The Elite list for the second half of 2017 is published: ATKINSON (ENG) AYTEKIN (GER) BRYCH (GER)* CAKIR (TUR)* COLLUM (SCO)* ERIKSSON (SWE)* FERNANDEZ BORBALAN (ESP) HATEGAN (ROU)* KARASEV (RUS)* KASSAI (HUN)* KRALOVEC (CZE)* KUIPERS (NED)* MAKKELIE (NED) MARCINIAK (POL)* MATEU LAHOZ (ESP)* MAZIC (SRB)* ORSATO (ITA)* RIZZOLI (ITA) ROCCHI (ITA)* SIDIROPOULOS (GRE)* SKOMINA (SVN)* TAGLIAVENTO (ITA) THOMSON (SCO) TURPIN (FRA)* UNDIANO MALLENCO (ESP) ZWAYER (GER) So, Clattenburg removed/retired. Moen and Nijhuis demoted. The Clattenburg removal is only interesting insofar as it confirms that he won't do UEFA matches and there is no English replacement--a bit surprised by that as England is now left with one Elite referee. The Moen demotion is not a shock, as he was probably the worst referee in France last year and did not get good assignments this year; the only thing weird about that is some other referees, like Tagliavento, hung around. And Nijhuis is only a surprising demotion in the sense that he was ever promoted in the first place and given such a brief stint--seems like the Dutch and UEFA realized one year too late that Makkelie has much more potential. Makkelie and Zwayer both promoted. Both deserved, both being groomed to take over for their country's #1s (Kuipers and Brych, respectively) and both are the only exclusive VAR candidates from UEFA for next summer's World Cup. Current on-field World Cup 2018 candidates are marked with an asterisk. Clattenburg, Moen and Soares Dias are the other UEFA WC 2018 candidates, but non-inclusion on this list makes that seem like a stretch, with the sole possible exception of Clattenburg (who, by the way, just did the Australia v Brazil friendly in Melbourne). Soares Dias is a strange candidate, because he's never made the Elite list. You can probably expect 9 or 10 UEFA officials to be named as referees so the competition is going to be intense with a couple huge omissions--I see 13 referees that I think absolutely should be there (if you include Karasev, as you likely must). And that doesn't even count Clattenburg or an English replacement. Competition for the UCL Final will also be intense. Skomina and Mazic will both likely look at it as their turn (though I think immediate progression from EL Final to CL Final is rare, so maybe Skomina will have his enthusiasm in check). Marciniak and Mateu Lahoz (if Spanish clubs ever allow it) would also be two favorites to watch. Rocchi is probably the 5th credible candidate. Hategan and Turpin would be the dark horses, who you'd expect more on the EL Final.
If Spanish teams don't make the CL Final, Lahoz will get it next year. It will be a lock. If Clattenburg doesn't go to Russia and Spain doesn't go far in the tournament, I'd argue that Lahoz will be the favorite for to get the World Cup Final as well.
Lock is too strong of a word because performances have mattered. But if he's clean throughout the year and Spanish teams don't make the semis (or get defeated in non-controversial manners in the semis) I'd put him as the favorite. He'd be in a similar position as Webb was in 2010. Similarly, I'd argue "favorite" is too strong of a word here, too. First for the same performance reason--there's too much obvious competition from within UEFA alone to give him a leg up, starting with Kuipers (don't underestimate the fact he probably has the best ARs in the world) and Marciniak in my view. And second that there are way too many other factors, including political pressure for it not to be a European. You have Infantino, Collina and Busacca in charge. You have two straight and three of the last four World Cup Finals done by UEFA referees. Right now 15 of 20 WC Finals have been done by a European. There will be political pressure to go another route. An Asian referee has never had the match. I'd keep an eye on Faghani (and, of course, Irmatov). There's also the pesky problem of him having to get picked for Russia. Don't get me wrong, I think he's going because he's performing well and a Spanish referee always goes. But a year is a long time and in June 2013 you would have thought it was crazy to say Kassai and Skomina wouldn't be in Brazil. Anything can happen and like I said above, 2-3 brutally tough cuts are going to have to be made.
That is unusual that a second English ref wasn't added with the removal of Clattenburg. Oliver or Taylor both have potential and could have made the list.
Lock might be too strong of a word, but I would wager good money that if the cards fall right in regards to the draw that he will be on the Final. It's been now over 12 years since a Spanish referee has done a CL Final. In that time you've had two German referees do the Final, two English referees, a Dutch, a Portuguese, and an Italian. Granted, most of that is down to the fact that Spanish teams have just dominated the competition for the past 10 years or so. But as soon as UEFA had an opportunity to squeeze an English referee in they did in 2010 and last year with Clattenburg after doing a semifinal in the same season. This past season was the first time since 2011 where a Spanish referee could actually be eligible to referee a Champions League semi-final and he was put on it. I'd argue that he didn't have the necessary experience in the Champions League to warrant that assignment this year, but he got the assignment anyways because a Spanish referee was basically due to appear in the semi-finals of the Champions League. Mazic, Skomina and a couple of other referees, I'd argue, we are all more worthy of a semi-final appointment than Lahoz. Look at the assignment of Brych. This was the first time in a while that it was clear there wasn't going to be a German team in the Final and Brych got the game. If the opportunity is there, I think he'll be put on the game.
There's still the prerequisite of being good enough, though. Mateu Lahoz benefited from everything you're saying, but he also benefits from being the best Spanish referee since Mejuto Gonzalez. He was probably as good as Mazic this year, if not better, and you can't say Skomina was "more deserving" without pointing out that Skomina got the bigger match (the EL Final). In other words, yes, the opportunity needs to be there to be seized but with the focus on performance and the competition among the Elite referees, a UCL Final isn't going to be handed out solely on nationality. Brych was in the top 5 this year of eligible referees and got the Final over Skomina because of all the reasons you point out. But it wouldn't have happened if he was, say, #8 or #11 or #17. Same will go for Mateu Lahoz if a Final is free of Spanish clubs. The political accommodations still exist in UEFA, but they aren't what they once were (see only one England referee right now; see also no French referee at WC14). You might not always see the absolute best-performing referee get the UCL, but you're also not going to see someone who has a sub-standard season.
If Clattenburg goes, then you can put it in stone that he will get the Final. If FIFA/UEFA will basically rewrite the rules for him to go to a World Cup, then you might as well put him on the Final. Why go through all that hassle and not put him on the game? If a European referee (not Clattenburg) gets the game again, I think it will be between Lahoz, Kuipers, Cakir, and, maybe, Kassai. I'm not including Brych simply because Germany always go to the sem-finals, at least, at every tournament. Rocchi won't get it simply because Rizzoli did it in Brazil. Politics don't matter as they much as they used do, but it will still be a tough sell to have an Italian referee do three of the last five World Cup Finals no matter how deserving Rocchi would be. Guys like Mazic, Skomina, Eriksson & Marciniak, for me, simply don't have enough combination of experience and "name recognition" to get the World Cup Final. The reality is the headline of "Referee from Serbia/Slovenia/Polan" is a factor. I don't think the political pressure of putting a European referee matters as much as you say. The public, the teams and the media all want the best referees and everyone is now aware of who these guys are. The Champions League has become so high profile and all the teams that get to the Final will be pretty much be composed of players playing in Europe that it just doesn't make much sense not to put a European referee on the game. I just think the days of putting a Moroccan referee (1998 World Cup) on the World Cup Final are gone. Whenever a referee from a small European country has a poor game in the CL against an English team, the press inevitably say "is referee from X country good enough?" A couple of years ago Mazic did Atletico vs. Real Madrid in the CL and the Atletico players came out and said that a referee from Serbia is not experienced enough for this level. If the game goes wrong, what will the reaction be when you put a referee from Asia, Africa or a South American country that isn't Brazil or Argentina? Also, at the last World Cup, there was a perfect opportunity to put a non-European referee on the game and they went with the "safe" option in Rizzoli. You had a European and a South American team. Everything made sense from a practical stand point to put someone like Geiger, Marco Rodriguez or even Irmatov on the game. Instead they went with one of the two or three best referees in the world at that time. For me, Lahoz will one of, if not the favorite, from the European contingent due to a combination of factors. One, I think FIFA and UEFA really like his style. He doesn't call fouls and he somehow has a way of managing everything. It's not something I would recommend for referees to try at home. He has such a unique personality which is so ayptical of Spanish referees. He is quite a big star in Spain. I've seen him somehow manage really blatant acts of violent conduct and serious foul play in the El Clasicos with only yellow cards or just a warning. Spain is one of the largest and greatest football countries there is and their referee program is kind of "due" to be represented on the biggest games. It's not a huge factor, but I think it kind of does player a role. If he somehow ends up doing the CL Final next year, then I think it will be really easy to put him on the game.
I think that's just understand that the performances need to be good enough. Every argument/hypothetical I'm making, I'm assuming that the referees will perform.
Because of poor performances? England making the semis? England losing in controversial fashion to a team that makes the final? Kuipers really is probably the favorite among the UEFA group, I'd say. He's done a Confed Cup Final, an U20WC Final, and he's done the big matches in Europe. He's trusted by both UEFA and FIFA, which means he's trusted by Collina. Makkelie being an expert in VAR likely will help him, because that will be part of the standards next year. I still think it's way too early to make this guess, though. For one, I'd include Marciniak on the list. And, second, to beat the dead horse performances are going to matter, as you concede. Most people would have guaranteed Cakir on one of the final 3 matches in France last year--he wasn't good enough at the tournament to justify such an appointment. That standard will hold true for every referee that makes it. Well, Brazilians did back-to-back finals. I find it funny that you think that matters, but other political considerations don't. Regardless, Rocchi's reason for not getting the Final is either going to be that he's too fresh (how does he leap over about 10 more highly rated UEFA referees and 5+ non UEFA referees with multiple FIFA tournaments?) or that he's not there. I firmly believe he'll be there, just like Mateu Lahoz, but again... 2-3 brutal cuts are going to have to be made and Rocchi is in a group of about 8 referees who are candidates for such a cut. I think you're wrong--at least about Eriksson and Marciniak. Eriksson has been slipping and he might actually be a top candidate to not make the World Cup altogether, but if he does make it, he certainly has the pedigree and was considered strongly the last time. And Marciniak is Collina's new golden boy. If they are going to go with a UEFA referee for that match, they're going to go with the best in their opinion. That could be Marciniak. But all this ignores all the evidence over decades that FIFA is an organization that doesn't care about what the public and players think. Internal politics rule FIFA and influence every decision. Look at WC 2006--four UEFA teams made the finals, so not a single UEFA referee was on those matches because the other confederations wanted a role. Sure, Larrionda and Elizondo and Archundia were great referees but were De Bleeckere, Michel and Busacca really not good enough to merit a single spot? 2010 saw the pendulum swing back, where UEFA was able to say "our two teams, our match" with Webb, based on how the tournament was assigned. And last time Busacca doubled-down with Rizzoli because options were limited. I think it's going to be very difficult to triple down. Non-UEFA referees are going to have to be poor, CONMEBOL is going to have to get a team in the Final, and someone from UEFA is going to have to shine. All could happen, but those are the conditions. There weren't "days" of that happening, though--it was one time. And it went relatively fine. It's a rare occurrence because UEFA and CONMEBOL dominate, but a referee from a smaller country will happen again. Nishimura was a prime candidate if he didn't have the penalty in the opener last time. Shield was a candidate if he didn't retire early. Same for Michel. We all fear Irmatov and Aguilar are candidates. I think you can now add Faghani as a serious contender. Doesn't mean it will happen, but it's wrong to rule it out. It's also wrong to presume FIFA cares what the British press says. Also, implying people would have a problem with Mazic but be okay with Cakir or Kassai barely passes the smell test--in Italy or England or Spain, all three of those referees come from small countries. Except Irmatov wasn't that good, and Rodriguez already had the semi (with Geiger on it) so CONCACAF was done. Oh, and Nishimura was radioactive. Last time was not the perfect time to put a referee from a third confederation on the match precisely because of the performance principle. The debate at the time was Eriksson or Rizzoli, right? With some people claiming Webb might break tradition and get it again. And reports indicated that the Argentinian FA, given the options, wanted Rizzoli, so that was that. If this match is UEFA v CONMEBOL next year and Geiger, Garcia, Aguilar, Irmatov, Faghani, and Gassama all have had issues, Pitana is a non-starter because of how Argentina does, and there are a couple UEFA referees who have had glowing performances, then yes, it will go to a UEFA referee again. And if one or two UEFA referees are just that much better than everyone else, it might just happen because of that. But it's a huge leap to assume it will be a UEFA referee and I look at the tournament, with all things being equal, and presume that right now FIFA would prefer it isn't. Agree (mostly) on Mateu Lahoz and why he's well liked. I know you conceded performance matters, but when you make a comment like this I really think you ignore just how much. Webb refereed out of his mind that season to get two Finals and had an amazing crew. Not saying Mateu Lahoz couldn't do the same, but saying it would be "really easy" for FIFA to give him the biggest match in the world after he gets the second biggest match in the world 6 weeks earlier ignores just how unusual it was for Webb and just how well he had to referee to force FIFA's hand.
I know it's a different competition, but the last two Euro Finals were done by referees that did the CL Final that same year. I know so many things had to go right for those referees and for Webb to get those Finals in the same year besides just refereeing well. Just getting any major club or international Final requires so many factors besides just refereeing well. I am aware of that. Could it be just a coincidence that three out of the last four major international finals were done by referees doing the CL Final the same year? Possibly, but there is, also, something to be said about going with the "hot hand" so to say. The odds of Lahoz actually given the CL Final are slim to begin with, because I find it very hard to believe that Real or Barcelona won't be in the CL Final next year. If the draw is kind to him and he performs well, I just don't see why they don't give him the game.
Politics matter and they will play a role, but I just don't think they play as much of a role as before. I do disagree with you on the statement that "FIFA is an organization that doesn't care about what the public and players think." I think those tides are changing within FIFA. The organization isn't as insular as before, not only when it comes to refereeing, but other aspects well. This was the same organization that only a couple of years ago was against any kind of technology in the game. Now all of a sudden we have GLT and VAR. They listened and caved to public and player pressure. I think you've said yourself, that there are certain people within FIFA refereeing that are skeptical about the whole VAR project themselves, but they are giving the people what they want. Look at the Laws themselves. They, basically, changed the DOGSO law to appease the fans, public and players and media. I always thought the crowd that was complaining about the Law being too harsh was too small, but they listened. Even when it comes to refereeing, they have kind of started to listen. During and after the 2002 World Cup, there was a lot of complaint about how unprofessional the referee program was for the World Cup. Esse mentioned this himself at National Camp this past year. The media and other countries criticized FIFA for a putting a "bunch of amateurs" that were just country and confederation neutral on games. Because of that you had decisions like this. See 1:30 mark They listened and started to instill trios and a more professional selection and training system for picking referees. After the 2006 World Cup, where so many red and yellow cards were given and the public complained. What did they do? They instructed the referees to give less cards and manage the game more. The numbers and the games back it up. One other thing that I think is not being discussed enough is this is really the first time, at least, that I can think of that the same referee "regime" is in charge of selecting and picking referees for consecutive World Cups. Or at least in the modern era, so to speak. I think in 2002, it was done by committee. In 2006, I think it was done by committee. I know that in 2010 Esse was the head of referees, but I don't know how much were the assignments his Final decision. All those times, it seemed to be more than one person picking and so things like politics and preferences would be more at play than what it is now. In 2014, it was Busacca and seemed like only Busacca that made the call. In 2018, it seems like it will be Busacca with some input from Collina.
We're way off the UEFA discussion, and that's at least 50% my fault, so I'll try to wind things down and leave it here--we'll know in about 13 months who was more correct! I would say, however, that you made some pretty big assumptions/conclusions in your final three paragraphs above and I don't think they are all based in fact. Also, VAR is an avenue to money, which is the only thing more important that politics.
What about Eriksson? He seemed to be a lock for the 2016 Final and did a Euro semis, and I don't remember any controversy involving him.
I think that UEFA wanted to test them more. Taylor is only on his second (now 3rd) season on the first group. They definitely need more time if UEFA doesn't want to burn them.
That's not exactly true though. FIFA was pro-GLT for a long time while the home nations was against it and thus the IFAB said no. Then the opinions fluctuated a bit for a few years and then we had Lampards no-goal v Germany and after that (and a few similar incidents just before and after) the home nations was fully pushing for it and that left only UEFA in opposition (because they "invented" the AARs). And now we have GLT. There's hardly been much of a shift in FIFAs stance. Again you are attributing FIFA for something that the IFAB did. And the crowd was fairly small (possibly still is world wide) but the last 4 or so years have seen a massive increase in the demands among British fans and media. The DOGSO discussion was as big as (or even bigger at times) the discussions about offside in British football, that is what pushed the IFAB towards the change.
@MassachusettsRef Is it possible to fix the typo in "season" in the thread title? It's bothering me far more than it should.
As someone who was beating the Eriksson for WC14 Final drum, I personally think he's slipped since then. Anything can happen and given how experienced he is, of course he'd be a contender for a late match or even the Final if he performs. But he wouldn't be right now based on this past season. I don't even think he gets picked for the World Cup if decision day was now, actually. I know I'm beating a dead horse, but there are going to be some huge cuts from UEFA if FIFA sticks to 9 or 10 on-field referees. Some guys who regularly get UCL knockout matches are either going to be VARs only or sitting home completely. Skomina and Kassai being cut last time was a shock. I expect at least two equally big or bigger shocks when the 2018 team gets named. In fact, Kassai could be an odd man out again, as crazy as that sounds. He was the only non-Russian UEFA referee at the U20s not to receive a knockout appointment and didn't perform greatly in the group stage.
Kassai has never performed "greatly" at any of the high level games I have seen him in, and I never understood why and how he got as far as he did. I can only assume he had a "patron" maybe Puhl or some other Hungarian or some one else who favored him for some reason and kept pushing him and now that person is no longer in a position to do so. Stuff like this has happened many times before. I know things do appear to be more merit based than political these days, but never rule out the politics in refereeing, at all levels. PH
2017 Super Cup Real Madrid : Manchester United - ROCCHI (ITA) Turpin is his 4th official. I believe no referee has done the Super Cup and the UCL Final in the same year, so you might tentatively scratch Rocchi off the list for the big assignment this season but, as we see regularly in recent years, "rules" are meant to be broken.
That particular "rule" has yet to be broken. Expected appointment. It's too early for a CL prediction, but IMO, Skomina is in the front seat.
You can remove Rizzoli from the list now. Looks like he has retired from active officiating. So expect Orsato to get even more big matches in the CL. http://footballrefereeing.blogspot.com/2017/07/nicola-rizzoli-has-retired.html Probably the second greatest Italian referee ever. Had a really good career. A little over a year ago he was planning on going to another a World Cup and now he has retired to take on an admin role. Tells you just how demanding that level really is and how difficult it is to really go out on "top" or on your own terms. Guys like him and Webb start getting pulled in different directions in regards to media opportunities or admin roles and it becomes hard to say no.
There seems to be a "yes you can be a FIFA after you turn 46, but no, you're not going to the World Cup" rule in place. It's one of the reasons that Atkinson has allegedly not been considered. So not quite sure if Rizzoli was actually ever planning to go to the WC. It depends on how real that rule is and, if it is real, when it was conveyed.
Rizzoli wasn't planning on going to the WC. He knew that he could be in the list of preselected referees, if he wanted, but decided to abandon it in order another Italian to be included on it.
Don't forget Clats in this discussion. Being a World class referee is becoming too demanding with not enough compensation. Just look at what you have to do to be a PRO candidate. Once you strap that Heart Rate monitor on, they own you. PRO tells you what to eat and drink, when and how to exercise, etc... with very little in return. Most of the guys I know that are at that level are shocked just how much is required of them to stay there.