UEFA hubris

During the first week of the tournament, I felt that the referees were being unfairly criticised. Their calls were technically correct, and actually allowed flow to the game. Commentators were mostly wrong about the nature of the calls the referee were making, but a worrying trend regarding cautions started to creep into view. And as World Cup 2006 continues, it's become quite clear that the story of THIS Cup is the officiating.

There have been missed calls, disallowed goals, erroneous penalties, way too many send offs, and a very definite lack of dealing with players except through cards. Worse, and this one I cannot prove, there is at least the perception of a bias against the non-traditional powers. The stats show less fouls for the Englands, Brazils and Argentinas than for the Togos, Japans, et al.

There is, however, a delicious bit of irony in all this. During and after the 2002 Japorea tournament, there was an enormous hue and cry about substandard referees being allowed to officiate games beyond their abilities. Referees from CAF, AFC and CONCACAF, they argued, are not accustomed to working such pivotal matches.

Who are "they"? Officials from UEFA federations, for the most part. The snobbery inherent in these arguments was disgusting. After all, American referees had particularly distinguished themselves in three of the previous four tournaments. The hubris was, well, hubristic.

Where was the referee from that for the first time allowed a player to be cautioned three times? England. And the referee that issued a staggering 16 cautions, a World Cup record four send-offs and only 25 total fouls? Russia. How about the referee that incorrectly sent off an Italian player while whistling a game-deadening forty-three fouls (or nearly one ever other minute)? Yup, UEFA ref, from Spain.

And on and on and on. Records have already been set for total number of cautions and send-offs, and we still have 10 games left! There has been little man-management in evidence. The body language of most of these officials is very confrontational, dictatorial even. Cards are presented by thrusting them into players' faces, rather than calmly being presented. These are basic mechanics that are taught to entry-level referees.

It is in summation better a guide for how not to officiate a game rather than a showcase demonstrating the best ways to manage a game.

Obviously it's not just European referees at fault -- it was an American 4th official, after all, who also allowed a player to stay on with two cautions. But since UEFA referees are being given the lion's share of the pivotal matches, they are expected to set the standard. Net result? They haven't proven themselves to be any better than referees from other confederations. Having watched many a match in many of the major European leagues, and qualifiers for the Euro championship and this World Cup, I can say I'm not in the least surprised.

It's the man that makes the referee....