Referee Fitness Test Standards Comparison History
Back in mid 2025 an announcement was made in regards to the fitness tests for US Soccer Referees.
The test in terms of the sprints, high intensity run, distance, and times, per each referee category, have remained the same so it is not a new test, however the only change that was made is that it is moving to a different surface. Instead of it being on a track - it will now be administered on a turf field or natural grass field, making it more realistic of a match. The referee will now run from one end of the field to the other - measuring 75 meters, with a 25 meter recovery walk. Also, they now must make it to the end of the 25-meter walk, be completely stopped at the line and turned ready to run back up the field to the other 75m marker, followed by another 25-meter recovery, this will be done until all 40 Intervals are completed.
I have currently run this test a number of times and have noted that it is a little more difficult than on a track. Reason being is the turf/grass surface, coming to a complete stop and turning. The natural grass or turf doesn’t provide the same responsiveness as a standard track - this means it requires more muscle activation and force to be used by the athlete, requiring more effort/energy. Also, with the starting and stopping at the end of the 25m recovery walk/jog and beginning of the next 75m interval - referees will now be applying more force to move an object of mass that is starting from a stopped position and will need to get up to the correct speed/pace faster, also utilizing more energy.
If we look back at previous referee fitness tests thoughout the years, there has been unique changes, and the main reason for this is because of the development of the modern game, which requires high speed running, repeated sprint ability, and great aerobic endurance.
Lets start with Pre-1995, the fitness test consisted of
12 minute timed run (Cooper test), 2 -50m runs, and 2 -200m runs - run alteration and a 4x10m agility test, and done in this order.
From 1995-2001
2 -50m runs and a 12 minute timed (Cooper test), and done in this order
Post 2001 - 2006
12 minute timed run (Cooper test), and 2 50m runs and 2-200m runs in alteration, but done in this order
2006 - 2014/2015
6-40m sprints and a 150m run followed by a 50m recovery walk x 20.
2015 - 2025
6 -40m sprints and 75m run followed by a 25m recovery walk x 40, completed on a track
The changing of the test throughout the years has been based upon the demands of the modern game and referees are expected keep pace with changes, and be as fit or fitter than the players on the field, and last 120+ minutes of a match if need be.
If we look at Pre-1995 - 2006 the runs were based upon upon how far a referee could run in the 12 minutes, the standard was always 2 miles in 12 minutes or better. The 12 min timed run (Cooper test) measures the referees aerobic fitness and VO2 Max; also the 50m and 200meter runs measured the referees sprint capacity, speed endurance, as well as heart rate recovery.
After having this standard of referee fitness for almost 15 years, and the game becoming faster; the tests had to adjust. Which is why in 2006 the standards switched to the Repeated Sprint Ability and the 150/50 interval run.
Less than 10 years later the standard had to switch again, keeping the 40m repeated sprint ability test. However, the high intensity intervals moved from the 150m run and 50m to a 75m run and 25m recovery. If you think about it basically it was a cut of the 150 and 50 in half and made two more intervals and split the time; making it 4 intervals instead of the 2.
The 150/50 test measured how well an athlete could recover after running 150m with a 50m walk/jog, if the referees were training correctly they would recover, and repeat the same 150m again. In essence this test measured the athletes aerobic endurance but also measured heart rate recovery.
When the test then shifted to the 75m/25m, it also shifted in terms of what it measured. The repeated sprinting ability remained; however now with the addition of 2 shorter intervals being added to make 4 intervals per lap. By doing this it had a different effect on the athletes. The intervals measure endurance but a different form, called speed endurance or high speed running. The ability to get up to speed and maintain that speed over a set distance with minimal recovery and then repeat. Also, this test also measures the athlete’s lactate threshold and how much they can tolerate before the end; or if they can’t tolerate it, resulting in a potential fail.
Athletes and trainers need to have an idea of where the lactate threshold sits per athlete. This important measurement can aid the athlete and learn how to train accordingly and in-turn become fitter and pass the fitness test. In undertrained/deconditioned athletes the lactate threshold will be lower in terms of VO2 Max; meaning the lactate may start being produced at 50-60% of that athletes VO2 Max. In trained athletes the lactate threshold can sit higher anywhere from 80-95%.
There are ways to get a true lactate threshold measurement by either doing a VO2max test or through lactate threshold testing, which can be pricey, but very accurate, and will need to be measured every so often. A cost efficient option but maybe not as accurate but more of a guess, a wearable data device - i.e. Polar, Garmin, Apple Watch. Based upon your training with these devices and their metrics that they use to analyze, will help guide you come to specific number. Back in 2019 I had my VO2Max and Lactate threshold measured - My VO2 Max score was 63 and Anaerobic Threshold sat at 179 beat per min. These test provided great feedback and I was able to maximize my training.
As we can see over the years the fitness tests have changed significantly and met the demands of the modern game. Referees will need to adjust their training and lifestyle choices to meet these fitness requirements for not only testing but for the matches they will be working. Athletes can do their own sports performance testing through a reliable source, track their own data for best training strategies, but must be able to interpret those numbers correctly to get the most out of the training and continue to get better conditioned.