There are a few things that I really don't like about this forum. Not the worst, but certainly the most common is the use of the term "Center Referee." I hate that. Where did it come from? He's not always in the center of the field. In fact most of the time he's not in the center of the field. Why do we have to write "CR?" Can't we just write "R". Isn't that different enough from "AR?' There is the Referee, and there are the Assistant Referees. If you want to use a generic term, use "Officials". We don't have a 4th Referee.
The thing I hate about this forum is the flames, taunts, and general belittling of lesser refs. It's why I don't post much here, I mostly read. If I want advice about a match that I screwed up, I write to asktheref.com.
I don't see much belittling the lesser refs. I do see a lot of bickering among very experienced refs. My main beef is that there are some who love to argue in an obtuse fashion, so that very clear cut decisions become cloudy for the lesser experienced ref. That having been said, overall this Board is infinitely more informative than asktheref. You just have to wade through some tiresome bullshit.
I'm largely with you and don't use CR. But it isn't one I get too worried about, as I have other windmills I'd rather tilt at. I think the genesis of Center Referee and thus CR, was a byproduct of dropping linesman in favor of Assistant Referee -- which was a good thing (albeit a bit Orwellian) in elevating the image of those on the touch line holding flags. But that good thing made Referee ambiguous to some, so to be sure everyone knew they meant the one holding the whistle, people started saying Center Referee.
You might have just proved his point. I gave up on the Ref-L mailing list for the same reason. Very little tolerance for beginners' mistakes. Regrettable, because talking about our mistakes it really the best way to improve.
Honestly, I don't think there is enough belittling of lesser refs here. Most refs around here will tell you in the abstract that you shouldn't give cards to young kids. But when I gave a DOGSO-F red in a U11 game, the responses were mostly supportive. I don't get that.
I'm definitely a "lesser ref" - just a Grade 8 that exclusively does youth games (U9-U16, occasionally a U19 AR) and only about 100-110 games annually. I don't feel like I'm ever belittled.
The only problem I see has been the recent influx of unproductive fan-based bickering about calls. I appreciate the fact that Mass and the other moderators have tried to shut that down. We all wear multiple hats - referee, fan, coach, parent, player, etc. We are also all adults (I think) and need to remember what this forum is for and if our perspective of the moment is not conducive to the goals of the forum to express ourselves in the appropriate manner on the appropriate forum.
@SA14mars That's not so bad. I first stumbled upon this forum as a fan to complain about calls. I liked what I heard which led directly to me taking the plunge.
See, I don't mind a little of that as long as people stay respectful and on topic. It's when restraint goes out the window (as it has a couple times recently) that I have an issue. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, just have some decorum about it.
Then, of course, there are topics that discuss NFHS and refereeing using the double dual system of refereeing. In that case it is proper to use the terms "Center Referee" and "Side Referee".
This forum's strength is the same as its weakness, and that is the contributions from non-referees. Non-referees can often have a better intuitive sense of an officiating team's overall effectiveness. But, on the other hand, non-referees cannot understand the shared experience of actual referees, and therefore cannot understand what actual referees really mean when they write certain things. SOCREF-L, at its best, continues to be the ne plus ultra of internet-based discussion of refereeing topics in the English language, despite its US-centrism and the fact that most of its technical wisdom now resides in the slightly flawed but often too maligned USSF ATR. Both this forum and SOCREF-L are orders of magnitude better than any UK-centric internet-based refereeing discussion fora that I'm aware of. Perhaps the media climate and an unrealistic nostalgia have conspired to bring down the level of discussion from what it could be. There could be brilliant non-English language refereeing discussion fora, but I frankly doubt it, due to the inherent superiority of the English language.** *I've had a few drinks this evening. But I know I'm right. ** OK, three. That's way more than usual. I'll try to cut down.
This place isn't that bad compared to other forums (non-soccer related) that I frequent. As a coach that refs once in a while, the thing I hate the most about this forum is all of the acronyms for fouls/law violations.
It's interesting--and useful--to read what people feel the pros and cons of this forum are right now. That said, I'm certain that one of the positives is that non-soccer politics are completely left at the door. So with that, I'd politely but strongly urge you to edit that portion of your post.
And then you talk in code such as: CK, LOTG, DOGSO etc.. How about a thread where all these acronyms are posted so we can decipher what is being talked about. You could even put it right below "Suspending a match for Thunder..." Just saying... Cheers, Mi3ke
I agree this this. I have been a USSF referee for less than a year and this was my first season of HS soccer. However all these acronyms are sometimes very confusing. If would be nice if someone would make a sticky with the acronyms and their meaning. CK - Corner Kick LOTG - Laws of the Game DOGSO - Denial of Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity etc.
If this is your only stop on Big Soccer, you are in for a rude awakening elsewhere. If it is truly a referee matter, 99% of the time, you will learn something or be engaged in a good conversation. Don't come here after your team loses and your club/location clearly are going to show that you are ass-biased and complain or can't see the other side of the argument. In that case, you deserve to be run out of town.
Like life in general. I think part of the issue is some referees like to be precise in the way they discuss the game and LOTG while others are more accepting of imprecise language and descriptors. If you read long enough, you start to see the differences and find your own level of acceptance or annoyance. Much like on the pitch, its all in how you see the games, the fouls, the language and react to it all given the surrounding environment.
I treasure the opportunity to confront some of the more arrogant referees who post here about their attitudes without being sent to the parking lot.
