Heard a discussion on the radio the other night. In the modern era (post WWII), most sports have increased the number of referees in a game by at least one. Soccer remains on of the few that has not. Is it tradition or just stuborness?

They have talked about adding a second ref on the field before but so few times does it actually matter. When you look at it you're gonna get screwed sometimes and sometimes your opponent is gonna get screwed. Now that's not right but its how it is.

Football has like 18 refs and 20 cameras and yet somehow people still get screwed, you're just never gonna please everyone.

i think the main problem with soccer is the clock. the winner is too often now the team that can fake the most injuries. even with stoppage time, it does no good. i think the clock should stop for injuries and goals.

mazag, the clock does stop with injuries...it's called stoppage time at the end of the game.

If you ever get to go to Europe watch a conference game. These guys are in the same federation as the big leagues and can move up with promotion and in some (spain segunda B) the clock stops with injuries and goals, just like college here. There is still as much time wasting, they just need to enforce carding for wasting time.

mazag;
Then, you like how high school soccer is played. The clock is stopped for an injury, after a goal, to issue a card, and other times deemed necessary by the ref.

Most of the time, adding time at the end of each half is liberal, and the clock "stops" in the refs head when something happens in stoppage time.

Four refs on the field is too much and delineation of responsibility would be complicated. It's already complicated in high school when you run what's called a 2-man (refs @ opposite corners of the field).

No matter how you slice, there are "dead zones" on the field which will have trouble being covered, and a fourth will not help IMO.

It is better to remain silent and presumed ignorant, than open your mouth and remove all doubt, Abe Lincoln.

I don't think the quality of the calls would increase noticeably, plus the referees would block the play even more often than they already do.

There should be more visibility and openness with the "mystery" time added at the end of each half. What the ref is doing with the clock during play should be seen by all. Just link his watch to that on the board.

FIFA does a lot of studies regarding World Cup games.

I believe that in one recent World Cup, FIFA calculated that the ball was in play an average of about 55 minutes in each game.

Each referee is aided by the side judges that call offsides,whose throw in ,etc...They can also call fouls.

Linesmen do not call fouls. They only alert the head referee to things...whether the referee listens to him or not is another question. They are there to call direction of out-of-bounds, signal an offsides (which the referee can disagree with and ignore), and alert any fouls they see to the referee.

At that level of play...if the ref doesn't see it, they aren't gonna call it.

Linesman worth their salt call fouls. The center referee stipulates what area and when the linesman makes the foul call. But, linesman make foul calls, in fact, the fourth official can also call fouls and does on occassion.

"It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man," Psalm 118:8.

i also think consistency would be an issue with another ref on the field. one ref will call it tight and the other will let it play thats how it was when i played as a kid or high school and they put a second ref on there. he just got it the way

"Linesman worth their salt call fouls. The center referee stipulates what area and when the linesman makes the foul call. But, linesman make foul calls, in fact, the fourth official can also call fouls and does on occassion."

This is a semantics issue, but important for this discussion. Yes, a linesman signals a foul by holding this flag up the in air (and moving side to side to get refs attention, if I can recall my glory days as refing). Then, the center ref calls the foul, etc. If the center ref decides it wasn't a foul, then he can ignore the linesman. The linesman does not have the power to call the foul. He, by himself, cannot blow a whistle and stop the game.

The whole point of linesmen are to assist the center ref in out-of-bounds situations and things he cannot see. All decisions about the calls have to go through the center referee, however.

diehard;
I'm sure you'll agree this is stipulated by the "pre-game" discussion the center ref has with his A/R's. I've center ref's who've said "you guys are refs; you see a foul, call it, I'll back you." I've also had one or two say, "you just indicate oob (out of bounds) and off sides, I'll call the fouls."

The "smoother" games were those when the A/R's called fouls. It lets the players know that 3 pairs of eyes and not 1 pair are watching and calling fouls.

It is better to remain silent and presumed ignorant, than open your mouth and remove all doubt, Abe Lincoln.

The center and assts. on the lines form a "team" to control the game. 3 properly trained refs. are sufficient to do the work.

The referees in the World Cup are a huge disappointment in general, some of the players have not helped at all by faking... Portugal...

Perhaps a "cry baby" satistic kept by FIFA reviewing player grimaces and holding knees when nobody touched you should be kept. C Ronaldo of Portugal wins the cry baby award this World Cup.

I think the French team in general take that one...especially the obvious dive taken that led to the goal the frogs got in the final.