Football as it used to be? Part 1 – match officiating

It has been said that football at Southport’s level is “football as it used to be”. In a series of articles we’re going to take a look at how the modern game has evolved and whether the claim stands up to any scrutiny.

Officiating in association football has undergone a fascinating journey since the early days of the sport in the late 19th century. Initially overseen by players and captains themselves, the structure and tools used to manage games have continually evolved. From the introduction of umpires and linesmen to the recent adoption of Video Assistant Referee (VAR) and semi automated off side technology, each stage of this journey has shaped the way the games are played and experienced. However, these advancements have also introduced debates over tradition, fairness, and technology. On that basis examining the evolution of match officiating seems a reasonable place for us to start.

The Beginnings of Football Officiating: Captains and Umpires

In the 1870s and 1880s, the concept of officiating was informal by today’s standards. Games were typically governed by the captains of each team, who bore the responsibility of resolving disputes and enforcing the agreed-upon rules. This practice placed a premium on sportsmanship, as captains were expected to act impartially, even if it meant ruling against their own team’s advantage. Initially rule interpretations could vary based on local customs, and captains were entrusted with balancing fairness and competitive play.

As the stakes in matches increased, captains were no longer sufficient as sole decision-makers. This need for impartial oversight led to the introduction of umpires. Each team would appoint an umpire, who acted as an independent mediator when the captains could not resolve a disagreement. The umpires were typically respected club members or former players who understood the game’s nuances. However, their role remained limited, as they could only intervene when called upon by a captain. This reactive system meant that officiation was, to a large degree, still left in the players’ hands.

The Rise of the Referee

As games became more competitive and contentious, it became clear that relying solely on captains and umpires could hinder the flow of play. By the late 1880s, the role of the referee was introduced to provide more structured and impartial oversight. Initially stationed on the sidelines, referees would only be called in if the two umpires failed to reach an agreement. However, the role quickly expanded, and referees were soon given the authority to make decisions directly on the field, without needing to wait for an appeal.

This shift was significant, as it established a clear chain of command in officiating: the referee now held primary authority, with umpires acting as supporting figures. This structure allowed for more consistent rule enforcement and laid the foundation for the modern officiating system. As the referee’s role grew more prominent, the reliance on captains and umpires began to wane, though their contributions remained foundational to the spirit of fair play.

The Introduction of Linesmen/Assistant Referees

The introduction of linesmen, now called assistant referees, marked a critical advancement in officiating, addressing the limitations of a single referee’s field of vision. Assistant referees were tasked with monitoring sideline events, such as offside calls and where the ball went out-of-play, which allowed the central referee to focus more effectively on other aspects of the game. This structure provided additional oversight, ensuring that important boundary calls could be made accurately and consistently.

Assistant referees became essential to maintaining fairness in increasingly complex matches, particularly as the game’s pace increased. Their use of flags to signal infractions provided an effective visual communication tool, allowing referees to make quick and accurate decisions based on the information they provided. This three-person officiating team structure remains a cornerstone in modern  football, balancing the referee’s on-field responsibilities with the assistant referees’ close watch over boundary-related rules.

Experiments

Club historian Mike Braham reminded us in pre-season that in April 1932 when Southport entertained Cliftonville in a friendly at Haig Avenue, Southport became part of the first experiment of having two referees. As the game began one referee in each half of the field was trialled. The match was arranged by Bert Pelham, Southport’s Secretary/Manager and a former referee.
The two referees operated without linesmen in the first half and then added two as normal at the start of the second half.
“CRI” writing in the Liverpool Evening Express reported that “the match played was no criterion as to the method on trial” He added “I would want to see it in the hurley-burley of a hard thought 90 minutes before expressing an opinion”
Ivan Sharpe, a former Amateur International and President of the Football Writers Association took a different view. Writing many years later he said “Then a friendly match against Cliftonville with two referees was announced by Southport. I came, I saw, I was conquered. Each referee controlled his own half of the pitch, no
more. Each official was always right up with play: no trouble at all. Exertion was halved. The referee could see all, hear all. Discipline was doubled, goal disputes decreased to a disappearing point-the referee was always on the spot”.
On June 3rd 1935 the matter was raised at the Football League’s Annual Meeting with a view to trying the system in several matches during the following season.
Delegates who had never seen the method in operation spoke and voted against it. The plan was rejected by 31 votes to 18.

The Impact of Technology on Officiating

The 21st century introduced one of the most transformative—and controversial—developments in officiating: the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system. Designed to help referees make more accurate decisions on major calls, such as goals, penalties, and red cards, VAR relies on video footage to correct “clear and obvious errors.” The system allows off-field referees to review incidents in real-time and advise the on-field referee to reconsider decisions if necessary. Further to this technology has also advanced to the level that semi-automated offside detection has begun to take over the role originally assigned to the linesman.

VAR has undeniably reduced some of the most blatant errors in officiating, but its implementation has not been without challenges. Critics argue that VAR disrupts the flow of the game, with play often pausing for extended periods while decisions are reviewed. Additionally, the system’s involvement in subjective calls—such as interpreting handballs or marginal offside lines—has led to accusations of overreach, as fans and players question whether VAR is undermining the human element of officiating. Supporters of VAR, however, contend that it brings a level of accuracy that was previously unattainable and that it ensures fairness in high-stakes matches.

Tradition v Modernity

The evolution of officiating in association football—from captains and umpires to assistant referees and VAR—reflects a steady march toward increased fairness and accuracy. Each step in this journey has introduced new ways to oversee the game, yet it has also sparked debates about the trade-offs between accuracy, tradition, and the rhythm of play. The gradual introduction of referees and assistant referees provided a structured foundation for officiating, while VAR has brought a new level of precision, albeit at the cost of disrupting the game’s natural flow.

For many, the debate over VAR highlights a tension between tradition and modernity in football. In our league, we’re fortunate to still  experience a game free from the influence of VAR. Matches flow more naturally, with decisions left to the officials on the field and on the sidelines. While this may mean some calls aren’t scrutinised with the same precision as in VAR-regulated leagues, and decisions are obviously prone to human error, it preserves the game’s spirit as an immediate, uninterrupted experience. It is a human sport where quite rightly human judgment should and does still play a central role. It is a reminder of the delicate balance between embracing innovation and preserving the traditional spirit that has made these games beloved by generations of players and fans alike.

Many players, managers, and fans appreciate this traditional approach, feeling that it brings them closer to the essence of football as it was originally played. If anything screams “football as it used to be”, it is this.