Soccer: Keeping an eye on the referee

When the furore about Lord Triesman and Melissa Jacobs has died down, one nagging question will remain. Triesman lost his job this week over comments he made in a private conversation to Jacobs, who sold a recording of the comments to the Mail on Sunday.

The chairman of the English FA suggested a conspiracy was underway to bribe referees at the World Cup.

When you see someone sent off during the tournament, or a linesman flags for offside, you might find yourself wondering: are the lusting Lord's allegations feasible?

The prospect of Spain taking an envelope or two of Russian roubles to bribe referees, as Triesman suggested, seems far-fetched.

Were they minded to cheat - there is no evidence, and given the quality of Spain's players there seems little need - the Spanish FA has plenty of cash, and considerable influence within Fifa's Referees Committee.

But let's pose the question: would it be possible to nobble the ref?

There is a history of suspicion. In 1934, Benito Mussolini, Italy's fascist ruler, seems to have spent much time with referees before his team's matches and may have influenced them.

Two of the men who refereed Italy's matches in that tournament were suspended and beaten opponents cried foul.

The sight of the 28-year Swedish official Ivan Eklind, and his linesmen, giving Il Duce the fascist salute before the final is certainly unsettling. But in that match, the Czechs took the lead with 19 minutes to go, then hit a post before Italy levelled, without controversy, in the 81st minute, which suggests Eklind would have to have been cutting it fine.

Nearly 70 years later, it was the Italians complaining, convinced Ecuadorean Byron Moreno had fixed their 2002 World Cup defeat by South Korea under orders from Fifa.

COACH Giovanni Trapattoni was among those hinting that the organisers wanted the joint hosts to remain in the competition. Italy had a goal wrongly disallowed for offside, and Francesco Totti harshly sent off.

A year later, Moreno retired after being twice suspended in his home country following strange goings-on in domestic games.

When Spain were knocked out by South Korea in the next round, having also had a goal disallowed, conspiracy theorists were convinced. But it is still hard to square with the fact that Italy led with two minutes left, and even after Seol Ki-hyeon levelled, Italy's Christian Vieri missed an open goal.

South American countries alleged a European conspiracy in 1966. First the holders, Brazil, were brutally kicked out of the World Cup, with English and German referees overseeing their three games.

In the quarter-finals, a German referee dismissed an Argentine against England, and an English referee sent off two Uruguayans against West Germany. As for the final, and Geoff Hurst's shot that did, or did not, cross the line, let's not go there. No, let's. At Wembley, as in Rome and Seoul, as in previous tournaments from Buenos Aires to Valencia, officials favoured the hosts.

This can usually be put down to human nature, from the inevitable swaying of opinion that 100,000 voices can bring, or a sense of self-preservation; in the first final, in 1930, the well-regarded Belgian referee John Langenus demanded protection and planned a swift escape route afterwards to his ship.

These days referees can reasonably assume that, at a World Cup at least, they are not going to be assaulted by supporters. Each referee will have a bodyguard stationed outside his hotel door before matches and no outside calls are allowed to their room.

This is not, however, to protect them from fans - but from match-fixers.

The 90 officials, 30 referees and their assistants, will be billeted in a a hotel devoted, possibly entirely, to them. This is partly so they can develop a bond to help one another cope with the pressures of the tournament, partly so they can be briefed and debriefed daily - and so no one can compromise them.

To that end, referees' pay has also gone up from £11,500 in 2002, to £23,000 in 2006, and now to £30,000 ($62,918) for this tournament. The logic, slightly cloudy, is that the more they earn, the less likely they may be to be swayed by stuffed envelopes.

It is, though, relatively small beer compared to the potential profits to be made by match-fixers. In the German scandal of 2005, disgraced referee Robert Hoyzer was paid A$67,000 to manipulate cup and lower league matches by a Croatian ring.

The fixers were motivated by the profits that could be made through gambling on rigged matches. This is the main concern for soccer authorities today.

EARLIER this year, a Bosnian referee was banned for his alleged part in a match-fixing ring which operated in nine countries in central and eastern Europe, fixing matches in the early rounds of the Champions League and Europa League.

The fixers are thought to have earned A$10 million ($12 million) from bookmakers in Europe and Asia, primarily China. But while match-fixing appears to be on the rise, there is reason to think the World Cup will be immune because it is so closely scrutinised. Referees, operating at the pinnacle of their career, are also less likely to be subverted.

Fifa's problem is that poor decisions raise the spectre of fixing even when it has not occurred. It has thus spent much time and money raising standards.

England will be represented by Howard Webb and assistants, Darren Cann and Michael Mullarkey. Webb is not the best referee in England - Mark Clattenburg, Chris Foy or Martin Atkinson all have better claims - but he was when the provisional 54-man list was drawn up in 2007.

There are several reasons such an early selection is made. The intervening three years give Fifa time to weed out weaker referees, iron out the cultural differences in the way referees from different regions officiate (probably the real reason South American players had problems with European referees in 1966), prepare them for the pressures (the officials have dedicated sports psychologists) and raise the level of those from minor nations.

Politics means referees have to be chosen from across Fifa's confederations.

The 30 include 10 from Europe, six from South America, four each from Asia, Africa and Concacaf (North and Central America and the Caribbean), and two from Oceania.

The latter pair are both from New Zealand - since Australia moved to the Asian Confederation the Kiwis are the only serious nation left in Oceania. How good the Kiwis, a teacher and a naval officer, are remains to be seen.

There have been some good referees from minor nations; to judge from his performance in the Algeria/Egypt World Cup play-off, Eddy Maillet, from the Seychelles, is one.

However, it is reasonable to suggest officials with plenty of experience in the major leagues are going to be better than those without, as the hapless Tom Henning Ovrebro demonstrated at Stamford Bridge last season. Didier Drogba was not the only one suggesting, "It's a disgrace."

More poignantly for English fans, how experienced was Ali Ben Nasser, the Tunisian who failed to spot the "Hand of God" goal?

It is possible referees will be bought at this World Cup; it is possible some have been intimidated by gambling-ring match-fixers; it is possible some may subconsciously favour Spain, knowing the referees' boss is Spanish.

But it is far more likely strange decisions - and there will be some, of that we can assured - will be no more sinister than incompetent.

As Swiss ref Massimo Busacca, a candidate for this year's final, once said: "I am not God, I make mistakes."

The Independent