I think you need to differentiate. Referees are selected by FIFA based on their ability and neutrality. Players are selected by their countries with the hope that these are the best people who have the greatest chance of winning.
In other words, if Singapore qualifies, Singapore can go and say "I want to be represented by these 20 players".
Singapore cannot say, "I want to be represented by X referees". Every referee who wants to go to World Cup has to pass the selection on his own merit, nothing to do with his country.
Hence by definition, players are representing their countries, referees are not. A country has no say on how many referees it can send. Referees basically apply to officiate based on their own merit. The country has nothing to do with it.
Now, I'm not denying that spectators always question where a referee is from. That's human nature. And that if the referee does a bad job, spectators may have a bad impression of the country he's from.
But just because the spectators think a certain way does not change the facts above. Referees are not there to represent their country, and whatever they do right or wrong is a reflection on their own professionalism and on FIFA's professional standards.
To use an analogy:
When Tiger Woods wins the British Open, do people say he did America proud? Vice versa, when he loses, do people say he let America down? Going further, if he were to engage in unsportsmanlike behaviour and be expelled from a tournament, would people say he shamed America? Suppose he took drugs, would that mean he shamed America?
Of course not, Tiger's playing for himself, the country did not sponsor him a single cent and he's not wearing the American flag, so whatever he does is not linked to his country. The only exception, of course, is when he's playing for the country (eg US vs Europe for the President's Cup). Then everything he does is linked to his country.
Many people may not realise or accept the above. However, we should elevate ourselves above the common thinking.
Wai Leong
===
kcuf2 said:
The referees ARE 100% representing their countries when they officiate a match. They ARE as similar as a player on the field, despite them being a referee.
What comes into ppl's mind when they ask about the referee in the match? OF COURSE it is the country that the referee is from! And what happens when the referee officiates the match properly? People of course will look up to that referee from that country!
Even the thailand people are cheering for one of their country man when he is selected to be a linesman. So what if he is not a player on the pitch? he is still carrying a burden on his back to officiate the match properly and portray a professional image for FIFA AND Singapore!
And by the way, it isnt easy to be selected to officiate a match in the worldcup, he had won honours as being one of the best referees in our region and that is why he is selected to officiate the matches. It is not a case of tikam tikam and heng heng get to officiate the match. Because of this all the more he deserves our respect to being a part of the worldcup. A referee is just as important as the players on the pitch.
Just like how kayu is the referee in the england and paraguay match yesterday, what do people ask when they saw his unfairness? OF COURSE they ask "dam it, which country is this guy from?"
Shamsul, u did us proud! [in case u dunno who is Shamsul, he is our singapore referee at the world cup!]