World Cup 2014 Qualifying Appointments [Rs]

Discussion in 'Referee' started by MassachusettsRef, Jul 30, 2011.

  1. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    The Oceania assignments will come, again, bit-by-bit (unless someone has a better source), so I will come back to edit this post as appropriate:

    OFC ROUND 2
    01.06.12 - Vanuatu : New Caledonia - O'LEARY (NZL)
    01.06.12 - Samoa : Tahiti - OIAKA (SOL)
    02.06.12 - Fiji : New Zealand - ASSIENE-AMBASSA (NCL)
    02.06.12 - Papau New Guinea : Solomon Islands - HAUATA (TAH)
    03.06.12 - Vanuatu : Samoa - SA'OHU (SOL)
    03.06.12 - Tahiti : New Caledonia - KERR (NZL)
    04.06.12 - Papua New Guinea : New Zealand - GEORGE (VAN)
    04.06.12 - Fiji : Solomon Islands - ZITOUNI (TAH)
    05.06.12 - New Caledonia : Samoa - OIAKA (SOL)
    05.06.12 - Tahiti : Vanuatu - O'LEARY (NZL)
    06.06.12 - Papua New Guinea : Fiji - ZITOUNI (TAH)
    06.06.12 - New Zealand : Solomon Islands - HAUATA (TAH)

    Scary thought: That Vanuatu vs. New Caledonia match is probably the biggest World Cup qualifier Peter O'Leary can get. New Zealand is in the other group and will almost certainly be in Round 3. I guess O'Leary will get a game on June 5th that is slightly more important, but given the fact that he probably ends up going to the World Cup, it's still frightening. Maybe the time has arrived for FIFA to adopt the policy in force through 2001, where referees were exchanged during the qualifying stages among confederations.


  2. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Almost able to fill out this matchday...

    08.06.12 - United States : Antigua & Barbuda - CRUZ (CRC)
    08.06.12 - Cuba: Canada -
  3. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Still trying to track down both Canada games and the Antigua/Jamaica tilt. But I've found out that Geiger has Hurd and Boria with him in Panama, which seems a bit odd. Toledo on the boards.
  4. ColoradoRef

    ColoradoRef Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Location:
    Colorado
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Country:
    United States
    Sorry if I am slow on the uptake, but why is that odd? Seems like a tough match you would want in experienced hands.


  5. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    He's going to London with Hurd and Fletcher. If he goes to the World Cup, it's with Hurd and Fletcher. Boria is now tied to Marrufo. So it's odd that there's crossover.

    The issue of "experienced hands," by the way, is an entirely different debate that we could have. We have 10 FIFA ARs. Six of them have been on the list longer than Hurd and Boria. If I were ranking the ten--and this is no offense intended to either, because I think all 10 are great--I'd have Hurd and Boria near the bottom. But they are the only two from that list that could go to Brazil in 2014. There are reasons for both selections, aside from performances. And that's totally understandable. But I do think it's a shame that some of our top ARs don't get the chance at a World Cup. Just like Craig Lowry always missed out, I now feel that Corey Rockwell might be one of the best ARs in the world... and it doesn't look like he'll get a World Cup opportunity, unless the stars align for 2018.
  6. ColoradoRef

    ColoradoRef Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Location:
    Colorado
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Country:
    United States
    Thanks for the info. I was sincerely curious, and not being passive aggressive. And I was using "experienced" more as shorthand given the high profile assignments the crew has recently received. Everything you say makes sense.
  7. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    that last CONCACAF match for this weekend...

    08.06.12 - Cuba : Canada - CAMPBELL (JAM)
  8. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    AFC Round 4 Matchday 2
    08.06.12 - Lebanon : Uzbekistan - AL HILALI (OMN)
    08.06.12 - Oman : Australia - FAGHANI (IRN)
    08.06.12 - Qatar : Korea Republic - ALBADWAWI (UAE)
    08.06.12 - Japan : Jordan - KIM, D. (KOR)

    Nishimura and his assistant missed a "ghost goal" in their Iran v Uzbekistan match, it appears. Or a DOGSO handling on the line, if you're not convinced by the replay. Either way, further proof that this happens to the best in the world. 1:30 here:



    This is minor compared to the actual World Cup tournament, but the more big matches around the globe that have this occur, the more there will be calls for video technology. I really think it's just a matter of making it work now.
  9. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Some bizarre officiating in the OFC Nations Cup (which is the qualifying for the World Cup). If you were thinking you don't get full highlights packages on YouTube of the tournament, hosted in the Solomon Islands, you'd be thinking wrong. Probably better clip packages than another other confederation, actually. Anyway, this is from the Tahiti : New Caledonia match. Alarmingly, the referee is Chris Kerr, who is New Zealand's #2 and an official who works in a "major" league--Australia's A-League.

    The red card at 0:42 is absolutely baffling--I don't think I've seen a more perplexing send off decision in a WC match in a long time. The one at 1:53 is not much more convincing once you see the replays, though in real-time you can at least understood what he was calling:

  10. Eastshire

    Eastshire Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2012
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I think the 0:42 one is for DOGSO-H. The player comes in with his arms way over his head, but I think the ball hits him in the front of the shoulder and there was way too much traffic for it to be obvious. I can see the call but I think he's gotten it dreadfully wrong.
  11. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Well yeah, it's definitely for DOGSO handling. But how do you get it "wrong" when there are 5 people on the goal line? I can see the handling call for the penalty, but from that distance and angle how can you even be sure the shot is on frame?

    I don't mind--at all--that he isn't going by the 4 Ds or whatever international equivalent you want to cite. But you still have to reach the standard that there was an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. When there are 5 defenders across the goal line and you can't even be sure the shot is on target to begin with, I don't understand why you would even contemplate DOGSO, nevermind how you'd conclude it was the appropriate call. I watch this play without focusing on the referee and the though of DOGSO doesn't even cross my mind.
  12. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Err, 4Ds wouldn't apply to DOGSO-H; ATR would require the opinion of the R that the ball was going into the goal. That said, I agree this is a tough call to make on that play.
  13. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    I said 4 Ds "or whatever international standard"; my point was that he clearly was not following any rigid instruction relatively to DOGSO.

    That said--and I know this will sound like I'm jumping down your throat a little, so apologies in advance--but I'm so sick of the parsing on this issue. The Laws say "goal or obvious goal-scoring opportunity" in relation to DOGSO-H. It couldn't be clearer. USSF and the ATR, for whatever reason, complicated the matter and get it wrong. DOGSO-H explicitly applies to opportunities denied and not just goals denied, per the IFAB and FIFA. Period. Getting hung up in the legalese of the ATR does not serve the game and does not serve referees. Until it was clarified recently (by saying opportunities denied via handling fell under the DOGSO-F clause), it had created a generation of top-level referees that was populated by some who genuinely didn't believe you could give a red card for handling unless a goal was stopped. That madness needs to stop.

    Separately, why do you refer to this as a "tough" call and not a "wrong" call? Do you mean it's "tough" for the team who gets a player sent off or do you really think there's doubt as to whether or not this should be a red card?
  14. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    I guess I say tough because the only way I can see making the call on this play is if I was quite confident the ball was going into the upper corner of the net based on the trajectory -- and I think it would be tough to be confident that was the case. I think the call is probably wrong -- but I like the ref's angle better than the camera angle, so I'm not ready to say from our angle I'm 100% certain he's wrong. (And I'd really love to here what he was thinking on the play.)
  15. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    So what if you were pretty sure it was heading toward the top corner, though? As a referee, can you say that none of the five players would have been able to head the ball? Or that it wouldn't have hit the crossbar? And at what point does the distance come into play? This shot is from near the penalty spot. That can still be an OGSO with 5 or 6 people between the ball and the goal? If so, where is the line drawn? What about a shot from 18 yards out that you thought was heading toward the top corner? Or 30 yards?

    I've been avoiding saying it, because I recognize there are several pieces of referee opinion that come into the decision, but I really think this borders on a mistake in Law. Not a misapplication of the Law, obviously, but a misinterpretation of it (so not subject to protest, as we are discussing that in another thread). I don't see how someone can look at this, given how we're instructed regarding such plays, and come up with DOGSO as a possible conclusion at all. Would you--or others--really consider a red card if you saw this happen on your field?
  16. oldreferee

    oldreferee Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Location:
    Tampa
    Nope. Is there the possibility that this was a 2Y (just executed with poor mechnics)?
  17. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
  18. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    And now the rest of this matchday...

    12.06.12 - Antigua & Barbuda : Jamaica - LANCASTER (GUY)
    12.06.12 - Guyana : Costa Rica - BREA (CUB)
    12.06.12 - Canada : Honduras - WIJNGAARDE (SUR)
  19. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Can I be 99% certain he's wrong? I'm still thinking about that other 1% . . .

    At theoretical level, if I was certain the ball was going into he upper corner, away from the GK, I can see the red -- that's where my 1% comes from. But as I sit here, I can't imagine how I would ever be certain of that in active play. So here in the real world, instead of the theoretical, I can't see making this call. (But I'd still love to hear the R explain what he saw and why he made the call -- he's obviously far, far more experienced than I, so I'd love to know both what he was thinking in the moment and what he thinks of his call now, as I do find it a baffling call.)
  20. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Ok, that's fair.

    From a theoretical perspective, I also can see the DOGSO-H when there are more than 2 players between the ball and the goal but you are sure the ball is labeled for an unreachable area of the net. Agreed there.

    But from what we see, including how quickly the ball is "handled" and the fact that there are 5 or 6 people behind the ball, I just don't think that can possibly apply here.

    I do agree that I would love to know what he's thinking. Because he's either thinking about the points you are espousing (and again, I can't see how that would apply here) or he's got a nearly unlawful standard about what constitutes DOGSO for handling.
  21. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    CAF Matchday 2
    09.06.12 - Equatorial Guinea : Sierra Leone - CORDIER (CHA)
    09.06.12 - Zambia : Ghana - KORDI (TUN)
    09.06.12 - Botswana : South Africa - KEITA (MLI)
    09.06.12 - Gabon : Burkina Faso - FALL (SEN)
    09.06.12 - Republic of Congo : Niger - MUNYEMANA (RWA)
    09.06.12 - Uganda : Senegal - BENOUZA (ALG)
    09.06.12 - Cape Verde Islands : Tunisia - JIYED (MAR)
    09.06.12 - Namibia : Kenya - BONDO (BOT)
    09.06.12 - Morocco : Cote d'Ivoire - GRISHA (EGY)
    09.06.12 - Malawi : Nigeria - SEECHURN (MRI)
    10.06.12 - Lesotho : Sudan - SHIKONGO (NAM)
    10.06.12 - Mozambique : Namibia - KALYANGO (UGA)
    10.06.12 - Rwanda : Benin - BAMLAK (ETH)
    10.06.12 - Congo DR : Togo - FAROUK (EGY)
    10.06.12 - Ethiopia : Central African Republic - RAPHAEL (MWI)
    10.06.12 - Tanzania : Gambia - RUZIVE (ZIM)
    10.06.12 - Liberia : Angola - LEMGHAIFRY (MTN)
    10.06.12 - Guinea : Egypt - ALIOUM (CMR)
    10.06.12 - Libya : Cameroon - MAERUF (ERI)
    10.06.12 - Mali : Algeria - BENNETT (RSA)

    Alioum and Bennett are the first two WC candidates to see two matches. I've yet to see Bennett personally, but I've heard good things. I have seen Alioum, including highlights of his qualifier last week. I am not impressed--missed an obvious penalty/DOGSO call and his ARs seem to be weak. He's young, though (29 years), and I fear he's one of the new crop that the CAF is going to push at all costs.
  22. bluedevils

    bluedevils Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
    For me, the sendoff for the tackle at 1:53 is a worse decision than the handling sendoff at 0:42. The tackle was a yellow at most. Definitely reckless, but not excessive force and not the type of challenge to endanger an opponent's safety. Slide tackle came in on the ground. The angle of the challenge, had his legs down, not targeting the ankle/knee etc...this was about as clean of a reckless sliding tackle as you will see.

    The handling thing, I'm a bit torn. On one hand, there are several defenders back on the goal line. On the other hand, the player has prevented an uncontested shot from 7-8 yards via handling. It's a darn good chance to score. Is it an obvious goalscoring opportunity? Maybe it is.
  23. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    CONMEBOL Matchday 7
    07.09.12 - Peru : Venezuela - VAZQUEZ (URU)
    07.09.12 - Argentina : Paraguay - SENEME (BRA)
    07.09.12 - Ecuador : Bolivia - SOTO (VEN)
    07.09.12 - Colombia : Uruguay - LOPES (BRA)

    CONMEBOL Matchday 8
    11.09.12 - Peru : Argentina - ROLDAN (COL)
    11.09.12 - Uruguay : Ecuador - AMARILLA (PAR)
    11.09.12 - Paraguay : Venezuela - OSSES (CHI)
    11.09.12 - Chile : Colombia - CARILLO (PER)
  24. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Will edit this as more assignments come in...

    CONCACAF Matchday 3
    07.09.12 - El Salvador : Guyana - MARRUFO (USA)
    07.09.12 - Cuba : Honduras - QUESADA (CRC)
    07.09.12 - Jamaica : USA - RODRIGUEZ (MEX)
    07.09.12 - Canada : Panama - SOLIS (CRC)
    07.09.12 - Guatemala : Antigua & Barbuda - BREA (CUB)
    07.09.12 - Costa Rica : Mexico - MORENO (PAN)

    CONCACAF Matchday 4
    11.09.12 - Guyana : El Salvador - BOGLE (JAM)
    11.09.12 - Honduras : Cuba - LOPEZ (GUA)
    11.09.12 - USA : Jamaica - PINEDA (HON)
    11.09.12 - Panama : Canada - BONILLA (SLV)
    11.09.12 - Antigua & Barbuda : Guatemala - GANTAR (CAN)
    11.09.12 - Mexico : Costa Rica - CAMPBELL (JAM)

    Marrufo has Morgante, Boria and Salazar with him. Interesting that he remains in an All-American crew for a qualifier.

    I would expect (and hope) Geiger gets one of the Mexico/Costa Rica matches. He might not be able to do Mexico in the Hex and this is their biggest test before then. Makes sense to give one of the matches to him now. Maybe with the other going to Lopez.
  25. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    CONMEBOL fully updated and CONCACAF updated with everything but the US home match. No Geiger for these two rounds, which surprises me a bit.

    There are very few options for the US-Jamaica game. Technically there are a bunch of Elite referees not used, but based on who has gotten "big" past assignments, I can only see it being Pineda or Wijngaarde.

Share This Page