premier League Games & PL TV
- Starting price: $4.99/mo. for Peacock Premium
- Watch 175 exclusive EPL games per season
110+ channels, live & on-demand
- Price: $59.95/mo. for Plus Package
- Includes FOX, FS1, ESPN, TUDN & more
11 Comments
Leave a Reply
Leave a Reply
SOCCER TV SCHEDULES APP
 |
 |
STREAMING OFFERS
 Includes: Premier League + 84 Sports Channels | |
| 7-Day Free Trial | |
 Includes: Bundesliga & La Liga | |
| Sign Up |
|
Includes: Champions League & Serie A | |
| 7-Day Free Trial | |
Includes: Premier League | |
| Sign Up |
|
 Includes: USA, NBC, FOX, FS1 + more | |
| Browse Offers |
|
Eric
May 4, 2018 at 6:24 am
Can’t wait till we have robot referees…. That will solve all of the referee hubris problem. What Noel fails to realize is that there are many times when both sides are going to disagree no matter what the referee decides. The game isn’t always black and white. Even with var decisions are still debated. The plight of the referee would be better understood if everyone refereed just one match. I’m guessing that there is much more hubris in writing an article alleging referee hubris when you’ve never put yourself in the referee’s position. You should try it Noel and then write a follow up!
Phil D
May 4, 2018 at 9:23 am
I love all these high speed middle school refs commenting. This is a terrible argument btw, for that matter why not just shut down all criticism of the game to begin with, how many have played at a professional level? No being a ref for your local high school is not the same thing, this site focuses on TV coverage, should everyone not comment at all since nobody has ever called a game at a professional level and probably could not complete a sentence if you put them in a booth?
Victor
May 2, 2018 at 7:07 pm
The person who wrote this has never reffed a game or even read the IFAB laws of the game…
NSW
May 2, 2018 at 5:12 pm
Judging by a couple of comments, it looks like the author was right about refereeing hubris. Tough job, though, so why make it any tougher by extemporaneously superseding the rules based upon some subjective sense of how the game should unfold? Still, my hat’s off to refs who, in a way, are the most important part of any soccer match. We need them, flawed though they be. Nice article, overall.
Dean Anderson
May 2, 2018 at 2:01 pm
Hey Noel – you might want to get into a referee training class, work games for quite a few years and then make your “opinions” known. Your words ring about as true as the parents in the sideline of our matches.
Marcelo Soto
May 2, 2018 at 1:57 pm
You sir, are very knowledgeable of how to referee. Most state associations are in desperate need of more referees. Please apply and get your uniforms ASAP! The game clearly needs you!
John M. Bonelli
May 2, 2018 at 11:36 am
I believe I had read the dumbest thing posted on the Internet today. As a referee and assignor of referees, I’d clearly have to say you are clueless about the Laws of the Game and how referees use them to manage games for the players safety and the game itself. I can see you have never officiated a match. With the speed of the game, the players who often feign injury and dive during close encounters, we have a split second to make a decision. We have to decide if there was a foul, if there is need for a lecture, card or worse, or whether or not to allow play to continue on advantage. We are more right than wrong. But we have the pundits like you, who ruin a beautiful game with your slack-jawed, pathetic article, that blames the referees for faults in the game.
ramah
May 2, 2018 at 2:33 pm
Well said
John Doe
May 2, 2018 at 11:30 am
Am I reading an Onion article? This has to be a joke.
Lawrence Dockery
May 2, 2018 at 11:11 am
As a referee, this literally hurt my brain to read. Very clear that you have no idea what you’re talking about.
NSW
May 2, 2018 at 5:18 pm
Yikes, you may, unintentionally, be substantiating one of the author’s valid points: further proof that most refs’ brains may not be equipped to “manage” matches on the fly.