Hardest Sport to Officiate?

In basketball, there is more player-to-player contact in a very confined space happening at lightning speed, so positioning and foul recognition skills must be honed to a very fine pont. However, in my opinion this is more than offset by the absence of issues like "advantage". Officiating basketball is generally much more of an objective exercise, usually susceptible to absolutes when being critiqued, especially at anything below the pro level. Either the contact happened or it didn't - it's almost scientific and the issue becomes one of pure recognition. In basketball, the official must first see the contact, then recognize the foul, then blow the whistle. On the soccer pitch we engage in much more of an artistic endeavor. First we see the contact, then we recognize the foul, then we guage the degree (triffling?), then we evaluate the impact before we decide whether or not to blow the whistle. ITOOTR is a double-edged sword - it makes soccer officiating "easier" in the minds of some and "harder" in the minds of others. I guess it comes down to your personality as to which is more difficult to do. It might make for an interesting poll to see how many of the referees on this board are employed in the world of black-and-white subjects (math & science) versus those employed in the world of relative values (art, history, law, etc.) Frankly, I don't think there is anything more difficult than calling balls and strikes behind the plate!

 

If you're comparing soccer to BB, in basketball a "missed foul" will only allege to contribute to 2 points out of probably 70 and a foul tacked on to the player's list. Where in soccer a missed foul will always alledge to be a game decider since if it could of led to a goal, most games are decided by one goal.

Then of course the compare and contrast can't forget the multiple official/multi-whistle system in contrast to one opinion, one whistle. Oops, my bad!

 

My opinion is that ice hockey is the hardest to officiate. It is in no way a job that I would want. There is an art to refereeing a hockey game that parallels what you see in soccer and the fact that a penalty results in a man advantage means that a single call can "decide" any game. The speed of play is ridiculous, you have players carrying weapons, and the puck is like a missle. You have to see what's happening, decide if there is a foul, decide to call it, and deal with the players and coaches while hell breaks loose at 100 miles an hour. Oh, and you need to do this while skating like a pro. I love hockey, but that doesn't sound like fun to me. The rule book is very detailed too. I think I'd have a hard time with that.

I thought about reffing either soccer or ice hockey before I got involved with soccer. It came down to knowing the game of soccer much better and the fact that reffing soccer always seemed a much more elegant venture to me than reffing ice hockey.

Reffing in the NBA seems hard in the sense that you have to deal with a lot of lip, but there are three guys with whistles on a very small court. They have their game down to a science now. Maybe referees in the NBA just make it look easy, but when the philosophy of the officials seems to be anytime Shaq or MJ is touched blow the whistle, it can't be that hard.

 

I wonder about the conditioning of NHL referees compared to soccer referees. There is more ground to cover.

 

BB is definitely not the hardest sport to call. 95% of the fouls are so black and white it's pretty easy to call them. It's those 5% that can make or break the reputation of the official though. If you know the game and know the fouls then you don't have a problem -- especially with three whistles. The big difference is that if you blow a call the whole world knows for a fact it was missed.

I agree that Ice Hockey is probably the most difficult for the reasons mentioned above. Those guys are just incredible.

I would place soccer officiating somewhere in the middle of the pack actually. It's not really that difficult if done properly with a good referee. But as with any sport if the referee is not a strong one you'll have problems. Those problems are more controversial depending on the level and type of game being played -- league or tournament, amateur or professional. At the highest levels the games are watched worldwide by more people than any sport so naturally the referee will hear that much more grief. Also the very nature of missing a big call swaying the outcome of the game make the job more difficult. None of this really matters as far as recognizing the foul and making the call though -- that in of itself is fairly simple most of the time.

I think the hardest part about soccer officiating is not what goes on in a game, but what goes on off the field. The rules and federation have been formed in such a way there could easily be bias and politics influencing decisions without a solid way to prove it. This hasn't really happened in most sports -- NFL, MLB, NBA -- although we're seeing more and more of it in the NBA since the 90's and the Jordan era. Baseball had its time of politics and gambling influence but was caught and hasn't had any more problems since. I'm not aware of any outside influences affecting the NFL in recent history -- back in the 50s and 60s there was some incidents but nothing major has happened that I recall. The fact the Patriots of all teams won the Super Bowl last year despite overwhelming odds and a much smaller fanbase pretty much proves the NFL is neutral.

Anyway, I guess it's just safest to say all sports have their ups and downs but I don't agree the NBA is hardest to officiate. All the established sports have found systems that work well the majority of the time if executed properly but there will always be a few bad apples in the bunch for officials. It just so happens the NBA has more bad apples than good apples right now unfortunately.

 

In the NHL they have to work every other night in different cities. What they do is a little different than what we have to do in soccer. There's a lot of stop and start in hockey, and for players hockey is a game where the top players play about 28 to 30 minutes of 60 minute game in 35-45 second spurts.

I read about the offseason and preseason conditioning for an NHL referee and it's pretty sick. They do lots of skating, stationary bike work, and weight training. Plus they're full-time pros. My guess would be that they are the most fit officials, but there is no doubt as to the demands of refereeing a high-level soccer match.

I'd also guess that the level of stress working a top-flight soccer match internationally or in a country like England would a little higher than that of an NHL game though.

I don't think I could be paid enough to referee in the NHL. If anyone here thinks MLS officials get a bum rap, listen to what hockey fans say about the referees and linesmen. It's a wonder none of them have gone postal at some point.

 

I don't see making a call that give a man advantage as that controversial, but like in any sport making that foul call with the game tied and minutes to play, is always a tough call and the bar always seems to raise.

With hockey, I don't see it being physically demanding as far as stamina goes (you're on skates), but "getting in the way" seems to be a real difficulty. Getting involved with the check, and now where to "step off the field" out of the way seems a big problem. The other is fighting. I think this has been let go way too far. I can understand the frequency of tempers and fighting allowing a player to "legally" smash another player into a wood wall, and expecting the player not to take it personally, not to mention all the "weapons" their carrying. Waiting for the combatants to fall to the ice to pounce on them and get physically involved in breaking up a fight seems too much risk.

In the NBA, I think it's just to political. The lip is allowed because of big salaries, and this is what leads to all the fights were seeing. You don't see them in college basketball, because of that one missing ingredient. . . . big $$.

 

I don't agree. I have season tickets to Colorado men's basketball, 3rd row on the end, under the basket, and I see all the fouls pretty up close and personal, and I still can't understand this foul recognition in basketball. It's seems like too gray of an area. You see contact, that suggests a foul, that can even knock a player on his can and it's not called and all accept it, other times you see a simple hand check called, and wonder "where's the disadvantage?" The foul recognition seems too gray here. I always wanted to try BB officiating, but because of this, I stay away. . . that and having the fans right on top of you, and having to turn a deaf ear to it, more than we do in soccer.

 

I guess I don't see this as an issue. The playing area is much smaller than a soccer field, the officials are on skates, and move at three times the speed of any soccer ref, and they're are two sets of referees to "tranfer" or pass the responsibility down ice on a break away.

 

Having played both Soccer and Ice Hockey, as well as officiated my share of soccer games. Hockey Referrees are generally in better condition. Skating takes a lot more stamina than running.

Hockey players are on the ice for only 45-60 minutes at a time, because you can only go full tilt on skates for so long before you become exhausted.

 

I meant "seconds" oops, to late to edit.