World Cup 2006

[Diplo]

I dont think there should be "styles" of refeing period. You follow the rules and that's it, its pretty simple if you ask me.

I totally disagree. Blindly following rules is exactly what causes the problem, not fixes it. Good referees are not automatons following pre-programmed rules, they are the ones that can use their experience to apply discretion to their decisions. For instance, a good ref will let play continue even if a foul has occured if it is look advantageous to the agrieved team (but may pull the offender back afterwards and have a word).

The thing is, not every foul diserves a card and this is where common sense has to apply. There are no "rules" that govern whether a foul deserves a card, just the wisdom of the referee. Refs just need to try and be fair and consistent.

 

[Moffell]

Ok, I'll go off topic here. The Chechz are having a really hard time against Ghana. 0 - 1 so far with an early goal. Ghana seems so far to perform the best football of the african teams.

 

[Deepak]

WTF, Ghana defeated Czechs 2-0. It is group of death now.

 

[Skrying]

I totally disagree. Blindly following rules is exactly what causes the problem, not fixes it. Good referees are not automatons following pre-programmed rules, they are the ones that can use their experience to apply discretion to their decisions. For instance, a good ref will let play continue even if a foul has occured if it is look advantageous to the agrieved team (but may pull the offender back afterwards and have a word).

The thing is, not every foul diserves a card and this is where common sense has to apply. There are no "rules" that govern whether a foul deserves a card, just the wisdom of the referee. Refs just need to try and be fair and consistent.

So everybody has to play against a ref with a new style. So with each new game you have no real clue till its to late as to what goes and what doesnt? Good one there.

The problem with using "style" to ref a game is that everybody has a different style. If you're a machine and do what the rules say (why wouldnt the rules give you a perfect outline in the first place? wtf) then everybody knows what the limit is and so forth. This makes the game much more enjoyable because the players and the refs know exactly what's allowed and what isnt, therefore removing any worry over possible wrong calls beyond mistakes.

 

[Zaphod]

I’m very surprised to see such a weak performance from the Czech. Without both Baros and Koller their attacking play seemed random and disorganized.

 

[Mariner]

A cracking game that, with a deserved win for the Ghanaians (crap, is that spelt correctly?).

It was good to see a team continue to endlessly attack despite having the game virtually won. You can guarantee that the Italians (and quite a few other teams) would have closed it down near the end but credit to Ghana for continuing to try and score more goals. Funniest for me was the Ghanaian player celebrating his goal which had been correctly disallowed for offside - celebrating facing the crowd, he didn't realise it had been disallowed until he turned around to beckon his teammates to come across to him!

All we need now is an unlikely win for the Yanks to open the group up completely.

Think the Czechs are stuffed now, especially when you consider they have no strikers remaining for the final group game.

 

[Mariner]

Adding to discussion about referees, good refereeing is 90% about using your common sense with any given situation.

The problem being, of course, that "common sense" is a contradiction in terms...

 

[epicstruggle]

All we need now is an unlikely win for the Yanks to open the group up completely.

Yep. The US teams needs to win and at least score a few goals to erase that goal diferential.

epic

 

[Zaphod]

There are no "rules" that govern whether a foul deserves a card

Sure there are (see Law 12, p.38). As the rules apply to fouls, the most common reasons for a caution is if the referee rules it as 'unsporting' or the player comitting the foul is a 'repeat offender' (you often see referees telling players that 'next time' you get the card...). You get sent off for fouls that are ruled 'dangerous' or 'denying a clear goalscoring oportunity'.

 

[Diplo]

Iwhy wouldnt the rules give you a perfect outline in the first place? wtf

You obviously have no understanding of football. Every incident in a game is totally unique and there is no definitive guide as to what happens in every possible circumstance. For instance, if a centre forward is heading toward goal and a defender makes a late tackle do you:
a) Let play continue if the attacking team still have possession
b) Blow for a foul
c) Blow for a foul and give the defender a yellow card
d) Let play continue then call the defender back and give him a verbal warning
e) Let play continue then call the defender back and give him a yellow card
f) Let play continue as the tackle appeared a genuine attempt to get the ball and no foul was intended
g) Send the defender off as he deliberately committed an act meant to deprive the opposition of a goal scoring opportunity

You have a split second to make the decision. There is no algorithm that will decide for you which is the "correct" choice.

The ref needs to judge what was the intent of the defender, what advantage do the attacking team loose if play stops. He also has to take into account previous actions of that defender (ie. is this his first foul or has he made others? Does he already have a card?). There are lots of factors to weigh up. The rules are a framework, not a definitive set of immutable directives that cover every circumstance. The worst thing in the world is a referee who blindy follows rules without first applying common sense.

 

[Diplo]

As the rules apply to fouls, the most common reasons for a caution is if the referee rules it as 'unsporting' or the player comitting the foul is a 'repeat offender'

But how do you define what is "unsporting"? How many repeat offences are allowed before a card is given? It's all open to interpretation by the referee (as it should be). If it was a simple as merely applying rules than anyone could be a referee, but clearly that isn't the case, it is a skilled job. Being a skilled job therefore means that some are better at the skill than others and this is all down to their "style".

 

[Zaphod]

f) Let play continue as the tackle appeared a genuine attempt to get the ball and no foul was intended

You made it sound like there was no guidlines (rules) at all at first, but it seems we're pretty much on the same page. I totally agree with the rest of your post, but this - I think - is not an option. 'Good intentions' can't whipe out the foul.

Edit:

But how do you define what is "unsporting"?

They have a description somewhere that I couldn't find again now. It boiled down to deliberate acts of anything that is not a part of normal play. For fouls such things as holding, tackling without a genuine attempt to reach the ball, and sabotaging the flow of play (obstructing a player on the counterattack, for example).

 

[Diplo]

I totally agreed with the ret of your post, but this - I think - is not an option. 'Good intentions' can't whipe out the foul.

Yes, you are right, and generally this would be the case. There are, however, a small number of situations were you might let play continue, even if an accidental foul was committed - for instance, if the attacker made a huge meal of it and rolled around theatrically (trying to get the defender booked) then you might judge it fair to let play continue. This is where, I think, a good ref has to make a skilled judgement call.

 

[Zaphod]

Agreed.

Enough about the rules, though. Looks like the Yanks may give us the upset we asked for (speaking of cards ). This group is totally weird.

 

[Deepak]

Latest: Italy 1 - US 1 (own goal by Italy). And Italy are down to 10 men now. If US beat Italy and then Czechs also beat them then....

 

[Diplo]

Group E is certainly turning out to the most interesting and least predictable group. If the US manage to win this then it will be totally down to the last games who goes through. At the moment, it could be anyone!

 

[epicstruggle]

kill the ref. Whats with that red card on the US. make up card?

 

[Diplo]

kill the ref. Whats with that red card on the US. make up card?

He was only following the rules, which are clear and unequivocal, ummm?

 

[epicstruggle]

He was only following the rules, which are clear and unequivocal, ummm?

That was clearly a make up call. No way that was a red card foul.

epic

 

[Diplo]

That was clearly a make up call. No way that was a red card foul.

According to the FIFA directives it most definitely was, as he went in with both feet and slammed straight into the guy's ankles, which is deemed a "reckless" foul and a straight red. Of course, a good ref would make a judgement call and so may have let him get away with a yellow, as I think it was his first offence. However, technically, the ref was well within his rights to send him off.