We have a long way to go...

    Two little pieces of news--minor items by themselves--I learned this last weekend emphasized for me that we still have a long way to go before the United States will be assimilated completely into the world football community.  We have the resources, we have the athletic talent, we have the knowledge of refereeing, but do we have the attitude and understanding that are necessary for us to become a respected member, and not remain a tolerated bystander?

    The first was from the recent USA vs. Japan match in San Jose.  For that game, three officials from Argentina were appointed to officiate.  The referee was pleased to be here and remarked that this was the first time he had ever refereed the United States.  You ought to understand that this sort of thing is something that FIFA referees do.  They collect and catalog the names of the countries they have refereed, the places they have been, the great players they have been privileged to be on the field with.  When the career is over, the catalog is often all that they have left to share.  Oh! And the souvenirs they have collected.
    A moment ago I reached up to a shelf in my study and brought down the ball used in the Australia vs. Korea match in the last international tournament I worked--the President's Cup in Korea in 1987.  Beside it is the one used in the Olympic qualifying match between Canada vs. Mexico, the second "A" class international I refereed and the one that brought me my FIFA badge.  Yes, in the good old days you had to earn the right to wear the badge by doing two "A" class matches and by being listed as an international referee for two years.
    So at the end of the match, our guest from Argentina wanted, perhaps even expected, to take a game-ball back as a souvenir.  But he was not allowed to do so, prevented by officialdom.  By whom?  The promoter, the game supervisor?  I couldn't find out, but what matters is that three international officials from a major player in the sport return to their country perplexed that in the richest country in the world, they don't allow someone to take a used soccer ball as a souvenir home with him.  How miserly!  How discourteous!  He returns home, not as an enthusiast for how the game is progressing here, but as a critic saying how cheap we are.
    The second piece of news came from a senior league, the San Francisco Soccer League.  In a referees' clinic on Saturday, the organizer announced that the league had changed its rules about substitutions, and that for the next season twenty-five subs would be allowed and they could come in-and-out at will.  (I'm exaggerating for effect, to emphasize that the league decided to abandon the laws of the game--see Law 3, and the permitted modifications allowed--and play a different game from the one played at the senior level world-wide.)
    Don't league officials get it?  Don't they understand that they signed on to play a particular game played the same way in every soccer-playing nation on the planet?  Why do we have to be different, especially after the ridicule we took after our farcical experiments with law-modifications over the years.  Remember the 35-yard line for offside?  The gunshot to end the game?  The clock being run by the home team?  The pass-back rule from outside the 35-yard line?  The "crash-helmet" request to FIFA?  The attempts to enlarge the goals (so that shots wouldn't hit the woodwork so often!) and to bring three whistles onto the field?
    We will earn the respect of the world when we respect the world game as it is, not as we in our inexperience, imagine it should be.  They will admire us when we do things right.  And doing things right, by the way, was the theme of my presentations at the clinic for the referees in the San Francisco Soccer League last Saturday.  I hope they got it.

Comments

[Ron]

Here! Here! My pet peeves precisely. (+ that most leagues don't have frozen rosters, so that players play on 3 teams in 3 different divisions or leagues during the same season. But, hey, that's another blog.) Unlimited substitutions don't develop 90-minute players; unlimited substitutions don't develop smart players; AND unlimited substitution keeps games from experiencing the same ebb & flows that occur if sub's are restricted from re-entering the game. After playing college in US, I played in West Germany in mid-80's and discovered first hand what a benefit limiting sub's is to the game. And back then, we were allowed only 2 subs. The higher amateur levels in the US should restrict sub's from reentering the game according to Law 3 . . . and the quality of play would almost certainly become a lot better.

[RF]

The amateur roster issue is simple economics. When SFSFL was forced to raise team fees to cover the cost of field usage they helped reduce the burden to the teams. They did this by allowing more players on the roster which keeps the cost that each player pays to play in the league down. They still only allow six subs per game.

While the ideal is substitutions per FIFA guidelines, the reality of managing an amateur team where the players have to pay to play needs to be taken into account. If it gets to expensive then players will drop out and where would that leave us referees?

[Alberto]

I gather this is an amateur league? If it is, I have no issue if the league wants to modify the LOTG with respect to subs. This is not a professional league where the letter of the LOTG must be followed. While I agree in principal that unlimited substitutions destroy the flow of games, we are talking about an amateur league. I see nothing wrong with getting players substituted frequently at this level. Older people get tired.

[Pat Smith]

Being a little older than many of your subcribers,i can recall when we didnt have subs,you played hurt or you played short,In the industrial league i played in in England you only had the referee no linesman my time was rough, but i think it is abused today

[Bruce]

Regarding the first item, shame on us. It certainly seems petty. I can only hope someone just wasn't thinking. Which I suppose highlights the fact that a USSF international referee didn't have any input in the hospitality provided our Argentinian friends.

Surely, one of the issues that ought to concern the USSF is how we treat officials of all sorts at international games held in the US. The importance and thoughtfulness (in terms of appropriate knowledge not only hospitality) should not be underestimated. We need to remember that in the soccer universe we are not the superpower to whom others look for direction.

[Victor Matheson]

I am forced to disagree with Dr. Evans regarding the move to unlimited substitutions in recreational adult soccer. My experience here in Boston is that the strict FIFA substitution rule actually makes the game significantly worse.

Guys who are playing amateur soccer don't want to show up for their game on Sunday not knowing if they are going to get any playing time. Therefore, it is quite common for the "better" Boston league to play games where teams are short players since no one wants to be a substitute in a limited substitution league. In the "worse" Boston league with free subs, games are always 11 v. 11 with a couple of extra guys to cover for injuries that occur during the game because even the guys who aren't starting know they will get 60 or 70 minutes of game time. As a result, these games generally have much better competitive balance than the games in the "better" league. These benefits far outweigh the disruptions caused by occasional substitutions.

I'm not advocating mass substitutions of 7 players every 5 minutes as in U-10 matches, but you guys are crazy if you think the game is best served by having guys waste their weekends coming out to a game so that they can sit on the bench until the 75th minute and then play for 15 minutes.

I have no problem with limited subs in the professional divisions and in a few select amateur tournaments such as the Open Cup, but the rule is completely inappropriate for the 99% of amateur soccer which is played purely for the enjoyment of the game.