World Cup Refereeing Telegram - Team 33 is ready

Wednesday was the day. Massimo Busacca and his colleagues in FIFA's referee committee have defined the match officials who will take charge of the 64 matches in Brazil. Not only we but specially the 52 pre-selected World Cup referees have excitedly awaited that list for months - their hopes and dreams have partly come true, but have partly been disappointed as well - the mere sharpness of professional sports.

The nominations for the World Cup have surely aroused a mixed echo by meeting joy, approval, astonishment and maybe also disapproval. It is undoubtfully certain though that all officials are very good referees and assistant referees in their respective leagues and confederations, counting to the best of the best, as Busacca tends to repeat. For the Suisse, I have to express all my respect: I would not have liked to change with him and his colleagues. The choice has been tremendous difficult; the differences between the officials have been marginally thin. And like for every football coach, such a vital decision is the toughest and most far-reaching one to take, leaving at home some of his protégés. Inspite of my joy for the referees and assistant referees nominated, some things should be said after this selection though.

First of all, the number of referees is surely surprising. The previous news about 10+1 referee teams for UEFA and 6+1 teams for CONMEBOL have proven to be wrong. Or they were subject to a change at the meeting and because of the World Cup drawing made last December. The committee might have been confronted with political pressure from the minor confederations who maybe demanded five referees. Thus, AFC got 4+1 which reflects the great development in referee education in this zone and is a logical consequence after World Cup 2010. CAF and CONCACAF only got three main referee trios, but also two support duos. Actually nobody thought of the idea of "3+2" before. It is surely a tactically sensible decision taken by Busacca. While it satisfies the political necessities, it still mirrors the quality of refereeing in a decent manner. However, this also meant that UEFA and CONMEBOL got one place less than expected respectively (9+1 and 5+1). In UEFA's case, FIFA might have drawn this conclusion due to the drawing: in the group stage, there are only 19 matches where UEFA referees are possible without breaking the confederation neutrality rule. Appointing ten referees would have meant that not every official could have got two matches and, in case of nine referees with two matches and one referee with only one match, that referees from other confederations could not take charge of some of these 19 matches. With only nine UEFA referees, FIFA can be a bit more flexible.

As already mentioned, FIFA has appointed eight support duos mostly consisting of a pre-selected referee and his pre-selected AR1. Practically, this is sensible, too. These duos can travel to the matches and support the referee teams as fourth and fifth officials. Because of Brazil's size and climate conditions, it is very useful to have a big pool of standby officials who can do this job. The distances between the cities are partly very large, so that appointing referees, who are heading active trios, could be inefficient and leading to bad performances. The eight support duos could attend six matches in the group stage. 

There are only two problems. First, Busacca and co. have frequently emphasized that 52 referee teams were pre-selected and underwent all the seminars, tests and matches ahead the final tournament together. For example, Svein Moen, Kim Haglund and Frank Andås are forming a team for several years. While Moen and Haglund have been appointed, Andås has to stay at home - just because he is formally the AR2. For my taste, that's unfair. And second, FIFA made plenty of political moves in these support duos to be dealt with later.

Concerning the names, most of them were surely expected and deserve to be in Brazil. Specially in Asia, FIFA has in my opinion proven a good feeling and made sensible choices. 

In the CONCACAF zone, the biggest surprise certainly is that Mexican Roberto García has to stay at home. His performances at FIFA tournaments have shown that he is actually a good referee, maybe even the best Mexican referee. Nonetheless, his countryman Rodríguez received a World Cup call-up, probably due to his experience. Both officials had fitness problems in the past, so that cannot be the basic reason. García's assistant referees Camargo and Morín count to the best of North- and Central America, but have not been selected either. That's a loss of quality. I am happy for Roberto Moreno though whose good performances over many years have been finally rewarded. World Cup 2014 will finish his career, as he had already announced before the names was announced. Walter López' very likely benefitted from Carlos Batres, who was able to make some pressure in the committee. My feeling is that Batres could have formed a stronger CONCACAF team than he has done.

Personally, I believe that Noumandiez Doue's selection is very risky and de facto wrong. I hope he will disabuse me. 

The five South American referees were sensibly chosen as well. Néstor Pitana has been the safer Argentine candidate compared to Diego Abal. It is quite remarkable that Antonio Arias has to stay at home and that he did not profit from his countryman Carlos Alarcón who is one of the responsible officers in FIFA's committee. They splitted the support duo in a Peruvian part (Carrillo) and a Paraguayan part (Aquino) - of course a (geo-)political move and nothing else.

But now to Europe. The UEFA selection is clearly Pierluigi Collina's handwriting. Carlos Velasco Carballo has prevailed over Alberto Undiano Mallenco which reflects the trend within UEFA since Collina is heading the committee. Serbian Milorad Mažić has been nominated after his extremely positive development in UEFA, while his FIFA performances have not been great. After only six months in UEFA's Elite Group, he is a main referee. I have rarely seen such a high flyer. Surely, Collina has lobbied for him being impressed by the Serbian's performances. The referee teams who were subject to interferences by Collina (Thomson's, Skomina's, Kassai's) have not been appointed. It is also remarkable that France does not have a referee at the World Cup, which last happened in 1974 and is again a device of the poor development in French refereeing. At least here, there were no politics.

When reading the list, the biggest surprise was surely the absence of Viktor Kassai of Hungary. Having been very good at World Cup 2010 and having well performed in Champions League final 2011 as a very young referee, there was a certain decrease in his performances. He and specially his team-mates made way too many mistakes and are now paying for that. However, Kassai's current shape is actually quite good. FIFA stated: "The referees selected for the World Cup in Brazil have been chosen based especially on their personality and their quality in football understanding by being able to read the game and the teams’ tactical approaches towards each game." Well. Why has Kassai to stay at home then? It is actually unbelievable how UEFA and FIFA have managed to burn the probably most talented young European referee. He got too much too early and is now not receiving the needed trust in his abilities. Kassai at his best is miles better than several other officials who have been selected. At the end leaving him at home is of course justified if you argue with the performance principle based on the last months and on the circumstance that the entire team have to function properly, what the Hungarian team did not do. Therefore I can understand the decision, but am quite wistful knowing that with Kassai, a real match manager has got lost. Another approach might be that Eastern Europe was only able to send one referee to the World Cup, knowing that geopolitics still exist in FIFA officiating, even if Scandinavia having got two referees contradicts that a bit. As said in the prediction posts, Skomina stumbled over his play-off. But even in case of a good performance, I believe he would not have been selected - if the theory with regard to geopolitics is true, his chances against Kassai and Mažić were quite small. 

Politics still prevail over the performance principle, even if not everywhere. UEFA is maybe one exception with some limitations. But concentrating on CAF and CONCACAF, it becomes clear that politics have not been totally abandoned when selecting the referees and assistant referees. 

Néant Alioum did not manage to attend the World Cup as main referee. He is very young and can learn from his first World Cup experiences with regard to 2018. But his assistant referee 1, Evarist Menkouande, actually counts as the best African assistant referee. Therefore, based on performance principle and quality, he replaced Angesom Ogbamariam of Eritrea (a very good assistant, too) in Bakary Gassama's team. He could have also replaced the AR2, Felicien Kabanda, who was recently injured. But no, he replaced Ogbamariam. Knowing that Kabanda is from Rwanda and that former Rwandan World Cup assistant referee Celestin Ntagungira is in FIFA's referee committee, it should become clear why Kabanda stays in Gassama's team. Removing Menkouande from Alioum's side could have meant that Peter Edibi, Alioum's AR2, will complete the support duo headed by Alioum. But no. Neither Edibi, nor Ogbamariam do so. But Djibril Camara does. The young Senegalese is very talented and can look forward to further World Cups in 2018 etc. Since Badara Diatta has not been chosen, Camara would have had to stay at home. In the committee, Badara Sene from Senegal has also something to say. One does not have to see relations between some committee members and those moves on the list, if one does not want to. You can surely also argue that Edibi and Ogbamariam are quite old and would not have any prospect for 2018 so that their presence in the support duos would not have benefits in the future.
In Brazil, AR1 Alessandro Rocha De Matos was replaced for political reasons. Marcelo Van Gasse has been appointed instead. A hard decision for Rocha, who has mostly performed flawlessly and assisted in many FIFA matches.

Another example for politics is visible in one CONCACAF support duo. Roberto Moreno will be accompanied by assistant referee Eric Boria of the United States. Originally, Boria was pre-selected in Jair Marrufo's team along with Jamaican Ricardo Morgan. Moreno was accompanied by Daniel Williamson of Panama and Keytzel Corrales of Nicaragua. So why was Boria chosen and not one of them? ...

You see, this long awaited World Cup list of team 33 was created following a decision process that was surely hard to conduct for the committee and Busacca. Besides, it seems as if the performance principle had played a bigger role for the selection than in previous World Cups. But this cannot belie that politics have still existed.

We should keep the fingers crossed for good performances and a low ratio of mistakes, knowing that mistakes will be made. Personally I cannot wait until the 20th World Cup will commence!