I’d really love to understand the dynamics at play in all this, which is (at least facially) different from other US sports. PRO is (at least officially) the negotiator. But it’s MLS’s money. When we attribute what “PRO wants,” I’m not sure it has a lot to do with what the negotiating positions are. Seems that it is all about what MLS wants, and PRO is stuck in the middle. Or am I missing something?
im not predicting anything anymore. I was predicting that both had too much incentive to not create the ugliness of a stoppage on the cusp of the WC, and I was obviously very wrong.
I'm assuming someone like Geiger is torn. He probably wants MLS refs to be paid over the moon and get every benefit possible. But that's not the job he took. His job is to negotiate based on what the leagues they serve want. It does create this odd middleman compared with other pro sports in the US where the leagues hire and train refs and their union us negotiating straight with the league.
Look no further than Garber's interview last Saturday, where he kept referring to "we" in the negotiation process and then, in response to PSRA's letter directly to him (you know, the chief executive of "we"), was all "we?! huh?! how dare you!!!" in response and threw everything back to PRO. It's all pretty farcical. But it definitely is what you and others are saying it is. Geiger and company are put in a ridiculous position here.
I'm a little bit curious how this is influencing assignments further down the ladder. USL2 and USL1 start on March 9th and MLS Next Pro kicks off the next weekend. Theoretically PRO has to hold back the replacement refs they want for MLS which will shift up a number of referees in the assigning process for the rest of the leagues.
Not really. Or not that much. BU2 isn't working MLS during the work stoppage. So all of those officials are available. With under a handful of exceptions, that next tier of "on the radar" officials (those not in BU2 but regularly getting assignments in USL1) are also not working MLS. Layer in the regular cohort of servicable/aspiring regional officials and you have it covered. It's not like Weiner, Herrera, the retired foreign officials, etc., were working USL. You've maybe created a half dozen holes you need to fill across USLC and USL1 in all positions which, in the grand scheme of things, isn't much at all. Going in the other direction, one interesting aspect about the start of this season is that CONCACAF W Gold Cup (T. Penso, Fischer, Simon, Koroleva + ARs), CONCACAF U20 qualifiers (Rivas and Szpala +ARs) and CCL midweek matches (manageable, but a lot of crews in action) have all been going on right now and we have a number of PRO crews and VARs working. It wouldn't have been a dire situation by any means, but if the regular PRO officials were working these first few weeks, they would have been stretched a little thin. Which, in turn, might have given opportunities to some of the BU2 cohort earlier than usual.
Courtemanche managed to find a second (kinda) positive thing to retweet about the scabs. Unfortunately it's a piece for Vox that reads like it was written by a sixth grader with the help of ChatGPT.
So, for sure now, we have replacement refs for this weekend. A whole new set of data points. I thought that the refs last weekend let a lot of ticky tack fouls go which led to a different type of game flow, at least to the 4-5 games I watched. There is a lot of risk in that but it seemed noticeable to me that some actions where I'm accustomed to hearing a whistle were instead "let them play" moments. Some soft foul/dives were not rewarded. Anyone else think that?
Everyone is only getting the usual match fee correct? I wonder how many weeks some of the refs (especially ARs and 4ths) will want to spend 2 or 3 days away from home each week for a month or two when if they're only getting a match fee?
Today we share the 4th in our series of open letters to our referee community.An overwhelming majority of officials who were approached by PRO to work matches as replacement officials courageously declined the offer, choosing instead to stand in solidarity with their colleagues…— PSRA Officials (@PSRAofficials) March 1, 2024
NEW: After further negotiations today, PRO appears to be playing a game of chicken with its out MLS referees.It’s told the PSRA that refs can either accept PRO’s offer by March 11th… or the offer will get worse. Updated story on @TheAthleticSCCR:https://t.co/JUtxBW1p38— Pablo Iglesias Maurer (@MLSist) March 1, 2024
Yep, if true, this is exactly what I have been saying. PSRA is going to remain locked out until enough of the referees cave in and accept a below-desired offer. They are never going to get their demands met. No one cares enough about the MLS for subpar refereeing to force the league to act, and players boycotting games is illegal per their CBA. Their only chance is Messi getting hurt due to refereeing incompetence.
From the article: I suppose I should feel bad for these guys now in management, but this is the business they've chosen. I do wonder how much power the current PRO team has been given to actually bargain at the bargaining table.
https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_...lockout-2nd-week-labor-impasse-pro-psra-union In a memo to the MLS Board of Governors, MLS executive vice president Nelson Rodriguez said that 17 additional referees were being added to pool of replacement referees for this weekend's matches. "Also, there have been numerous former professional and international match officials who have contacted PRO during the last week about working MLS matches," he added.
I’m interested to see if there will be fall out within PSRA if they end up accepting an offer from PRO which is worse than what is currently on the table.
I've only heard of that type of negotiating strategy working out when there is a credible alternative to reaching agreement. So, either they are bluffing or they consider the replacement referees a credible long-term option https://t.co/cA7jHuPNeV— Steven Bank (@ProfBank) March 1, 2024 Here's one perspective on today's news
PRO’s credible long-term solution is rebuilding the referee corps, a 3-5 year project. There must also be a hope on PROs part that there is a divide between the part time (lower compensated?) and full time (higher compensated?) guys that they can leverage. They have to hope that this split shows up in a couple of weeks and they can start peeling off guys that need to work. Alternatively, BU2 guys could be convinced to take games. Once that happens, the floodgates will open and they will have broken the union. I can’t believe they want to do the rebuild. They pretty much just did that in the late 2010s, early 2020s. Didn’t they go into 2019 or 2020 with barely enough referees to cover a full slate of games? The pain point on both sides is probably still a while off… weeks/months. I am still of the opinion that PRO will have to pay something in line with what PSRA is asking for to whoever is doing these games after this is over.
Yeah, I guess this is what I don't get regarding MLS' end game. It's not like the Saudi model of bringing in "all-star" referees (which involves paying officials a lot more) is viable. And if the growth in MLS continues, you're eventually going to have to pay officials more no matter what. So even if you break the union here or "rebuild" the corps, you're just kicking the problem down the road a few years. And, in doing so, you're pretty much abandoning all of PRO's success for the last decade or so in the interim. It really does make no sense. Unless it's a signal to the MLSPA about how they will negotiate. Or the league isn't as financially sound as it is making itself appear. Or Garber and the owners simply don't recognize or accept the role referees play. Or... something. But it's really hard to discern any long-term vision on the MLS side here, absent facts or knowledge we can't see. The PSRA side is pretty clear (more money, better benefits, improved conditions, etc.). You can argue, if you'd like, that some of the requests are too aggressive. But even if you do, it would seem like you could then accept room for negotiation (like, if the request here is $3M more cumulatively, how is $1-2M more not on the table as a counter?). But that's not where we seem to be right now.