Like as if the dice were a player...
So imagine any RPG as really like this:
It's a storytelling game, right? Everyone at the table is helping tell the story, everyone, depending on their character (if you're a player) or status (if a GM) contributes to the story in a different way because they all have slightly different roles--formally (rules-wise) and socially. You have to make these different inputs into a coherent whole. This is the whole set-up of an RPG (or even, in this case, a sport or wargame).
So a way to imagine the role of system is to introduce the idea that the game itself (that is: ruleset + setting) is also a player. And the dice are its mouth.
Like any player, its responses are an expression of what's in it, the aggregate of all the knowledge and opinion stored inside. The game designer has, in essence, programmed a (very) manually operated robot and you bought it and made it play with you.
So what kind of player do we have here?
A player whose feelings do not matter, but who we nevertheless all decided would be fun to play with on account of the quality of his/her ideas (setting) and personality (system) and who plays characters called Physics or Fate.
This is a player who'll give you ideas when asked, but does not volunteer ideas unless asked by the GM or other players.
So when we ignore the dice we are sort of ignoring this player's input ('railroading' it--to stretch the metaphor waaaaaaaay out).
This points up a couple things:
-One is the fallacy of saying the problem with railroading is just that it hurts players' feelings.
-It shows one of the things you're really doing when you fudge--you're choosing to ignore someone that you yourself invited in.
-It shows what you're doing when you're hacking--you're changing this robot player so it fits in better with the other people at the table.
-It shows what the game designer's real job is--to package a personality to be exported to your table. This voice will be just one of five or six or seven or whatever at the table.
-It shows what you're doing when you're complaining about a system--essentially its like saying "Don't play with that guy, he's a handful".
-It also shows how subjective it is: some people can handle people that other people can't handle. Some people rub each other the wrong way and bring out all the bad bits in each other.
-It suggests why we want a system at all, what we expect from it.
I could keep going all day...