The Soccer Debate

Now that the world cup has progressed passed the group stages, the recent games have more of an impact and each second is important, each play and each touch on the ball can change the outcome of the game. A few calls that were made or not made have recently sparked controversy as far as officiating strategy and the use of technology in this sport. As people have readily pointed out, it would be very easy and cheap to place computer chips in the cleats of players and the ball to keep track of them and see things like when someone goes off sides or when the ball crosses the goal line, etc. A lot of avid soccer fans, including myself, feel that this would ruin the game of soccer because it takes away the human element, and although I admit human error is something inescapable, the human element is what makes sport, well sport.

My boyfriend doesn’t understand this argument, he thinks that all sports should try and make things equal and fair. My boyfriend is a very decent and very intelligent human being, but he was unfortunately not blessed with what one would call athletic ability. He has not played a sport consistently for his life the way that I have played soccer for almost 15 years of my life. I am in love with sports, baseball, basketball, soccer, volleyball, you name it. And I know this debate of technology is brought up in all sports, especially baseball lately as well. Although giving both teams a fair advantage and making them uphold to the same standards is important, I feel that both teams are already presented with these standards. The point of the human ref is his own standards. Playing soccer my whole life, I have encountered many refs, all with their own style and limits. Some refs call every touch and don’t allow any aggressive play, others are probably much too lenient. My point with this is that the players have to push the limits to see what the ref will call. There is a certain point that the aggression will go to, which is what makes the game interesting. There is a certain level that each game can be at, a potential level that can be different each game, which is what makes each game unique and exciting. If we had technology involved, it would bring that level down significantly lower. I feel that the motivation for players to push those boundaries would be lowered and by proxy, the games excitement would also be lowered. I know that not everyone cares about soccer in the US, and those who do not play soccer find the sport boring. I think that you have to play soccer or for whatever reason be intimately attuned to the strategy and feel to understand why this is important. It’s easy if you don’t play to think that having technology as an assistant would be beneficial. But again, the pace of the game would totally be changed. The thing about soccer is that the best team doesn’t always win, even if they may have the advantage of talent, speed or strategy formation, because there are those lucky breaks that the underdog gets, whether it’s behind the refs back or not, that are the equalizer. It happens in all sports, like baseball. The ump asks if you tag the person, or slid in safe, you say “yes”. If people have problems with the consistency or ruling of the refs, then they shouldn’t be changing the rules to match the refs, they should be training better refs.

That brings up the other issue. Refs are all different, and whether this is good or not is debatable. However, since it is the world cup and there is a lot at stake, I feel the refs should be impeccably trained and know the rules of the game in and out and have lots of experience. They should also know what off-sides is. I know there has been a lot of grief because of the inconsistency of the refs calling off sides. There are other ways than technology to combat this, such as adding more refs that are well trained and well versed in the definition that is off sides. Or linesmen who stand in the corners of the field, much like volleyball, who can also tell if the ball goes over the lines or not. Human error in sports in inevitable, from refs and players alike. There are two sides to every call or not call. One team may think something is unfair when it is totally legal, another team could be at the disadvantage of a good call, or obviously a team can be disadvantaged from a bad call. My point is the refs at such a high level should be held to the same standard, a high knowledge of the game and rules and be fair and consistent in their calls and decisions.

A good case in point is the Mexico/Argentina game. That ref made a good call on that offsides, whether he knew it or not. It actually wasn’t offsides, because the Mexican defenders followed the ball as the player passed it to the guy that was in fact offsides, but since they stayed with the ball and kept running with it, they made it a tougher call for the ref. If they would have stayed, he totally would have been glaringly offsides. The player isn’t offsides until the play is directed at him and the team is given an unfair advantage. The Argentinean forward technically wasn’t offsides until the player decided to kick it back to him, and at that point, the Mexican defenders decided to guard him, and reached his side as the ball did, and passed him…therefore, not offside. If you don’t believe me, just check out the clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MevANY8DrGs you can clearly see that once he becomes involved in the play, the defender is beside him. My point from that is that Mexico obviously thought they were given the disadvantage, when it was actually a good call. But of course, they will never admit that. It’s like all the players who are theatrical and take falls, when they are obviously not hurt to that extent at all. It draws the call in a way that may not be fair, but everyone does it. Who’s to say that one of those calls isn’t fair? It could give an advantage to a team that didn’t deserve it as well. It’s just something that you have to deal with, in all sports. Human error is present, but so is human nature. The competitive nature that makes a team want to win, blatantly cheating or not. It’s something that you wont ever be able to control in sports, ever.

So when someone starts to break out the point of technology or complaining about the refs, that is just bullshit. The players are worse than the refs in most cases, their bad nature in some cases outshining the refs honest mistake. The technology if added would be a killer to the game atmosphere. Sports like baseball and soccer have survived this long without instant replays, and people still keep coming back through the years. I’m sure they can survive without technology, and keep tradition going.