Quote:
Originally Posted by Flk_d_pk  Guilly, Carol.... I would like to agree with you, its only that in the real world it doesnt work like you think it does. Actually, the proffessional refferee's in other sports have the same issues. It REALLY doesnt matter how clear and enforcible rules you have implemented, there is always a very strong HUMAN factor or "common sence" factor, witch counts for 90% of the refferee's influence on the game.
And the best refferee's (and the only real reffs for me) are not the one quoting the rules from memory, and holding up to them like drunks to electricity pole, but rather they are the guys with most common sence, and are taking on their job like the "goodharted policeman with strong caracter", and not the job of a judge!
Taking on the job of refferee with the same mentallity as that of a judge (some even take it as a job of prosecution), produces the problems that make you think we need more enforcibillity in the rulebook. We dont! Really... the only thing needed in the rulebook, to get more enforcibillity of the rules is a phrase: ... and the decidions of the in-water or deck refferees are ultimate and final, without exceptions and without debate. Complains cant change that decidion.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that.....Democracy, however much you belive in it, has no place in the world of reffereeing. |
Flk,
having clear rules helps, and having referees that know them, helps too. I agree that a referee will not make binary decisions, and will have to analyze a lot of grays. And rulebook is there, as a guide, to decide what's white, what's black and what's gray.
I have seen good referees that can quote the rules from memory, and also have common sense, I don't see why it should be one or another.
But I have seen a lot of good people failing to ref a simple game, just because they don't know what's legal and what's not. Even their common sense failed in the most elementary calls, and that caused a lot of troubles, complaints, and a tought enviroment... There must be coherence between the game, the players and the refs.
I think the idea is not to reinforce the rulebook, it's not a bible after all. The goal is to make it simple and clear, so any guy who read it can understand what's ok and what's not.
Maybe Democracy is for writing the book, not for understanding it...
30-03-08, 10:54 AM
Linear Mode
