In an official address to FIFA's medical conference yesterday, FIFA's Chief medical Officer Jirí Dvorák said that the organization is discussing having the player's mandatory drug testing rules apply to game officials as well. "We do not have an indication that this is a problem but this is something we have to look at. "The referees are a neglected population." Michel D'Hooghe, chairman of FIFA's Medical Committee, added: "The referee is an athlete on the field so I think he should be subjected to the same rules."
This dope testing just reeks of a witch hunt. Now, we got people wanting to get rid of cash on pitch and now they want dope testing on refs. I understand them wanting to test illicit drugs like coke, smack, meth etc, but HGH, Clenbuterol, ??? It is not like a ref needs playing advantage over an opponent.
Witch hunt seems a bit extreme. Necessary? I dunno. Sometimes fixing a problem that isn't there creates more problems than anythinge else. But I can see thinking that if they are going to test refs (presumably b/c of illegal drugss/abuse), that it makes sense to use the existing system. And they might be concerned about the msg about enhancement performing drugs if they used the player system but then excluded certain drugs from the testing protocol.
It's a logical next step - after all, some referees MUST be on drugs in order to want to ref in certain leagues. AND, I agree referees are a neglected population, but in other ways besides investigating drug usage.
What is the issue with this? Refs shouldn't have any problem submitting to this. Please don't give me any of that invasion of privacy BS either. If you aren't doping you are fine.
Odd that FIFA investigates the use of technology at the same time that it doesn't want its referees enhancing their performance. Well there's a mentality that has done nothing but advanced individual rights throughout history. How about asking the opposite question, of what the purpose/justification is? The man proposing this change freely admits "we have no indication that this is a problem..." Well, then, what is the dope testing going to prove? To be honest, I fail to see how some banned supplements or the like would be a problem for officials to use. They are not in competition. They are not cheating an opponent. The most tortured argument you might make is that they are "cheating" fellow referees if they are able to pass a fitness test due to supplements, thereby taking someone else's slot at a tournament. But that's quite the stretch. So what's the problem that's being solved here? If it passes, of course referees shouldn't have a problem submitting to the tests. FIFA is a private entity (sort of) and can certainly impose such standards as a condition of employment at tournaments or international matches. But that doesn't mean people should just lie down without asking questions.
Understand how doping control works. There is in-competition testing and out of competition testing. In-competition is post game, 'please fill up this cup and, yes, I do have to watch you do it.' Out of competition means that WADA can come collect a sample from you at any time, anywhere. How do they know where you are? You have to report to them any time you are changing where you are. USA Track & Field has just begun doping control (in competition only) for Masters meets. Going to set a world record? You'd better be clean, even if it's women's O-70 pole vault.
The one thought I can come up with in favor of the testing is based on the presumption that the drugs used to dope are, in general, illegal drugs (i.e. made illegal by the government for anyone's use outside of a valid prescription). If that's the case, then a referee using said drugs has, at the very least, contact with a criminal element that could pose problems with match fixing and so on. I think that's a stretch, but it's the most plausible reasoning I've been able to come up with.
Yes yes, I know all the slippery slope power hungry arguments are nice and catchy but honestly I find them to be tiresome and for the most part over reactions. If they are testing for enhancement drugs, yes I can see this being a bit over reaching but these types of drugs are rarely good for you in the long run so I don't have a problem with them not wanting the refs using them. If they are testing referees for illegal substances then I am all for it. I don't think referees using those drugs should be allowed to take charge of matches at that level or any level. The ramifications are too great.
Once you cede power, you'll never get it back. It is a slippery slope no matter how you slice and dice it. It is not about invasion of privacy, but dealing with potential ripeness for manipulation by governing bodies. If there is no credible issue at hand, why create an issue out of nowhere? That reeks of a power play maneuver.
I'm sorry but I think that referees should be REQUIRED to take HGH. There's no side effects other than being faster and more awesome!
My thoughts would be the laws of the country the match is played in along with some standards set out by FIFA themselves.
If they implement this MLS will lose two of their most experienced referees: Ricardo Salazar and Chico Grajeda.
This is good for a laugh, but I will say seriously that I have little problem with referees doing anything which enhances their ability to do their job more effectively.
Population screening - heck, population anything is almost always very difficult to justify. (Cf. current arguments over population-based breast/prostate cancer screening.) Drug tests are not 100% accurate, even when all protocols are done perfectly.Given the plausibly low percentage of referees who are actually juiced (or stoked) makes matters that much worst. The chance of a false positive among athletes is considered worth the risk because of the harm to the health of athletes and the damage done to the integrity of the sport. I see no possible upside in the case of referees. There is probably a better argument to regular financial audits of referees than there is for testing them for questionable substances. Nobody has ever said they wuz robbed because the referee had epic delts. The reasoning behind the suggestion smacks of that hobgoblin that often stalks little minds.
There goes the post-game beer in some countries. Seriously, though, standards from the home nation and its government? Great. So now referees are going to be opening themselves to arrest if the match doesn't go the right way and a false test magically appears. Disaster waiting to happen. There's no problem here. The doctor proposing the testing admitted as much. Let's leave well enough alone.
If I may attempt to translate (for those who think like me ). Imagine your HGH test is 99.9% accurate. Meaning, 1 in every 1,000 negatives will register as a positive, and 1 in every 1,000 positives will register as a negative. Sounds good, right? Now, assume we have 1,000 current FIFA badges and 1 of them is dirty. Give the test to that population. Your test will almost certainly nail the bad guy. It will also almost certainly nail an innocent guy. 2 guys nailed. 99.9% has just become a 50-50 proposition. Oops. It doesn't make sense to give tests (even really good ones) unless there is a problem to solve.
I hate to break it to you but if you travel to another country you have to abide by their laws regardless of anything. You can't go to a country where drinking is illegal and then drink because you are from a foreign country unless you happen to have diplomatic immunity which I doubt they give to referees just on a whim.
You missed MassRef's point which was the possibility (probability) of a test being spiked in retaliation for a loss.
Let me try and frame the question correctly... Why are we any different than the players? Let me take my shot at it. Performance enhancement by players benefits them by out-performing their opponents. There is a clear and direct link between their doing better and financial gains for many parties. With referees, no such direct link exists... unless, somehow, the tier-2 referees think they're not getting a fair shot at "the show." I see no indication that this is what is driving this movement. While drug use my help or impair the ability to referee, is drug use suddenly going to cause a referee to favor one team? A laughable argument to say the least. So either this is a solution in search of a problem or, more likely, is a [not very transparent] attempt to create an avenue to externally influence referees.
That is exactly what everyone has in mind. If you open the door to that scenario, the door is wide open no matter what. You won't see this in England or Spain, but you will see this in Africa or some tinpot Asian country like Kyrgyzstan. There is no credible issue at hand, but you will be creating one because you need to justify its existence.