What motivates a man to become a referee?

In amongst the complications and glaring yet beautiful simplicity of football there have always been a few puzzlers that I have never quite got my head around.

Amongst them are why would anyone choose to be a goalkeeper? But perhaps more prominent in my mind is why on earth would anyone freely choose to be a referee?

This weekend’s action from the Premier League has once again put referees in the spotlight and further emphasised my feelings towards the men in black’s motivation, but the focus shone on them is not for the largely efficient and commendable background work they do to ensure the main event runs smoothly, but for their collective failings.

The key word when it comes to criticism of the fellas in the middle of it all is consistency or rather inconsistency in this case.

The flaws in this criticism are eloquently highlighted by the Guardian’s Jacob Steinberg, who points out that a consistent unity in decisions made by many different people in the heat of a game is understandably a far more complicated request for individual humans to do than many pundits seem to think. It is just expected that because all referees follow the same rules, they will have the same interpretation of incidents and even that they are of the same ability.

Gary Neville’s failure to be dismissed for a lunge on West Brom’s Graham Dorrans when the player was clean through on goal, perhaps highlights a perceived favouritism towards United, but also an obvious inconsistency in the application of the last man rule.

Steinberg elaborates on this point with this point with the help of a disgruntled Cesc Fabregas, who has clearly been taking the same bitter pills that his manger has been known to indulge in “Earlier in the week Cesc Fábregas launched his own Twitter complaint about referees after Arsenal were denied a penalty for a handball by James MacArthur during their draw with Wigan. “What’s the difference between this handball and my one versus Spurs?” he asked” in an indignant voice.

With this in mind and many other instances of referees being chastised for making human errors, it’s difficult to understand the attraction and even what joy a person can derive from being the man in charge, as seemingly only the negative is ever brought to life.

A sceptical person like me would suggest that they’re failed goalkeepers, who in turn are failed outfield players themselves and they turn to officiating to satisfy their urge to be involved with the beautiful game.

Thankfully though there are seemingly gluttons for punishment who are willing to take the flack for their ability to err as humans and publically display their mistake to a potential global audience.

Clangers are made every day by Joe in the street and every week by monstrously paid players, but little is known about the seemingly automaton referees who make emotionless decisions in difficult situations.

Thanks to Mattias Löw’s excellent documentary on Swedish referee Martin Hansson though, football fans can begin to be enlightened.

The Referee | Rättskiparen [2010] from Freedom From Choice AB on Vimeo.

Posted By Dan Mobbs - Tuesday January 4, 2011.
Tags: Martin Hansson, referees