More Details About Europa League's Additional Referees Experiment

UEFA has acknowledged that their trial of using two additional Assistant Referees in the Europa League will in fact make it a six-man team of match officials (and not five).

Therefore, all 144 Europa League group games will be officiated by six match officials. Two additional ARs, who will take up positions alongside each goal behind the goal line, will join the usual four-man team of match officials.

According to FIFA and UEFA:

The additional ARs will be positioned on the opposite side of the goal from the AR – to the left when viewed from the centre circle. Using a radio communication system to relay their recommendations to the Referee but without flags, additional ARs will generally remain behind the goalline but may enter the penalty area when play moves towards the other end of the pitch so as to keep up with the action.

[Additional AR standing behind the goal line]

Here are some of my thoughts:

1) Will this trial of using additional ARs only be applied to Europa League group games? What about the knockout stages starting from the round of 32 teams leading to the final? It is not made clear.

2) FIFA and UEFA have stated: "Technical experts appointed by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) will monitor developments throughout in order to assess the impact the two additional ARs have on the game and to determine whether they enhance the officials' control of the match. The conclusions will later be presented to the IFAB for consideration."

How is this trial assessed? How will "technical experts" assess the impact of the additional ARs? If at the end of the season the methods and results of the trial are not made transparent and publicly available, then there will be questions and much doubt about the trial.

3) I assume that there will be meaningful comparisons made, so that there is a reference point and justification for using or not using the new refereeing system of additional ARs (at the highest levels). What meaningful comparisons will be made? Will it be between Europa League group matches and the previous seasons' UEFA Cup group matches? Will it be between Europa League group matches and the Champions League group matches? Will it be a comparision of the number of cautions and red cards issued in matches with and without additional ARs?

4) It is clear that the higher echelons of FIFA and UEFA are hesitant (afraid almost) to use technology. Regardless of what everyone thinks about video and goal-line technology, a more definitive trial would have been to simultaneously assess the current system of four match officials with using addtional ARs and also with using technology.

Wouldn't the following hypothetical statement by FIFA and UEFA be an improvement?
"Technical experts appointed by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) will monitor developments throughout to assess the impact the two additional ARs [and also the impact of video technology including Hawk-Eye] have on the game and to determine whether they enhance the officials' control of the match. The conclusions [comparing three different refereeing systems] will later be presented to the IFAB for consideration [and released to the public]."

5) Finally, how will all this help the grass-roots level of the game? In most countries, there is a shortage of referees so it is obvious that implementing additional ARs will not be practical (and is limited only to the highest levels). Relatively speaking, ARs do not get much physical activity on the touch lines (high-tempo matches with fit players aside), so imagine what standing behind the goal line would mean. Therefore, referees involved in the amateur game need better assistance not additional assistant refereees.


Related Posts
UEFA Enforces “Deceiving the Referee” Charge
New Europa League will Trial "Five" Match Officials
Do Referees Need Additional Help to Catch Divers?

Reference
Two extra pairs of eyes for referee teams
UEFA President hails UEFA Europa League

2009 is Asian Referees' Year

In recognising the importance of referees, the Asian Football Confederation has designated 2009 as Asian Referees' Year. In addition, Tuesday 1 September 2009 was also the first-ever Asian Referees Day. A Green Card, issued on September 1, promotes fair play and care for the environment.


Yousuf Al-Serkal, Chairman of the AFC Referees Committee, said: “AFC is the only confederation to recognise the efforts of referees in such a way and I urge all Member Associations to organise relevant activities.”

He acknowledged Asia’s glorious refereeing history and said: “The referees’ scene in Asia today has completed transformed and the referees now can inspire the next generation of referees.”


References
AFC celebrates Asian Referees Day
Asia’s glorious refereeing saga

UEFA Bans Eduardo for Two Matches

UEFA's control and disciplinary body met on 1 September and subsequently decided to ban Eduardo da Silva of Arsenal FC for two matches in the Champions League competition. Eduardo is charged with "deceiving the referee" (i.e. simulation).

Arsenal have three days to appeal against UEFA's decision.


Related Post
UEFA Enforces “Deceiving the Referee” Charge

Reference
Uefa bans Eduardo for two matches

Do Referees Need Additional Help to Catch Divers?

"The time is now" for some kind of additional assistance to be given to referees ... at least at the highest levels of football and in the professional game. This is according to Sir Alex Ferguson, manager of Manchester United, who has weighed in on Arsenal striker Eduardo da Silva's dive that is regarded as "deceiving the referee".

The long-time debate about helping referees – whether through technology or extra officials – will not go away. Ferguson said:

"For the last decade there has just been talk. Nothing has been done. The time is now. Michel Platini [President of UEFA] has his own views about bringing in extra human assistance with additional referees and assistants but most people in the game think technology should be used."

"Whatever the debate it should lead to something more positive in terms of helping referees in situations like Wednesday night [Arsenal vs Celtic, Champions League group qualifier]. There is no question that the speed of the game means technology or additional assistance should be used."

I have often wondered what are Referees' views on this debate? Referees are either not asked for their opinions, or are not quoted by the media, or are simply too diplomatic to say anything either way!


Related Post
UEFA Enforces “Deceiving the Referee” Charge

Reference
Sir Alex Ferguson says referees need additional help to catch divers (Guardian)

Indecisive Referee in Israel's Premier League

This bizarre incident happened on the evening of 22 August 2009 in the Israel Premier League between Maccabi Tel Aviv and Bnei Sakhnin.



The incident here shows that the assistant referee (AR) did not signal for offside. It is very tight but with the benefit of video replays it appears that one of the players (the yellow player who received and passed the ball on to the goalscorer) was offside. However normally in these situations, the Referee cannot do anything but trust his AR. How can the Referee do otherwise? The Referee should only be concerned with his AR’s view of things (unless the Referee does not feel comfortable with his AR, in which case the Referee can ask for a replacement AR). In addition, at the top levels of football, referees associations will always perform post-match analysis to see whether decisions were correct or not. Post-match analysis is always done with the objective of maintaining and improving the performance of match officials, and to help minimize potential errors in future matches.

Hence in this case, the Referee was justified to signal that a goal has been scored. Then, from what can be gathered from the video, strange things happened. First, even though the AR did not raise his flag for offside, the Referee changes his initial decision and indicates offside. Then, the Referee asked the 4th Official to consult with him and the AR. But rather than give his view to the Referee, the 4th Official is more concerned with signaling for a substitution. So the referee changes his mind again and indicates that he is awarding a goal. The Referee goes promptly to the centre circle. Despite the Referee requesting for the ball to be placed in the centre circle, no ball appears. Mayhem ensues. The Referee walks back to the touch line and again consults his AR and the 4th Official. This time, the 4th Official appears to tell the referee that it was offside (but how does the 4th Official know this?), so the Referee once again changes his mind and indicates offside. Not once did the AR raise his flag to indicate offside (from the video clip). It therefore appears that the Referee inexplicably took the 4th Official’s assessment and disregarded the AR’s. What are the factors that contributed to the Referee's indecisiveness?

We must remember that with the benefit of video replays it is always easier and less stressful to assess incidents. It is always more difficult and extra stressful to decide in the heat of the moment. Referees do not have the benefit of video replays; they only have one take of the incident in real time and then have to make a quick assessment and be decisive. If a Referee shows repeated indecisiveness, then credibility is likely to be lost.

Note: Did anyone notice, at the beginning and end of the clip, when the ball is in play at the far end (left) of the pitch, that there are no fans at that section of the stadium? All the fans seem to be concentrated at only one end of the stadium.

Reference: (Hebrew) Incident Keinan, Maccabi Tel Aviv 3:1 Bnei Sakhnin Israel Premier League (YouTube)

UEFA Enforces “Deceiving the Referee” Charge

Following a Champions League qualifying game between Arsenal and Celtic on Wednesday 26 August 2009 where Arsenal striker Eduardo da Silva appeared to dive to win a penalty, UEFA decided to use video evidence to examine the incident. Subsequently, UEFA has charged Eduardo for "deceiving the referee" (i.e. simulation). He faces a two-match ban when the UEFA control and disciplinary body meets on 1 September 2009.



The charge is based on Article 10, paragraph 1c of the UEFA disciplinary regulations (misconduct of players) which states:

"Players may be suspended for two competition matches, or for a specified period, for acting with the obvious intent to cause any match official to make an incorrect decision or supporting his error of judgment and thereby causing him to make an incorrect decision."

This case has highlighted again the debate about whether video evidence and technology should be used (at least at the highest levels of professional football), or whether human fallibility should be embraced by the professional game. Does anyone have any comments?

There is also the delicate matter of consistency. We have seen that there are regulations that do not allow Match Review Panels to review incidents that have already been addressed by the referee (as in the recent case involving Robbie Fowler), and then there are regulations that do allow incidents to be reviewed even though the referee has decided on the incident (Eduardo's case).


Related Posts
Violent Conduct by Nemanja Vidic?
Violent Conduct by Robbie Fowler
New Europa League will Trial "Five" Match Officials

References
Wenger angry at Eduardo charge (BBC Sport)
Arsenal VS Celtic 3-1 (YouTube)
UEFA President hails UEFA Europa League

Violent Conduct by Nemanja Vidic?

In contrast to Robbie Fowler's violent conduct that was acknowledged during the match by the referee and therefore prevented any official match review, here's a recent incident of violent conduct that did escape the referee's attention and therefore may be reviewed. The incident happened during the match between Wigan Athletic and Manchester United on Saturday 22 August 2009.


[Referee Howard Webb's physical man management skills]

It was reported 23 August 2009 (a day after the match) that:

Manchester United centre back Nemanja Vidic is facing trial by TV after appearing to slap Wigan centre forward Hugo Rodallega. Tempers flared when the striker clattered into United keeper Ben Foster in an attempt to win the ball.

Last night the FA confirmed that they will look at the incident and Vidic could face a three-match ban.

As a result, Howard Webb the match referee was asked by the FA to give his view. After reviewing the replay of the incident, Webb has given Vidic the benefit of the doubt (innocent until proven guilty).

Webb reported that he had been following the play and had not noticed the two players come together but he also felt the television pictures were inconclusive and could not say he was certain it was a deliberate offence.

Referees like to be as certain as they can when giving decisions. Even a non-decision is a decision!


References
Vidic is left facing trial by television over Rodallega slap (Daily Mail)
Nemanja Vidic escapes punishment over Hugo Rodallega clash (Guardian)