WORLD CUP REFEREE FORUM!

The initial pre-candidates list for World Cup 2014 Brazil was finalized this past week in Zurich. I've received the document via email and have been asked by the sender not to post publicly until it's published officially. That said, I can unveil three interesting nuggets:

1. Both Mark GEIGER and Jair MARRUFO are on the list.

2. There are 10 CONCACAF referees on the list. Given the list is that large, there are no real surprises for anyone who closely follows CONCACAF, unless you thought there would be a Canadian referee, as neither Gantar nor Ward made it. There are, however, some pretty big surprises within UEFA.

3. There are over 70 referees on the list, which is much larger than the initial list in the previous two cycles. Last cycle the list started at 55 in January 2008, was culled to 38 in October 2008, and then 24 + 5 referees were selected in early 2010. I bet this larger list has something to do with FIFA looking toward (or hedging bets about) using AARs in 2014 and needing more officials.

I've been told the list will be published by FIFA in January. I do, however, suspect it will leak before then, as if you poke around the internet you will see some names have already been divulged. If that happens, I will feel comfortable re-posting here. I'll also try to independently confirm the CONCACAF list so I can post that. I just don't want to be the first one to publish it in full, because the person who obtained it for me was doing a pretty big favor.

 

Couple points on Geiger and the surrounding discussion:

1) The U20 Final in the "off-year" is not a guarantee for a World Cup appointment. The 2007, 1999, 1991 and 1987 U20 refs went to the next World Cups. The 2003*, 1995, 1983 and 1979 referees did not (*the 2003 referee did get to go, but he was a last minute replacement and not a first-choice selection). I think, under the present processes, it's a great indicator for Geiger, but it's by no means a guarantee.

2) To that point, remember that this was the first U20 tournament where FIFA stuck to the rule that no referee from the confederations involved could do the match. So while Geiger's appointment was impressive, it should be kept in context: by the time the match was assigned, I believe he was one of only four referees available to select from.

3) The whole "we haven't had a referee since 2002 and Mexico is infinitely better" is over-hyped, in my opinion. Mexico probably is better and is definitely considered so right now by FIFA, but it's not as clear as some have made it out to be. Put simply, Stott got screwed in 2006. That led to Mexico getting two referees in 2006 who were both age-eligible for 2010, so when you added in Batres, it was an uphill climb for 2010 for any American. There was no spot for Marrufo--the only surprise (or loss) was Aguilar getting a slot as a 4th over him (which, in turn, puts him behind Aguilar going into 2014). Other than that, our performances at FIFA tournaments since 2002, including Marrufo at the Olympics and Stott and Geiger at youth tournaments, have been very good.

4) Now that Archundia is out of the way, there is only one Mexican (Rodriguez) who is a clear front-runner. The second Mexican on the list, Garcia, is very good, but both Geiger and Marrufo have had more high profile assignments than him. As such, I think it will be a fair race (unlike 2010, where there were 3 locks and no room for Marrufo).

5) With Hall at CONCACAF, we have more influence--or at least a more level playing field--than we've had in recent memory.

 

Absolutely.

Language is probably too loaded, sorry. But the story I've been told is that Stott was ranked right at the top of CONCACAF, behind Archundia, going into the final selections and then mysteriously dropped off. In short, his omission was a surprise and not something that was obvious based on performances. It was second-hand info, and while it came from someone who would have inherent bias in Stott's favor, the same person also held a FIFA badge, so I've tended to believe it.

 

Well, there still has been no official publication from FIFA. But the list, as it was described and presented to me in October, has finally leaked. I'm sure some might doubt its veracity, and given how things have gone I expect the first official list from FIFA to be culled from this.

http://s1.directupload.net/images/120108/dzygpgvh.pdf

This particular PDF is re-created by the person who posted it to include WCQ matches officiated thus far. In that regard, the ARs are only there for informational purposes and are not necessarily the ones that would be part of a trio.

 

I should probably clarify that this list differs slightly from the one first presented to me in October. That one had 10 CONCACAF referees and did not have Bonilla nor Gantar. I think I notice one other small discrepancy. But, by and large, this is about 95% consistent with what I was shown before. I tend to believe it's real but, given the wild west nature of the Internet sometimes, I must stipulate that I can't proclaim it 100% authentic.

EDIT: just looked back at my correspondence from October... Lannoy and Orosco were the two other names not on the list. So there are 4 additional names here that were not on the first version I knew about. Definitely enough to give me some pause and if this turns out to be a fake, I do apologize.

 

Very true, and I'm sure that can and will apply to some referees. But a guy like Lannoy, who already went to the World Cup? Can't imagine he was left off and then added back on.

I believe we have the same or similar sources, so yes.

But if those numbers are true, why would a document suddenly appear with the very same referees but guys like Lannoy and Orosco and Gantar also listed?

Perhaps the source or sources that originally informed us didn't have complete information. Otherwise, this document is an elaborate forgery.

 

Hi. I see you're new here. This post is actually a little closer to being acceptable than the previous one. In this forum, we discuss news and offer analysis of referees, in addition to talking about refereeing development, case studies, training and other issues.

Anyway, there's no problem with you saying a referee isn't good, but you'll be expected to give a few details as to why you feel that way, with examples or specific critiques. If you can't give more than just saying a referee is terrible, then this is probably not the forum for you. Thanks.

 

Tried to send you a private message but your account isn't set up to receive them.