Conger has been released. And I can confirm Barton is staying. Several others I’m 99% sure on but don’t want to get ahead of people.
Also I’ve been saying for awhile to others that France v Brazil would be Elfath. We shall see. FIFA might think it has to use him on QF now because of Morocco-Portugal matchup.
3 Italians in 6 WC Finals is a lot, even with the Italians on the committee! On a different note, I came across an interesting interview with Elfath from 2016: http://malanational.org/ismail-elfath-casablanca-fifa-referee-dreams-become-realities/
I would say no surprises on the referee front, other than perhaps the size of the list. Like, you don't need both Oliver and Taylor at this point--but I guess there's no need to literally send one home now. And you probably only need two out of three CONCACAF, but if Elfath's hands get tied, then there's a backup. If you told me the size of the list, I don't think there's anyone on it who I would have expected to be off it. Or vice versa. Maybe Beath for Mohamed but it seems pretty clear that FIFA wasn't happy with Beath's crew about something. VARs are a bit of a different story. Bin Jahari and Jiyed are surely there just because each confederation needs one. Van Boekel staying might indicate Makkelie actually works again (and with him), so that's noteworthy. And then, I wouldn't have seen Villarreal staying given his assignments so far. I'm not sure it's explicitly a good thing for Elfath, but it's certainly not a bad thing. It's worth stressing that several individuals retained will not work at all, so this list should not be taken as an indication of guaranteed future assignments.
Note that Dankert stays as VAR but Fritz goes home. Fritz had the Croatia/Belgium offside that annulled a penalty. Not sure if that's the reason (I actually doubt it is), but that's the only affirmative intervention he had. Dankert, on the other hand, was VAR for Siebert. So a pretty clear signal that Dankert was right to send down the penalty for review and Siebert was wrong to reject it. In other words, this list screams "Uruguay has legitimate beef" as all three individuals involved in making the decisions they didn't like are no longer at the tournament.
And... you are right. Considering his standing before the tournament and even after his first match, this is somewhat reminiscent of Brych in 2018.
20 referees retained for a total of 7 matches (8 if you count the third place match)? This just seems like a total participation trophy list to not offend confederations, federations, and the egos of certain referees. You retain Al-Jassim even though his last assignment was like three weeks ago? Keeping both sets of Argentine or Brazilian referees instead of just having one from each is completely to not hurt egos and pride. It's practically mathematically only possible for one of the referees from each country to work. Otherwise four out of the last seven matches would be done by Argentines and Brazilians. So why not release the ones you don't plan on using? Other than you don't want to hurt Brazil's pride if you happen to use both Argentines or vice versa? By the way, 100% Frappart is on the third place match if France isn't on it.
Nothing that new, though. Just a little more insurance than usual. If you had sent one English, one Brazilian and one Argentinian home, I think you're down to 17 which is what it was in 2018, right? So the "let's not offend the #2 from the big countries" seems to be what gets you to 20. Yes. You're not new here. 3/4 playoff with Mohamed or, if Mohamed steals a game, he'll be the 4th. Correct. Read this after I wrote the above. Correct. And with Brazil v Argentina potentially in the offing and a Brazilian in charge of the refereeing, it's probably an extra delicate game right now. Meh. This is the one I'm not sold on. Getting an AFC referee a match, I think, is more important than getting Frappart a second one. The second one simply does not have the PR punch that the first one has. If an AFC referee gets a QF, then I agree she's likely there. But Al-Jassim and Mohamed aren't sitting around for no reason, I imagine. Frappart could be sitting around for no reason--both because of France's advancement but also because "we didn't send all the women home" is a bit of a PR play in its own right.
Ghorbal/Gomes might be the most interesting thing to me here. If they have to be used, they have to be used very quickly given Morocco's advancement. And there are only two games. And then only one where it seems even plausible (Brazil v Croatia). I don't think it will happen, but that's something to keep an eye for a big surprise.
@Mikael_Referee do we know about Nesbitt? Or Back & Diaz for that matter? Does Frappart have a trio now and they stayed with her? Or was that ad hoc and her participation might be with different ARs if it occurs again? And who is Barton's trio now?
In 2018, they retained 17 referees and only used 6 for the Final seven matches (Faghani did the third-place match). I'm gonna assume that same ratio holds for this round as well. Six referees will work the final 7 matches (unless they've decided one of Elfath, Rapallini, Sampao, Marciniak, or Turpin are gonna do the Final and will keep them out the rest of the tournament until the Final). In that case, it will be 7 referees for the final seven matches. On second thought, Marciniak feels a lot like Erikkson in 2014. I remember there was some talk and rumors about Erikkson being a potential candidate for the 2014 Final (at least on this board) after he did pretty well on his round of 16 match between Argentina and Switzerland. But that was the hight of Erikkson's international tournament career. Both have some pedigree in major CL knockout ties and were/are potential CL Final candidates, but have yet to referee a major European Final (CL or EL). Now Marciniak does have more tournament pedigree than Erikkson did in 2014 (one World Cup and one Euro versus one Euro and no World Cup). I could be wrong, but it feels like this is the end of the road for Marciniak the same way it was for Erikkson.
Except Eriksson had a real shot at that WC Final. I think you're right in comparing them. But just because Eriksson lost something close to a coin flip 8 years ago doesn't mean the coin will land the same way this time. Also, it's pretty well-known that Collina loves Marciniak. So take that into account, too. I think Marciniak is a candidate for almost any big match left. Does he need to work one? No. So he could be odd man out. But at this point I'd bet he's more likely than not to get one.
Zeegalaar was sent home while Nesbitt and Moran remain, so presumably Nesbitt is officially a member of Team Barton at least for the remainder of the tournament. Other than that, nothing so much interesting here. I wonder if Gomes, Ghorbal, Mohamed, and Al-Jassim were retained just to give AFC and CAF some representation in the room. As MassRef mentions maybe one of them could get the third place match. But with so many Europeans who ostensibly deserve a knockout game, it’d rub me the wrong way if we see any of the Africans or Asians on a competitive knockout match. Ghorbal is the closest, but none of them really deserve a QF on merit. I’m really interested to see what happens with the appointments coming out today, particularly the Brazil - Croatia game. If confederation neutrality isn’t broken, it will be doing a huge disservice to a number of deserving European candidates
While I think this is obviously technically true, I think the chances of Barton seeing the field again are probably on par with Frappart getting the 3/4 playoff, if not lower. So to the extent Frappart does not have a trio right now, I think it's fair to say Nesbitt would slot in for either one if they got a game. But again, I'd bet against both of those things. I think you need to have an England v Morocco semi to start talking about either one.
It also might be worth pointing out that Turpin isn't kept just to twiddle his thumbs. He's a real option for the Final if France doesn't progress. So do people really think Frappart goes to 3/4 over Turpin on Final if a decision came to that? Or that Turpin and his ARs go on the 3/4 playoff as ARs and 4th to Frappart? I can't see any scenario where two French officials get the two final matches of the tournament, so you really have to choose between Frappart and Turpin at that point.
Does the size of the list allow the committee not to kind of tip its hand in advance? Also, does the timing of this World Cup have an impact on keeping extra bodies around? With so many leagues currently on hiatus and with little other work on offer, is this just a "nice problem" to have for the committee to be able to keep the politicians happy and keep its selection pool bigger than is typical?
Of course. Also, which teams advance can pretty easily and clearly affect certain referees. Not sure I follow the question here. The World Cup is usually in the summer when every relevant league is off (other than MLS and some of the Scandinavian ones when they have a referee). The list size is about having options, keeping certain confederations happy, and maybe rewarding/encouraging a few people who may return in 2026 (Barton seems a clear example of this for me). The fact that it's 20 instead of 17 seems to clearly be about Argentina, England and Brazil. Don't think there's too much more to read into it than that. You've got 8 games left--at MOST 16 officials of the 20 will be used. And I suspect it's more like 13-15.
Maybe I am an idiot. Frappart as Turpin's 4th on the World Cup Final has to be in consideration, doesn't it?
I don't know how much off-season or pre-season work the UEFA referees do in the summer, but it seems that there international windows in June / July. Now normally, those working the world cup would probably not get used there, so that's not part of it. And, I doubt they want them for any domestic stuff going on in the summer either, other than friendlies, but that's not usually for these refs anyway. Then, I'd assume their employers would want to give them REAL time away from football before starting pre-season camps. So, I am just postulating that with this tournament creating a sort of world stasis of top-flight competition, there would be less desire or need to send people home who become redundant. It's just this kind of weird work stoppage, and given that these officials are jumping back into full competition immediately at the end of the event, having people stay in the training setting might actually be viewed as desirable. So, by keeping the list large: - They keep more options - They get to hide their cards a bit more - They keep politicians happy - More refs are allowed to say they were retained, so more refs are happy AND - More refs continue to live in a high-level training environment with on FIFA's dime, which is good for the refs and at least decent marketing for the leagues they service (we have the top refs, blah blah). Whereas during the summertime, I could see a stronger desire by the league's referee departments to get redundant refs out of there for ??? whatever reason... although, I am personally surprised they don't keep the list larger as a general rule anyway.
You're overthinking and overcomplicating it. As @MassachusettsRef said, the list was 17 in 2020 and is 20 in 2020 almost exclusively due to the fact that three of the largest and most important football nations sent three on-field referees. If they only sent one each, the list would be 17. That's it. There is no other reason why the number is larger than in previous years.
Sorry, none of this makes sense to me. What do you mean their "international window" is June/July? That's their offseason. There are no international matches, other than tournaments, for top referees in the summer. You're either at the WC/EURO, etc., or you're on vacation. From an "are these guys overworked" standpoint, the summer tournaments are a burden that the elite of the elite need to bear. I just don't follow this logic. What good does it serve the EPL to have Anthony Taylor, for example, sitting around a hotel in Doha and doing FIFA training? It's not like all the other guys in the EPL are sitting at home doing absolutely nothing. If he comes home, he rejoins his colleagues. Getting "FIFA training" that doesn't apply to what your domestic league is trying to do doesn't seem like it has any virtue. We are quite literally talking about three of the top referees in the world from three major leagues in the world being retained unnecessarily. Taylor, Oliver, Sampaio, Claus, Tello and Rapallini aren't exactly slumming it when they go home. Already addressed Taylor/Oliver but, also, the Brazilian and Argentinian leagues are done, so to the extent you want to give those referees a real break, you'd release them now. It's small in the grand scheme of things, but you have to house these people. Also, do you really want disaffected individuals in a camp like that? The number of assignments can't go up. The numbers don't work as it stands. If you start keeping people who know they have no chance and/or think they should have a chance but will be angry when it doesn't come to fruition*... that's not good for the overall health of the operation. Anyway, this is all about the first four bullets in your post and, specifically relative to 17 v 20, not choosing favorites ahead of time for Brazil, Argentina and England. That's it. Nothing about rejoining or not rejoining domestic leagues would be part of it. *This is one reason I think Makkelie might get England-France. He's not the type of personality you keep around for team-building exercises.