This article uses the World Cup qualifying match between France and Ireland to make the case that FIFA should introduce a six-referee system at the World Cup to ensure the fairness of soccer. The six-referee system is better suited to the nature of soccer than video review, and has been suggested as a way to reduce errors while maintaining the authority of the referee, and FIFA’s adoption of the system will further enhance the fairness of the World Cup.
On November 18, 2009, the final qualifying match for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa was played between France and Ireland in Paris, France. Having won the first leg 1-0, France needed only a draw to advance to the World Cup. The game was tense from the start, with Ireland scoring the first goal to send the game into extra time. In the 13th minute of extra time, France’s world-class striker Thierry Henry committed a clear handball foul in front of the Irish goal, but the referee didn’t call it a foul, and the goal was awarded. France advanced to the World Cup, and Ireland requested a replay, which FIFA rejected. A few days later, Henri admitted in a press conference that it was a handball foul, but it didn’t change the result.
The incident went down as one of the most controversial calls in World Cup history. The World Cup is often referred to as one of the world’s three biggest sporting events, along with the Olympics and Formula 1, and is a global celebration and a battle of national pride. The tournament is held every four years, and since its inception in South Korea in 2002, it has become a uniquely Korean sporting event. In a festival that brings together people from all over the world, young and old, and especially in a sport where fairness is so important, a decision like this can be shocking and disappointing not only to the athletes who are competing, but also to the many fans who are watching.
In sports, fair play is crucial, and that’s why referees are there. However, referees are human, and mistakes can happen. Since their decisions have a direct impact on the outcome of the game, these errors are deeply hurtful to the players and the people of the countries they support. For this reason, there is a need for systemic improvements to reduce calls.
“It was a clear mistake, but that’s football,” Mancini, the manager of Manchester City, said in an interview after his team lost a game on January 2. While there is a consensus among soccer fans and pundits that blown calls are part of the game, it’s certainly not right to ignore the frequent and decisive calls. I argue that the World Cup should adopt a six-referee system to prevent these errors.
First, let’s consider why such a system is necessary for a soccer tournament, the World Cup. The first reason is the international status of the World Cup. More than 220 countries affiliated with FIFA participate in the qualifying rounds, and the 32 nations that make it to the tournament compete for years. The World Cup is the most-watched sporting event in the world, with the 2006 World Cup Final being watched by 715.1 million people worldwide. Fairness is paramount in a competition of this magnitude, which is why it’s essential to take steps to reduce foul play.
Second, the nature of soccer demands more accurate officiating. Accurate officiating is essential in any sport, but it’s even more so in soccer. For example, in sports like basketball and baseball, there are a lot of points, but in soccer, a single goal can often be the difference between winning and losing. Because a goal can mean so much in soccer, fouls can have a huge impact on the game. For example, in the France vs. Ireland game, the impact would have been much less if the call had occurred while France was leading by multiple goals. However, in a tightly contested game, a bad call can be a major factor in deciding the outcome of a match.
So, what are the options for more accurate officiating at the World Cup? The two most discussed options are video replay and a six-judge system. Video review is already in use in baseball, where video is used to make decisions in controversial situations. On the other hand, the sixth referee system adds two additional referees to the current four-referee system to watch for blind spots that the head referee and assistant referee might miss. In the six-referee system, referees are placed near both goalposts, which reduces the chance of a wrong call in critical situations involving goals.
The first reason is the nature of soccer. Soccer is an ongoing game, and the passage of time is an important factor. Video assistant referees can interrupt the flow of the game, whereas a six-referee system can maintain the flow of the game while reducing the number of incorrect calls.
Secondly, there is a lot of debate about what situations video review should be used in. If video review is limited to situations involving goals, its effectiveness will be very limited. On the other hand, a six-referee system would allow us to maintain the current system while improving the accuracy of the decisions.
Finally, consider the authority of the referee. In soccer, the referee’s decisions are absolute. The introduction of video assistant referees could weaken their authority, which could have a negative impact on the game. On the other hand, a six-referee system could reduce the number of incorrect calls while maintaining the authority of the referee.
For these reasons, I argue that a six-referee system is the best option for the World Cup. Not only would a six-referee system reduce incorrect calls, but it would also make the World Cup more fair. I hope that FIFA will actively consider this option and make the World Cup a truly fair event.
