No female referees in MLS: a referee assessor speaks

Kicking Back comments: For some time now I have been following LE's work at the Examiner and have enjoyed her articles. The other week the Examiner caught up with me and I shared a few candid thoughts about women referees in todays professional and international game as well as some thoughts about MLS refereeing and the use of technology.

As the interview is intended to demonstrate, I very clearly believe that women referees are just as capable as men. Success in any referee depends on their ability to manage a match both through the laws and through their personality. Anyone who is able to do so will succeed in such a role.

While there are very few women currently employed in (men's) professional league matches, and I can not think of any in recent (men's) international matches, I opine that doing so, and therefore challenging the thinking of everyone involved, may not be such a bad thing. I do recognize however that doing so may run against social constructs and in result, may decrease the entertainment value of THE game for some.

Just one persons opinion ... but please read on and comment away ...

All comments are welcome, and I will answer them all.

No female referees in MLS: a referee assessor speaks

As part of an interview with former MLS referee and current state assessor Peter Kokolski about officiating in MLS in 2011, we discussed the absence of women officials in the North American league. Kokolski refereed in MLS for eight years. Kokolski is not affiliated with U.S. Soccer and his opinions are his alone based on many years working with U.S. Soccer. He regularly shares information and thoughts about officiating in his blog Kicking Back. In a separate story, Kokolski explains MLS referee directives to manage with personality in 2011. ...

See the full story here from LE courtesy of the National Soccer Examiner.

2014 and 2022 Media rights going (in part) to Al Jazeera

FIFA Signs Rights Agreement With Al Jazeera

Football's world governing body has announced that it has extended its Middle East and North Africa broadcast rights agreement with Qatar-based broadcaster Al Jazeera to cover the 2018 and 2022 World Cup football tournaments. ...

See the full story here, courtesy of VOANews.

BBC called "unpatriotic"

For the "you have to be kidding" file, Andy Anson, the now 2018 bid chief for England (Lord Triesman stepped down after accusing Spanish and Russian football federations of conspiring in bribery, and there was this one too of Sir Dave Richards in 2009) called the BBC unpatriotic. Specifically, regarding the timing of airing the program detailing FIFA's corruption:

To do it the week before the vote - I don't think think it's patriotic.

I am still admittedly confused as it was this investigation that led to the FIFA ethics probe, where it is likely that someone will be found to have done something unethical.

Why is it the BBC's fault they legitimately have found a story and are running with it? I would think that everyone would want to hear about vote fixing and collusion between national bodies of this type.

While England (note not the UK as the venues are for England only), has something to lose, I would imagine so to does Anson.

Take a look here, where in 1994 Alan Rothenberg landed a $3 million bonus for getting the 1994 World Cup in the black (way in the black actually). While admittedly this was an operation role it stands to reason there is a pay day here for some folks. Just take a look at some of the numbers ... and remember this was 16 years ago. Adjusting for inflation, that is about $4.3 million today. Not bad.

Any bets on what Anson is getting? I have no idea, but "for Queen and Country" does not pass the sniff test to me.

Either way, as I have stated before, I support the BBC role in this provided they portrait an accurate picture of what is going on.

If FIFA is petty enough to take out any bad press they get on England, shame on them.