Shamsul... U did Spore proud..


Status
Not open for further replies.

Tiger-in-the-woods

New Member
Apr 18, 2004
117
0
0
..by being the 1st ref to produce a red care in WC2006! :)

For all who did not see the match, he did not have any choice as the T&T player deserved his 2nd yellow card for a two footed tackle. Me think he had a good game... even having to handle Lundberg's piercing stare!! Well done.. think he performed better than the Mexican ref in the England's game.

Hope he'll officiate in later phases.:thumbsup:
 

Agree, The mex ref for the England match like kayu like that. S'pore did better but a pity match ended 0-0 despite sweden having good shots at goal.


Tiger-in-the-woods said:
..by being the 1st ref to produce a red care in WC2006! :)

For all who did not see the match, he did not have any choice as the T&T player deserved his 2nd yellow card for a two footed tackle. Me think he had a good game... even having to handle Lundberg's piercing stare!! Well done.. think he performed better than the Mexican ref in the England's game.

Hope he'll officiate in later phases.:thumbsup:
 

he also has his first tacklel and fell to the ground by TnT player

hes was pay 90mins * 2match for $40k .. so still not too bad
 

simon80 said:
he also has his first tacklel and fell to the ground by TnT player

that was quite 'embarassingly funny'.
 

It was quite an easy match to officiate. Nevertheless :thumbsup: for the sole Lion on the WC pitch :)
 

What he does as a referee has nothing to do with Singapore. He's just doing a professional job. He does not represent Singapore, neither does any referee from any other country represent their country.

The players represent their countries. The referees represent FIFA.

Tiger-in-the-woods said:
..by being the 1st ref to produce a red care in WC2006! :)

For all who did not see the match, he did not have any choice as the T&T player deserved his 2nd yellow card for a two footed tackle. Me think he had a good game... even having to handle Lundberg's piercing stare!! Well done.. think he performed better than the Mexican ref in the England's game.

Hope he'll officiate in later phases.:thumbsup:
 

waileong said:
What he does as a referee has nothing to do with Singapore. He's just doing a professional job. He does not represent Singapore, neither does any referee from any other country represent their country.

The players represent their countries. The referees represent FIFA.

Do agree with you. However, you cannot deny that commenatators often reference the referees by their nationalities e.g. the Belgian, Mexican and so on referees. Guess which country the famous ref Collina comes from? It's inevitable that the countries where refs are from get mentioned. B ut i do agree with you that refs are supposed to represent FIFA. (Not sure whether you saw the England match where some quarters are saying that the Mex ref was rather 'sympathetic' to the South American team... anyway let's not get into this)

Happy watching WC 2006!
 

waileong said:
What he does as a referee has nothing to do with Singapore. He's just doing a professional job. He does not represent Singapore, neither does any referee from any other country represent their country.

The players represent their countries. The referees represent FIFA.

I agree and disagree. Agreed that officially they represent FIFA and not their country. However, I do feel that referees are unofficially representing their country and an excellent refereeing performance definitely reflects well on the country and not just the individual ref. I was quite surprsied that a Mexican referee was asked to officiate the England v Paraguay game and my fears were justified in that he definitely seemed to favour the South American team.
 

Waileong said:
What he does as a referee has nothing to do with Singapore. He's just doing a professional job. He does not represent Singapore, neither does any referee from any other country represent their country.

The players represent their countries. The referees represent FIFA..

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!]
 

i think that in this case shamsul did SINGAPORE proud. why?

because contrary to popular belief, singapore is not very well known outside singapore. most still think we are part of malaysia or china. or that we are somewhere in asia.

and whats more important, is that we are totally unknown in terms of soccer. except the traditional power houses, asian countries are probably disregarded in terms of footballing knowlege and technique.

so for shamsul to be there and performing well, it will definitely get singapore noticed in one way or another.

hence in this case, he is more of a sporean rep than fifa rep. as for the mexicans and the dutch and the what have yous. they are expected to perform well because their countries have a strong history in soccer.

thats my opinion on this....

that said, hope the samba boys win!!!
 

of course he did us proud ..
we made it into the WC before 2010 YEAH!
 

wah lau... george suppiah made it long long ago lah... i think '74 if i m not wrong
 

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!]
 

When we talk of a game like football, the appeal lies in the hearts of the everyman.And he or she will perceive the referee's performance by sight and play influence, and not just with indepth analysis of his OPTA stats or other wannabe chart-ranking systems.

They simply ask, where he's from.And he's from Singapore, and perception counts as much as anything else.If anything, it is a good reflection of us as a nation.

Let's not end up creating mountains out of molehills.Football is a festival, a joie de vivre.Leave the World Cip to be enjoyed and not be tangled in semantics.

Good job Shamsul, you've got us proud.
 

He did SG proud with a clean game but really, giving red cards dun really make a ref proud. :)

He is representing FIFA and SG. If he screws up, he will be referred to as the ref from SINGAPORE, not FIFA. Once someone referred him as a ref from Singapore, he is representing Singapore. Once SG contribute a ref, SG is representated. Just that it is not glam and not mentioned in the media as often and SG do not get to do the selection. Don't day dream that he is representing FIFA only.

About Tiger Woods:

Tiger Woods is USA. He represent USA for golf in team events. Arsenal, Man Utd, Liverpool are England. When Liverpool won the CL, they represent England. When Arsenal field a all foreign team, they still represent England. When Beckham plays for England at the WC, he is also representing Real Madrid. That is why Man Utd wants Rooney to be at the WC. Whenever Ferrari/schumi wins a race, the German and Italian anthem was played. People mention that Spain is on a roll at the moment. Barcelona, Seville, Alonso and Nadel all won in their respective sports.
 

afbug said:
About Tiger Woods:

Tiger Woods is USA. He represent USA for golf in team events. Arsenal, Man Utd, Liverpool are England. When Liverpool won the CL, they represent England. When Arsenal field a all foreign team, they still represent England. When Beckham plays for England at the WC, he is also representing Real Madrid. That is why Man Utd wants Rooney to be at the WC. Whenever Ferrari/schumi wins a race, the German and Italian anthem was played. People mention that Spain is on a roll at the moment. Barcelona, Seville, Alonso and Nadel all won in their respective sports.

Exactly. When it's not a team event? Then does he represent the country? US Masters is not team event. Neither are most of the other PGA events. So how? You still think he represent the country?

When you play for a team, you represent a team, and you represent those people behind the team, which is your country if it's a national team. But when you play for yourself, you represent no one but yourself.

We are free to disagree, I'm not trying to convert you, and I know it is a difficult subject because it's as much about feelings as it is about logic. I know that people feel that when XX is from S'pore, whatever he does affects Singapore, like it or not. From that standpoint, because there could be some people who feel like that, you are not wrong, he did S'pore proud and such people might say so.

But I don't think the majority of people, esp. in the advanced countries, are as hung up on this as people in Asia. Maybe because they are more cynical, less patriotic, more individualistic than us. Certainly people don't think that if Tiger Woods did something wrong, then it reflects badly on the whole country, or that it reflects badly on African-Americans, etc. They see it for what it is, that what he does is his own business.

On the other hand, I know there was a huge outburst in China when Zhang Ziyi took on the role in Memoirs of Geisha, the Chinese people as a whole simply were not mature enough to see that she's just a professional actress doing a job, what she did does not shame the Chinese people.

So I know and understand why people in Asia, including S'pore, think like that. But it does not mean we should continue to think like that. It makes us too sensitive, too easy to exploit for nationalistic purposes, and that is a disadvantage.
 

waileong said:
Exactly. When it's not a team event? Then does he represent the country? US Masters is not team event. Neither are most of the other PGA events. So how? You still think he represent the country?

When you play for a team, you represent a team, and you represent those people behind the team, which is your country if it's a national team. But when you play for yourself, you represent no one but yourself.

We are free to disagree, I'm not trying to convert you, and I know it is a difficult subject because it's as much about feelings as it is about logic. I know that people feel that when XX is from S'pore, whatever he does affects Singapore, like it or not. From that standpoint, because there could be some people who feel like that, you are not wrong, he did S'pore proud and such people might say so.

But I don't think the majority of people, esp. in the advanced countries, are as hung up on this as people in Asia. Maybe because they are more cynical, less patriotic, more individualistic than us. Certainly people don't think that if Tiger Woods did something wrong, then it reflects badly on the whole country, or that it reflects badly on African-Americans, etc. They see it for what it is, that what he does is his own business.

On the other hand, I know there was a huge outburst in China when Zhang Ziyi took on the role in Memoirs of Geisha, the Chinese people as a whole simply were not mature enough to see that she's just a professional actress doing a job, what she did does not shame the Chinese people.

So I know and understand why people in Asia, including S'pore, think like that. But it does not mean we should continue to think like that. It makes us too sensitive, too easy to exploit for nationalistic purposes, and that is a disadvantage.

When Nadel plays tennis, its an individual sport but still he is Spanish and is representing Spain. It is a fact and nothing can change that. Golf/tennis don't make a big deal out if it. Lets say if Tiger plays golf for himself at the Olympics, if he won, he plays his own music or the Amercian anthem?

Sony is an electronics company and all they're interested for is money and business but if they'll to make an appereance in lets say a world electronics show, who they represent? Themselves and the Japanese.

Ferrari is a car manufacturer but if you dig a little deeper, they are Italian, an Italian company and represent Italy in races.

And who in SG is so hung up on this? In the forum only? I dun feel patrotic about this. But it is nice that SG's name is not tinted by mistakes.

I don't think the majority of people, esp. in the advanced countries, are as hung up on this as people in Asia.

You don't think? Who will confirm? If Shamsul made bad mistakes, do you think people will say that he is the ref from FIFA and not SG? Take the Eng's match ref for example. He made a lot of bad calls. People are saying that he is Mexican, from Mexico. Will he be referred to as the ref from FIFA? FIFA got so many ref, so how to refer to them? How do I refer him to you and make my point if I don't know his name? Tiger is famous. Once Tiger is mention, everyone knows but how to tell you that ref from Mexico if I don't know his name? So is he representing his country?

Bill Gates and Microsoft only wants money but really, who do they represent? Where all the moeny go? In his pocket and his doantions to Amercians. He is Amercian and represent the USA. Same as Tiger. If he screws up, its his problem but he will still be referred to as that amercian golfer. And if someone dun know him, he will be referred to as that amercian golfer.

And so what if singapore has this type of thinking? Why change if there is no harm? Why must adopt the so call Western thinking? As long as singaporeans are street smart, it will not affect us. But really, if you think the Amercians are not patrotic, you're very very wrong.

Anyway, you posts made a good read and i'm also not trying to convert you. Just expressing my views. I think i've said enough. :)
 

I follow this discussion with much interest. I always believe a forum is where differing views are being presented and discussed. This is democracy in action, imo.

Whilst writing a reply in this discussion, I was scanning the various press's headlines for the Swe and T&T match. Almost all of them mentioned Shamsul's name and half of them mentioned he's from Spore. He's a 'real' Sporean; not unlike those who are born but migrated and lived almost all of their life outside Spore type.

Without getting too much into technicalities here (FIFA or SGP), I proud of what he had achieved - to be selected by FIFA to officiate a WC final match. This is the closest our country can ever be in the WC finals (unless we decide to host/co-host one day). As a Singaporean, I glad and proud to see a sporean doing well on the world stage (ok lah, he bo-bian kanna produced red card; but hey, that led to a damn exciting second half, better than England's listless second half performance).

I don't agree with one of the writers that we should reserve our celebrations or pride for big achievements ie our whole soccer team in the WC. My view is that we should celebrate and be proud whenever a Singaporean does well on the world stage especially if he/she is a true-bred Sporean. To be selected as a ref to officiate in a WC is big deal (Only 21 referees are chosen). Our country will inevitably be linked to the person as people will naturally want to know where this person is from. If we ourselves can't be proud, who will?

So I say, lets be happy, and less cynical, to celebrate each Singaporean's success/achievements. :) Do sincerely hope that he'll get selected once again for the latter stages.

Enjoy WC2006!!
 

Status
Not open for further replies.