Soccer makes me crazy

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by DadofTwins

You're welcome.

OK...thanks...though I think we have the order backwards.

While there is nothing equivalent to "trifling and doubtful" written into the rules of football, there is a big emphasis in training and philosophy on applying advantage to many situations. There are even entire rules that are routinely taught to be ignored except in the most egregious of circumstances, such as assisting the runner.

As far as the uniform colors, etc, you see the the same thing in high school soccer. There is a note right now on the TASO Soccer page reminding officials to enforce the NFHS rules about the color of sliding shorts. The reason is most officials don't like being the uniform police.

I also recognize soccer is different and I don't honestly know what the solution may be. I was mainly interested in your take on "hyper officiating".

[DadofTwins]

And let me make sure I'm clear on one point. Saying a sport is "hyper-officiated" is not a reflection on the officials themselves. They're simply doing what's expected of them (and as best as I can tell, quite well most of the time).

My criticism of football and basketball is that those who play and follow the sport have unreasonable expectations of officials and officiating. In the quest for "fairness," they demand every conceivable wrong be righted by rule, and that an impartial judge hand out "justice" every few seconds.

And you're absolutely right that NFHS is the most egregious violator in this respect.

The result is players and fans can't enjoy the forest because they expect somebody in a striped shirt to point out, name and judge every single tree.

[CecilOne]

Here is a summary of the triple system of officiating (usually called double-dual or three-whistle) which I wrote for officials in our association who would be using it. Most of them preferred it.

The purpose is better coverage, seeing accurately what happens on every part of the field. The advantages are having a trail official closer to play, more flexible positioning for how the specific part of the game is being played and better match control because of increased presence. The triple system covers the middle of the field better than the dual system and covers the ends of the field better than the single or diagonal system, particularly the interior penalty area.

All three officials are equal and share responsibilities and authorities equally, except for the head referee responsibilities in Rule 5. The head referee designation (by assigner or crew choice) has nothing to do with the positions on the field. All work and communicate together as a team. Proper signals, especially prompt "play on", and observing each other are required so calls do not overlap.

Dynamic play:
All three move on or off the field based on the needs of the moment to stay close to the players.

The end referees (ER) work much like the dual system, except for not covering as much of the opposite end of the field as trail. They box in all the players, make all the calls and decisions for play nearest them and usually make most of the calls. The ER’s give priority to the “horizontal” line of sight.

The middle referee (MR) works as a “permanent” trail (vs. lead), boxing in the active play with the current lead, managing free kicks and kickoffs, balancing the positioning and angles of the crew, positioned for “trail” fouls, etc. The MR can penetrate deeper in each end and closer to the lead ER side than a dual system trail. The MR gives priority to the “vertical” line of sight.


Kickoffs
ER ready for attacks and offsides (NL defender)
MR near mid-line (kicker, encroachment)

Throw Ins
ER if nearest side, MR near expected action
MR if nearest side, ER near expected action or offsides

Goal Kicks
Lead ER positioned for attack and offsides
MR near expected action point
Trail ER near goal area, sound whistle if needed

Corner Kick
Lead ER outside goal line near goal area line
MR near trail side of penalty area
Trail ER near mid-field or NL defender

Free Kick
Lead ER ahead of ball, positioned for attack, offsides or goal
MR in line with ball, positioned for encroachment, manages “wall”
Trail ER behind ball positioned for counter attack

Free Kick near goal and Penalty Kick
Lead ER near goal line (goal judge)
MR positioned for offsides, encroachment, manages “wall”
Trail ER behind ball half way to mid-field, positioned for “trail” fouls

The referee on the home bench side is the primary timer.

[futuredoc2014]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Like I said ... not sure we need replay if we get enough officials...

But I do believe that IF replay is used, using it for goals (INCLUDING judging off-side on a score) as well as sideline plays makes sense.

One thing I'd add to my above rant. WTH is it with the ball going out of bounds at a certain point, and the player walking to the general vicinity of where it went out, then vaguely walking up 10-15 ... 20 yards before throwing it in. Absurd.

Technically, they actually are only allowed to throw from within 1 yd of where the ball went out. my instructor said that that was his biggest pet peeve and told us to call it. It's only an unpopular call because no one enforces it. I do enforce it. First time, *BEEP BEEP* right there [color]. second time, *BEEEP BEEP BEEP* throw to the other team. illegal throw.

[futuredoc2014]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Allow me to answer a few...


I used to think the same, but just forget about it. The FIFA folk decided a long time ago that once the clock starts, it doesn't stop. That's how it's done around the world, and that's what's accepted.

Somewhere, there's a YouTube video of a high school game where someone nailed a last-second shot (which I thought was late, but I digress), and comments from outside the U.S. thought it was ridiculous that there was a firm time limit. To them, that's not football, and we're in the minority on that one.

Now, since the clock never stops, here's a reason for time added on. Let's the half ends at 45:00. At 44:50 a striker goes on a breakaway and gets nailed by a defender 20 yards out. Ten running seconds is not enough time to set up a decent free kick, so if you can't stop the clock, you have to tack it on the other end. That's why they let plays "play out."


Apples and watermelons. In football, 22 guys are crammed into a much tighter space than 22 in soccer. While you do indeed get straightlined in soccer, like any other sport, you don't need seven guys. And yes, the four officials have unique responsibilities.


I completely agree. Someone tried to explain to me that other cultures don't view "owning up" in the same way we Americans do, but confusion is universal. That should change.

Actually, I'd prioritize something technological for goal review over reviewing every card. The missed goal in the England/Germany game is understandable -- I wasn't sure myself until I saw the replay -- but it can be solved with the assistance of the fourth official. I agree that cards should have some review process, but I think getting goals right comes first.

HS soccer used to have foul signals, but someone got to them and they abolished them. I work Fed games though with NFHS guys who still use the signals on unclear fouls, or with U-littles to help teach them. My rant is that of referees who don't try to take care of situations using conversation or understanding. Yes a card is needed at times, but just running up, flashing a card, and walking away does nothing to calm the situation or prevent fouls. It also just makes the player mad. Sometimes it is ok to have a short discussion with a player as to why they are receiving a card, or say a quick "watch those elbows" after a simple or trivial foul. Referees who are impersonal are generally disliked by teams. Players do however have respect for officials who will listen to players and explain things.