Rugby Union: I can't say that Australia's win over Ireland was a 'disgrace' in terms of refereeing as some have said. The game remains a human game with perceptions and rulings being based upon human decisions.We have seen such results and rulings in this sport and in many others that have disadvantaged Australia as equally as any other team.
Football is not rocket science or we would have all rulings controlled and decided only by machines and the continual replaying of the 'evidence' taking up most of the time. The video refereeing concept simply slows the whole game down and makes it less interesting. less interesting=fewer viewers. It's why football (soccer) has resisted the strong push to have so much of the game decided by technology. Technology can be okay as a tool from time to time but the essential thing is the game and the flow and the people, the imperfect players and the imperfect referees. that's what makes it so very good and interesting to watch and be a part of.
I think the most passionate of supporters of the game itself would support the game as it is, or even with less technological 'interference' in the flow. The main people complaining so profoundly about decisions would be those who bet the most money and lost...but the game does not exist simply as a gambling 'opportunity'...there is dog racing for that. For most people, Rugby isn't about money...it's much more than that...it's a great game because it's a human game of strength and skill and mistakes.
I recall being terribly upset when Australia in football (soccer) was knocked out on the rim of the quarter finals by Italy through a very bad refereeing decision, and that alone.There was no corruption involved and so you just live with that angst for awhile. You don't have to change what the game is and what it means or you lose it..not only the game, but the sport itself. You lose the people.
Football is not rocket science or we would have all rulings controlled and decided only by machines and the continual replaying of the 'evidence' taking up most of the time. The video refereeing concept simply slows the whole game down and makes it less interesting. less interesting=fewer viewers. It's why football (soccer) has resisted the strong push to have so much of the game decided by technology. Technology can be okay as a tool from time to time but the essential thing is the game and the flow and the people, the imperfect players and the imperfect referees. that's what makes it so very good and interesting to watch and be a part of.
I think the most passionate of supporters of the game itself would support the game as it is, or even with less technological 'interference' in the flow. The main people complaining so profoundly about decisions would be those who bet the most money and lost...but the game does not exist simply as a gambling 'opportunity'...there is dog racing for that. For most people, Rugby isn't about money...it's much more than that...it's a great game because it's a human game of strength and skill and mistakes.
I recall being terribly upset when Australia in football (soccer) was knocked out on the rim of the quarter finals by Italy through a very bad refereeing decision, and that alone.There was no corruption involved and so you just live with that angst for awhile. You don't have to change what the game is and what it means or you lose it..not only the game, but the sport itself. You lose the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment