A Referee’s Guts, Realpolitik, and Democracy

By Seno Gumira Ajidarma, Kompas.id, Dec 14, 2023

In the competitive realm of practical politics, is it so hard to understand that what should be the ultimate goal is not the victory of each group, but rather the democratic process itself.

This means that for a good politician-so virtuous, seemingly without peer-it shouldn’t be a problem for a presidential candidate, a party, or their coalition to lose, as long as it happens by democratic means. 

However, the world of football mirrors the world of politics, that is to say there is the operation of realpolitik—where rules may be disregarded, so long as victory lies at hand.

Just like football players, grabbing shirts, shorts, hands, tripping, and as often happens, handballing—despite players knowing that their actions are being watched by cameras and broadcast around the world.

The difference is, if they are caught, they are punished. They might even receive a red card and be sent off the field. Despite the grumbling, the players generally accept it. This is not necessarily the case with politicians.

In fact, in the world of Indonesian politics, will the referees carry out their obligations to punish or impose sanctions?

A Referee’s Rhinoceros Skin

In the analogy between football and politics, one might take a look at the discourse on referees in football, the extent to which there is an analogous too with referees in practical politics as an arena of realpolitik.

As noted in “The Football Man” (Hopcraft, 1974), still regarded as one of the top ten books on football, a referee experiences tension before and during a match just like the players. The tension is a consequence of their vulnerability, not only do they face the players, they also have to face the watching audience who are invested in their beloved team’s triumph.

A successful referee requires dedication to their role.

Referees are a picture of urgency: an authority in an anxious situation, when they perceive themselves as being part of the action, and not solely as agents of authority. They are minor celebrities, receiving both acclaim, and cowardly insults from strangers.

On the field, referees are privy to players’ conversations, foreseeing trouble brewing far before the explosive outcomes are seen by the masses. They have to stay close to the eye of the storm in the game, even though it is taxing being on their feet staying at the center of the action.

An inadequate referee is one who is nervous, confused, susceptible to player abuse, almost not in a position to control them. However, a referee shouldn’t react impulsively in tense moments, to avoid provoking immediate anger.

There are moments when skill and wrongdoing come into play at once, testing the referee to their limit. There are times when they have to decide which of the two is right, even though they are present at the incident at the same time.

Referees should be able to distinguish between swearing by angry players, and malicious abuse by those attempting to intimidate them. Referees, above all, need the skin of a rhinoceros and the deafness of a doornail.

A good referee is not one who plays it safe, chooses what to see, or becomes a public spectacle for stoning out of moral outrage, but one who can discreetly shift gears, avoid attacks.

Certainly, a referee only needs to make one serious mistake, and everything achieved in the game is forgotten.

That referees can err should be understood by the players, without carrying on as if that could never happen. A player has to understand—the referee always acts on “what they see.”

It is essential for the game that referees return to the position they normally occupy, when the players always accept the referee’s decisions as final.

Realpolitik’s Cunning Deception

In the analogy of football to politics, consider John Stuart Mill’s (1806-1873) idea in “Soccer and Philosophy” (Olaya et al. in Richards, 2010) which recognizes two types of rules: formal rules of law, and rules of opinion, with the latter coming from the coach independent of the formal regulations. Football is a game where players can breach either type of regulation.

Even though in the book in the context of violation, it is the “genius” of Maradona and Messi (yes, Messi too) to make goals with their hands, and for Mill it is the originality of thought and genius of action to disregard the conventional wisdom, it must be underlined with a thick marker: the referee did not see it.

Political fraud, what has become known by the term Machiavellian, is indeed how humans engage with politics. This is witnessed, explored and outlined in his biting satire, The Prince, by Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) who himself experienced extreme torture, one of the risks of his political activity in Italy in the 16th century.

Political realism is often just going along with something, which is then mistakenly referred to as Machiavellian, that the ends justify the means.

You can be sure that a trustworthy, hawk-eyed referee will see it. Still, it’s the guts factor that determines whether the referee is worthy of the trust of the Indonesia people.

Source: https://www.kompas.id/baca/opini/2023/12/13/nyali-wasit-dan-realpolitik