Are we sure the US isn't using their full allotment? Obviously the smaller countries don't get as many as Germany or Italy. And let's face at the US is still a second or third tier footballing country. Also I think England has failed to full allotment of White badges on the men's side recently
I can’t speak for other countries but I know that you must already be ready for the job before you take it here. Getting a FIFA badge here in the US and then bombing on the international stage is bad for everyone. Many of the Caribbean countries do not have access to high quality soccer until becoming FIFAs so perhaps they’re more inclined to keep a full roster but if an official is left off the panel after being invited to a CONCACAF event, it’s a pretty clear indication that they’re presumed to be not ready for the international game. this thread is also about MLS retirements but while we’re talking FIFAs there is actually more turnover on the female side both refs and ARs
So wait, was Apolinar Mariscal dismissed, and then Eduardo retired voluntarily, is that correct? How unusual is it for someone to go from FIFA to off the PRO roster entirely? Also, what happens to a referee or AR who is dismissed? Do they go back to the USL, and if so, can they with good performance earn a place back on the MLS circuit, or are their careers effectively over at that point? (I recall the example of Stuart Atwell in England being promoted very young, demoted after a few years, then earning his place again).
I suppose it would be technically possible for someone to be fired from PRO and go back through and fix the issues that got them fired and be rehired. I would think this would be highly improbable and even more so at the point of their careers as those officials.
So... now that this has changed, but the yearly appointments have been announced publicly. We would have to wait until next year to see any additions to the panel. Correct?
This "question" is a bit more public now that PSRA has sent an email to membership on it. Matt Conger, who was--and is once again--a USSF registered referee has been living back "home" with family in Georgia since the latter part of 2021. He's chosen to habitate there because of New Zealand COVID entry/exit restrictions; living temporarily in the US allows easier movement for various FIFA and AFC assignments. Anyway, the question is whether or not he will work MLS in 2022. Conger has joined PSRA and PSRA has no objections to his working MLS (short story is the body doesn't consider him a "foreign referee"). But there are some issues--from the technical around whether PRO wants to use its "trialist" spots on a referee who may only be here a year to the practical over whether or not PRO wants to introduce what could be a guest referee for 5-6 matches who hasn't been trained here and isn't used to the league. I suspect Conger will work MLS this year, but that's just a guess. I think it's nearly certain he'll work USL matches at minimum, though.
Admittedly, this is a useless and meaningless question. But since Conger would be working domestic matches outside of the country where he’s FIFA-listed, would he be able to wear his FIFA badge for USL or MLS? On a more relevant note, I don’t see why having a World Cup referee working some MLS matches for a year would be a bad thing. I would think he could integrate himself into PRO’s way of doing things since he already does FIFA and AFC matches. I get the thing about trial slots, but if you have a World Cup referee at your service for a year I’d think you’d want to use him as much as reasonable.
He counts toward the “trialist” slots that are capped by the CBA. So PRO would be using him in MLS at the expense of actually trialing people they were looking to hire in 2023 and beyond. That’s the calculus around “as much as possible.” Is, let’s say, 8-10 games for Conger better than 2-3 for a few different referees that you might be investing in permanently? I don’t think it’s an easy answer. It’s also worth asking if Conger is THAT good. MLS has had and has World Cup referees that don’t exactly have a wide fan base with all stakeholders. Conger could be a breath of fresh air or he also could be, in the eyes of fans, just another PRO referee. Do you go to some extraordinary lengths to add a single referee, probably viewed as somewhat above the league median, on an irregular schedule (remember all his international obligations) for one season? I genuinely don’t know. Conger’s intentions beyond 2022 also matter, of course. But my understanding is that, all things being equal, he does plan to return to NZ when feasible. So on paper, at least, there’s not a long-term investment with him on the table for PRO.
On the surface it may seem like a good idea but as @MassachusettsRef alluded, there are some precedent issues that are dangerous. Not that long ago, the MLS publicly said they wanted to recruit foreign officials to their league which would make it dramatically harder for any US official to make it into the league and therefore our own FIFA panel (FIFA requires you to officiate in your nations top league). Using foreign officials (like say they did in Saudi Arabia) would put a pretty significant ceiling on what many Americans could aspire to and that, quite simply, PSRA fought against. Conger’s situation is different in two major reasons. 1. He’s American born and still a citizen (he even came up through USYS regionals/nationals and 2. He was not recruited to replace other American officials. His request was made to help his chances at earning a spot in Qatar instead of MLS poaching officials from other leagues.
That’s why I’m thinking this isn’t a major deal, in my opinion. It’s one thing to actively recruit foreign referees like Saudi Arabia and China have done. I REALLY don’t want that to happen. I get there’s a possible precedent here, but as you said he’s a USSF-raised “homegrown” referee working for a year tops in all likelihood. Every type of rule has a possible exception. This one feels like it’s a valid exception. But I do understand why PRO may be hesitant to go all in with Conger for a short term situation.
PSRA clearly agrees with you. They admit this is a different scenario completely and as he joined the Union, had their support as any other member. PRO certainly has many different considerations but I’m sure it’s nice to know they don’t have to fight PSRA if they want to use him
if you were one of the refs working your tail off to get one of the grisliest spots this year, you’d sure think it was a big deal . . .
Maybe not. There are more games this year, there is tight international schedule, and plus people happen to like Conger. I don't think there is going to be a sense of jealousy or a sense of "that guy took my spot" with him. I really don't. I think it's more likely for people to have that attitude about a "lower performing" official than Conger. There is probably lesson in there about keeping good relationships with people even if it is people you don't think you'll "need" again. As far as I can tell, it seems Conger has done that.
I didn't say they would be jealous. But it is a big deal for them, even if they support it. As I understand it from above, if he takes 9 of the games that would be permitted for trial spots, that's three potential up-and-comers who don't get a trial. (If the international obligations of full time MLS refs meant PSRA agreed that he could do games without counting toward the capped number of trialist spots, then I would agree it isn't a big deal for those folks.)
A few things here. First, I think @jarbitro is right in nearly everything he says. The only part he's missing is that some (most? all?) of the potential trialists don't actually know Conger. They are too young. So I think he points out a great life lesson, but it applies to Conger's relationship with members of the PSRA Board and the other veterans in the league. But that's probably why he wrote this letter, which also might point to another life lesson: https://mcusercontent.com/c604ef9f7...-ba24-0b5b-7511317cfca8/Dear_PSRA_Members.pdf Second, my numbers above are just tossed out there generally and not fully accurate. There is a fixed number of trialist spots for each position where PRO can use a non-employee (and, similarly, a non-employee can get a certain number of trials before they have to be hired). Conger counts toward those spots. So yes, he is "taking away" trialist opportunities from other potential referees. But just want to be clear my numbers aren't directly reflective of what's in the CBA. Third and finally, I'm not sure why PSRA should or would want to make additional accommodations here. They've got to protect both their members who are in the Bargaining Unit and employees as well as the potential trialists (who are now going to be part of "BU2"). Plus, Conger is now a member of PSRA. If PRO wants to use him in MLS, he should be treated like any other trialist. The fact that there is a quirk where he is likely not to be here in 2023 and going forward is something PRO needs to account for--not PSRA. It's one thing to help accommodate Conger, as PSRA has clearly done. It's another to just rip up the CBA and not have it matter for one special case.
There seems to be one other factor that's being left out. It seems like this is largely being driven because of COVID restrictions back home for Conger. I think everyone has come to understand that over the last 2 years some weird things are happening and we have to roll with it a bit.
Not largely, pretty much 100%. NZ is still nearly shut down. There are mandatory FIFA events and seminars he has to attend between now and the WC. Staying in NZ would have almost guaranteed he doesn't attend the WC. https://travel.state.gov/content/tr...l-Country-Information-Pages/NewZealand.html#/
@MassachusettsRef I assume the delayed announcements for assignments due to COVID protocol remains in effect for the start of the season?
If he is a member of PSRA, does he have to be a trialist and take a trial it’s slot? Could PRO hire him and lighten the load on some of the more senior guys? But, my big question is why is this being discussed in a 2021 retirement thread and not a 2022 MLS Season Referee Thread?!?
We've covered the departures and additions in here. At this point we're just waiting to make the Week 1 thread once the first assignments come out.
I think there's some understandable confusion here. PSRA is an association. Being a member of PSRA does not mean you are in the union or "bargaining unit" (BU). A "trialist" is someone who gets to officiate in MLS while not being in the BU; essentially it is allowing the employer to test non-employees before they hire them. Most trialists are already PSRA members because they have chosen to freely join the association before making it to MLS. Now that the bargaining unit for NWSL and USL exists ("BU2"), that "most" might turn to "all." So Conger is now a PSRA member, but not a BU member. You are not a BU member until you are hired by PRO. Well, from my perspective it is because Conger isn't reffing in MLS yet (or maybe at all). Felt kind of weird to start a season thread with a "hey, this guy might be reffing in the league but maybe not."