Just noticed that there are no AARs in the Liverpool/Hearts match now being played. Hooray!! I hope, perhaps in vain, that it is the beginning of the end for AARs, PH
Completely in vain. This is now standard operating procedure. AARs don't get used in EL qualifying (or in UCL "qualifying," for that matter). There are just too many matches in July and August to be able to cover with crews of 6. In August, AARs are only on the UCL playoffs. Once we hit September, they are used on all UEFA club group stage matches and then all knockout matches. It's just July-August that they are omitted from the Europa League.
It's worth noting that Serie A has adopted AARs for all league matches. I think that's the first European league to do so. They are using, mostly, Serie B referees as AARs. I'm not sure how that's being pulled off without putting too much stress on the referee corps, but that's what they've opted to do. Interestingly, Ligue 1 has not adopted AARs. Given they are the brainchild of Platini, I find that surprising.
Maybe the French realize that Platini has the wrong idea. They know him best. It does seem crazy to say that they can do without AARs on some matches but not others in the same competition. There must be plenty of people available to do the job, even if they are not all on the FIFA lists. It could be a nice way to get some international experience for some up and coming guys. Still I am glad they are not there and I kinda knew that my hopes would be dashed eventually! I hate to say this but it probably can't be too much longer before they appear in MLS and then in U-12 girls matches in some areas. PH
Unless mandated to do so by law, I think it's safe to say we'll never see them used in English competitions, thankfully.
UEFA can justify it by considering them separate components of the same competition. These qualifying stages are to the group stage what EURO qualifiers are to the final tournament. I don't think so, because there are truly a lot of matches to cover. There are 274 EL qualifiers and 68 UCL qualifiers for a total of 342 matches. There are 270 European FIFA referees when they are all fit and in good standing. But you'd need 3 from the same federation to make a needed sextet--several federations don't have that, so that eliminates dozens of referees from contention. Be conservative and lop only 30 off to get down to 240. That's 80 potential crews for 342 matches. And we're only talking about 3 rounds of competition. Considering UEFA doesn't have the same referee work twice in one round, it becomes an impossible proposition--if you worked every single crew to the max, you'd be 100 matches short unless you changed something. Even if you expand the pool to include national-level officials for AAR duty, this is a heavy workload to cover. It's also, I'm sure, a cost issue. Two extra officials is probably about 1,500 EURO for each match when you count fees, lodging and transport. You're talking about a stage of the competition that sometimes sees clubs from San Marino battling teams from Andorra. Despite the money that UEFA is rolling in, these aren't the games that bring in television money and gate receipts. So it probably doesn't seem wise to throw 500,000 EURO at referees at this juncture of the competition.
I bet it was considered safe to say that about fourth officials a few decades ago. You never know how this is going to turn out. Once they are used at a World Cup, they very well could become something that all top-level leagues feel they must have.
On this match I noticed that the 4th official was seated up behind the subs, and not standing at the half-way line. He only came to the touchline to administer the sub procedure. This is in direct contrast to the way 4ths are used in top US competitions. Hopefully this may also be adopted here as well. PH
The media here have incredible power, both in shaping public opinion, and FA stances. The media here detest AARs and consider them a waste of time. Once the video technology comes into force and the media therefore get their way, AARs will be left to the worldof UEFA competitions. Not to mention the FA could never justify requiring another 100 or so Level 4 referees to fill the gaps caused by having to promote so many more to be AARs, causing even more shortages at grassroots when they're campaigning hard by publicly claiming there is a massive shortfall in referees at that level and have a target of 8000 new officials. As I said, it's pretty safe to say AARs won't be seen in English football for the foreseeable future.
They are only used at the highest levels. That is also where Goal Line Technology will come into play. AARs will be obsolete before they can spread too far. My hope is that eventually the discussion will move to adding another Referee on the playing field. 2CR / 2AR. Like Ice Hockey.
Every point you make is valid and I don't disagree with any of them. I just think that if AARs get used at the World Cup once, which they are planned for in 2014, it's going to be hard to undo their use. And once we see them at two consecutive World Cups, the top domestic leagues might eventually feel like they have to have them. The EPL would be one of the last leagues to go that route, for the reasons you cite. But, 2019, to pick a year out of the hat, is a long way off. At that point you'd have them active in top UEFA competition for a decade, at two EUROs and at two World Cups. If they are still around then, the perception will have changed.
You're making the assumption that AARs are only for goal line decisions. In theory, they're not. Obviously there have been some hiccups but one of the main points of emphasis is assistance with penalty decisions. If the experiment is deemed to be working in that regard, technology will not rule them out. And again, FIFA has pushed ahead with AARs as they simultaneously approved the technology. Even though many may not like them and some of the omissions or mistakes get highlighted, obviously the data shows enough success for their use to continue to grow. You might have just opened a can of worms that we haven't discussed here in awhile, but let me go on-record as saying my opinion is 'no.' A million times 'no,' in fact. This was tried. It failed. It failed miserably, in fact. FIFA authorized the use in five or six competitions worldwide, including the USOC and Italian Cup in 2001. The experiment was so bad that the USSF opted to revert back to one referee for the final at the request of the teams involved (and based on their own evaluations, too). It simply does not work and no one recommended its continuation after the experiment was tried. Our sport is not ice hockey. The size of the playing surface and expectations for certain infringements to reach the level of a 2-minute penalty do not mesh with the discretion that referees in soccer have in regards to application of misconduct and game management. In short, consistency is pretty easy to get between a pair of hockey officials--it's almost impossible in soccer. We worry about consistency match-to-match among referees as it is; you can picture how bad it would get in match with two referees. It is a bad idea that thankfully is not going to happen again. The failure of a two-whistle system is one of the main reasons why AARs were tried this time. I think people are underestimating how far along this AAR experiment is now. We've never seen a new system like this get used year-round in a major competition like it has been now for two years in the UCL and three in the EL. We've never seen it at a major tournament, like it was in EURO. And we've never seen FIFA formally adopt its use going forward, as it now has been. Many might dislike the use of AARs, but it's now past the point of being an experiment. Past experiments were in domestic cup competitions and in minor leagues and they faded away. This year we will see the permanent use of AARs in the UCL, EL, Serie A, Brazilian leagues and, then, the 2014 World Cup. The use of AARs is going to grow, not recede.
Kind of to play devil's advocate, but within the next 2 years, we will see the use of video technology start. I'm confident that will be a success and will be rolled out across competitions. Once it becomes the norm to have video technology for goal line decisions, I think there'll be pressure to extend it's use, further diminishing the need for the extra expense (both financial and manpower) of AARs. It'll be interesting to see which way the world has gone by 2019. If it's down the slightly archaic AARs route, or the future technological route. Either way, I hope it's left open to competitions to decide which one rather than be forced into one or the other.
Again, all fair points. I just think WC2014 is going to be the lynchpin here. If they are deemed useful in Brazil, it's going to be really hard to unring the bell, so to speak, even if technology proves successful. But it's all speculation at this point, I suppose.
First time I've seen Collina quoted giving unequivocal support for AARs. Also an interesting AR stat about EURO 2012 at the end of this article: http://www.uefa.com/uefa/footballfirst/matchorganisation/refereeing/news/newsid=1854936.html I'd note that all the talk is about deterrence and assistance with decisions in the penalty area and how AARs allow ARs to concentrate more on offside. Nothing really about goal line decisions. The groundwork is already being laid to justify their use even if technology proves successful.