Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fserb 5837 days ago
It seems you are not very familiar with soccer rules. Just a few comments:

1,3. is already true. There is post-morten review, we do see red-cards being cancelled and players being suspended all the time.

4. It is like this already. FIFA rules says that "when in doubt, favor the offense".

5. There has been some national championships with 2 field referees, it didn't noticeably improve the quality of the calls. FIFA allows rule experimentation from time to time on national fields. We've seen "blue cards" (where players must be replaced by others) for instance, two referees, etc... sometimes those rules end up in the official set: referees telling how many extra minutes of play was one of those experiments.

6. They do. English is spoken among all referees in a world cup game, except when all referees share the same nationality.

7. There are recognizable hand signals for all calls, but not for all rationales which would be impossible.

8. I have no clue what you mean by this suggestion. Just wanted to point out that it includes "discretionary power to the referee" while rule 2 suggested that this is "anarchy".

9. What happened to rule 9? Well, I want to use this opportunity to make a point that your comment (as most of comments suggesting new rules) seems to be sincerely trying to create a better game. But this game is just not soccer.

10. Players are not allowed to return immediately and they do must wait for the referees approval.

1 comments

Simply put, there is insufficient and non-timely post-mortem review. Kaka's red card should have already been canceled and the CIV player suspended. Italy's dive against NZ for the PK should have already generated a post-mortem yellow.

As far as multiple referees goes, it's simply a matter of having greater field coverage in the area of view. It also reduces referee fatigue. It's a no-brainer and is the norm for just about every other sport on Earth.

Let me ask: what was the call in the US / Slovenia game? Nobody knows except for one guy. I was stumped. The commentators were stumped. The players didn't even know. There was no signal whatsoever, and it's not even required.

In fact, you actually can signal just about everything: pushing, holding, dangerous challenge, tripping, elbowing, and unsportsmanlike. Pretty much everything can be summed up as one of these with a simple hand signal.

Your point about the difference between "discretionary power" and "anarchy" is disingenuous. One would expect an officiating body for the world championship for a sport to have at least a reasonable consensus on what constitutes fouls and caution-worthy offenses. Do you think that the German team deserved 5 or 6 yellows and a red from that Spanish ref? I don't think so, and most people did not.

Sports evolve. You can either embrace it or fear it.

I didn't mean to be disingenuous on my comment. I was trying to point out that suggesting more fine grained subjective rules conflicts with saying everything is anarchic because it may be subjective.

It's obvious that sports evolve. I think my overall feeling about this is that soccer IS evolving. Just not in that particular direction you and many others seem to want (i.e., more clear less-subjective rules, cameras, etc...).