Referee vs. AR fees

[USSF REF]

I have always wondered why so many youth and adult leagues seem to have this idea that running the line is only worth about half as much as being the referee.

The majority of leagues I have worked for usually pay a fee for the referee and the AR fee is almost always 1/2 (or very close) to the referee fee for that age.

Perhaps it has to do with the amount of responsibility the referee has. Maybe it's because the referee runs more (or should run more) than the AR. Could it be the referee is expected to have more experience on that level, but that isn't always the case...

College games pay closer to 2/3 of the referee's fee. Pro games are roughly along the 2/3 line as well. Even HS leagues with 3 man system pay 2/3 to 3/4 the referee's fee.

So what gives?

I have always felt that the Referee fee and the AR fee should be closer, even if it means referees get a slight cut to give slight increase to the AR's. The reason I feel this way is because there are so many guys out there who just work for the money, even experienced guys in my area, who turn back lines due to the financial aspect of this. I really think people would care less about being in the middle vs. the line if the pay was closer or even (GASP) The same! We're all working for the same amount of time, shouldn't that be worth the same? :confused:

Am I alone on this? And this is coming from a guy who is getting a lot more assignments as the referee than I used to when I was younger...

[ref2coach]

Ditto to your concerns.

I'll add another. Here HS pays $60/$50, 80 minute game no matter how crappy the teams. USYSF u18, 90 minute game pays on average $30/$23 the real problem here is that about the time we get a referee to a decent level of competence they drop their USSF certification to do Girls HS in the Fall and Boys HS in the Spring. It is ridiculous how little USYSF games pay.

[Rufusabc]

I happen to agree totally with our original poster.

In the GREAT State of New Jersey, we have such a wide disparity of pricing. I think it is sometimes based on HOW LONG the matches are.

I referee across 4 different leagues with 4 different pricing structures. And all of them have the 50% rule. Therefore, a three man crew in one league with a small sided game and two 11 v. 11 games will get 30/15 for the small sided and then 46/23 for the full sided. Bizarre pricing. Plus, I could do the small sided by myself for the 60!!

Anyway, I think a line (especially coming after a center!!) is worth way more than half!

And I wish they would standardize the structure throughout the state. I can't believe how much more we make in t he north compared to the south.

[intechpc]

Our High School association has it right in my opinion. On varsity matches, where they use the 3 man system, all three referees get paid the same fee. JV 2-Man get paid the same but less than Varisty and Freshmen 2-man also the same but less than JV.

I hate to admit it but the pay scale is one of the reasons that I elected to get my WIAA (High School) badge. My USSF games are still my priority but it's nice to fill in the holes on my schedule with games that pay $50+.

Our USSF fees in Wisconsin have the AR's getting about 2/3's of what the center gets. It's not great and I don't understand why the three don't just get paid the same. We're all a part of a crew, we're all trained the same, and it's a leap to say the center is more experienced or anything else. Case in point, I just worked an adult 1st division match yesterday as CR. I'm a 7 and I had two state 6's running my lines. I got $56, they got $35. Weird indeed.

[falcon.7]

70/55 for our top D1 amateur league. Last fall it went from 70/45 to 70/55.

[NHRef]

I do not agree on an even pricing, the CR is the person with the responsibility, the final decision making and the pressure of "getting it right". Check the LOTG, laws 5 and 6.

In reality, yes an AR, in an upper level game does a TON of work, but even then, all final decisions, all paperwork, all discipline reports and decisions are up the the CR.

Now the price split, may be off a bit. Having worked a variety of games this spring, with a variety of AR levels, and running AR on different level games, I'd say a good AR is worth gold on a competitive match. However, a lower level youth game with an AR learning, sometimes they don't earn what they do get. Had one yesterday that I tried to keep involved, but every time I tried to make eye contact I couldn't, he was looking down, or behind him, twirling his flag etc.

I would say as the game level goes up, may be move towards the 2/3 price structure, but this will just cost teams more, so not sure how it will go over.

[hradilv]

I would say as the game level goes up, may be move towards the 2/3 price structure, but this will just cost teams more, so not sure how it will go over.

Not necessarily, if the CR takes a cut as suggested by OP.

[DWickham]

This ought to change, but I don't think it will.

"I am being paid more because I have more responsibilities" is inconsistent with the modern notion that "we are a team." The modern approach is that the members of the team have overlapping, critical responsiblities, and the team must get the decision right.

The plate umpire doesn't make more than the base umpires in baseball and (like soccer) the officials usually rotate among positions in multiple game schedules. The crew chief doesn't make more than the other officials in basketball (I believe the same is true in most US football leagues.)

I don't think it will change, however, because referees ought not to be paid less, and leagues won't pay assistants more.

It becomes ridiculous when you look at the pay of fourth officials. Their pay is as if there are only there to replace any of the officials that may become injured, and thus, their standby time isn't worth much. They have responsibilities for unseen misconduct and a tough job dealing with the coaches and substiitutes in the technical area. They usually are paid less than assistant referees.

[Rufusabc]

When I was growing up, I had a friend who's Dad was a MLB Umpire. And when he was home (which really wasn't THAT often), he would take us up to Shea Stadium. I clearly remember the umpire's room (I was probably 12) and hanging out there waiting for him to be done after the game was over.

I have a very good recollection of him being very upset at comments Ralph Kiner had made on the TV about his balls and strikes calls that evening. he had gotten the info passed on to him by the clubhouse attendent.

Anyhow, along the lines of the thread, my friend's Dad said he only had to work once every four games. When he worked the plate he was exhausted at the end of a game, but the bases, he said, were a piece of cake.

[pacref]

Fees vary here also, U17 and Adult 50/30/30
HS 50/35 varsity 45/30 JV
In the younger youth games there is no Rhyme or reason to the different fees.

[Ref Flunkie]

I do NOT agree that CRs should be paid the same as ARs. 2/3 seems about right, and that is what we typically do around here for youth premier matches. 60/40, 50/35, and 40/30. Mens amatuer matches are 46/32. These all seem to be fair distributions to me. I'll be honest, if I had a choice between doing AR or CR, I would do AR the majority of the time, espeically if the pay was equal.

I feel that 4O's should be paid similar to that of the AR (probably, slightly less).

As for other sports, the officials in basketball and football all have similar levels of responsability, therefore should be paid similarly. In baseball, the home plate umpire should be paid more than the bases umpire (as Rufusabc) said, but MLB umpires get paid a salary so I doubt it matters much there.

[intechpc]

This ought to change, but I don't think it will.

"I am being paid more because I have more responsibilities" is inconsistent with the modern notion that "we are a team." The modern approach is that the members of the team have overlapping, critical responsiblities, and the team must get the decision right.

The plate umpire doesn't make more than the base umpires in baseball and (like soccer) the officials usually rotate among positions in multiple game schedules. The crew chief doesn't make more than the other officials in basketball (I believe the same is true in most US football leagues.)

I don't think it will change, however, because referees ought not to be paid less, and leagues won't pay assistants more.

It becomes ridiculous when you look at the pay of fourth officials. Their pay is as if there are only there to replace any of the officials that may become injured, and thus, their standby time isn't worth much. They have responsibilities for unseen misconduct and a tough job dealing with the coaches and substiitutes in the technical area. They usually are paid less than assistant referees.

And you hit dead on the point that I was trying to make. I don't know how the rest of you feel when you're the center, but when I'm CR (which right now is about 75% or better of my assignments) I don't see it as being above the others. I'm just the one that has the ultimate accountability for this match (in the end there has to be one person that gets that responsibility for each match). I believe very much in the team aspect amongst referees. We're all 3 (or 4 or 2) there with a truly common goal, to ensure the match is played fairly and safely. I've had plenty of games where I think my AR's have worked harder than I have. Games where they had to run a lot (especially the MRL games where they need to take passes from subs coming in if there is no 4th), games where they've helped manage the technical areas, etc. So by the train of thought that the CR has more responsibility than the AR's and therefore should get paid more, shouldn't then AR1 get paid more than AR2 since he has more responsibility?

We're a team out there and we should be encouraged to think like it.

[Ref Flunkie]

And you hit dead on the point that I was trying to make. I don't know how the rest of you feel when you're the center, but when I'm CR (which right now is about 75% or better of my assignments) I don't see it as being above the others. I'm just the one that has the ultimate accountability for this match (in the end there has to be one person that gets that responsibility for each match). I believe very much in the team aspect amongst referees. We're all 3 (or 4 or 2) there with a truly common goal, to ensure the match is played fairly and safely. I've had plenty of games where I think my AR's have worked harder than I have. Games where they had to run a lot (especially the MRL games where they need to take passes from subs coming in if there is no 4th), games where they've helped manage the technical areas, etc. So by the train of thought that the CR has more responsibility than the AR's and therefore should get paid more, shouldn't then AR1 get paid more than AR2 since he has more responsibility?

We're a team out there and we should be encouraged to think like it.

Bah, if you require everyone on the team to be paid the same amount in order to be a team player, then you shouldn't be out there. Most work places consist of people on the same "team" getting paid different amounts.

[USSF REF]

Bah, if you require everyone on the team to be paid the same amount in order to be a team player, then you shouldn't be out there. Most work places consist of people on the same "team" getting paid different amounts.

What about paying by years of experience or grade level, or a matrix of both. I've seen similar structures out there that reward experience and commitment to the profession.

I just think the 2:1:1 ratio just doesn't make sense to me.

And to the guy who said the Referee is solely responsible for the paperwork, remember that in matches where there is a 4th official, he is the one to typically do all of the post game paper work (excluding difficult supplemental reports).

[Nashvillian]

Whew... this is a deep, deep subject.

Yes, in games where substitutes need to be handled and benches need to be dealt with by AR1, AR1 should get paid more. In a lot of friendlies, however, the difference between AR1 and AR2 (depending on how vocal the parents are) is negligible.

Which brings up the reason I think the referee usually gets paid more than the ARs - he usually takes more abuse.

The referee also makes more judgment calls - fouls are much more subjective than offside and who the ball touched last before going out of play.

I think that between two-thirds and three-fourths of the referee rate is right for the ARs. Around here, high school pays $60 to the referee and $50 to each AR. It is more than worth the $10 difference to me to not have to deal with the controversy and abuse and, when necessary, write the report.

The difference in high school rates and youth competitive rates is crazy. Think about the amount of money parents are paying for their kids to play competitive soccer - $90 a training session for a top coach times two per week and the same amount for a couple of games on the weekend, a $100 uniform, expenses to and from tournaments, hotels, food, etc. Then compare that to the amount it would take to pay the referee crew high school rates instead of youth competitive rates - $20 more for the referee and about $25 more for each AR ($70 total). Then divide that $70 by the number of players on the two teams - 15 on each team (30 total). It's a piddling $2.33 per family per game. Less than five bucks more for a two-game Saturday.

Another thing that hasn't been mentioned but I think is inequitable is that, in most venues, a Grade 5 gets no more money for a game than a Grade 8. Shouldn't expertise, experience and the willingness to improve oneself enough to upgrade to that level be worth more money? Yes, I know that, theoretically, the 5 gets more higher level (and higher paying) games than the 6, the 6 more than the 7, the 7 more than the 8... but there just aren't that many higher level (and higher paying) games around.

I've always thought that higher level referees should be paid more (and I'm a Grade 8) and that the state associations should lead by example in their state championship tournaments.

[constructor]

Here's one thing to consider on USSF AR pay. In a competitive match, most of the movement by the AR will be sprints down towards the goal line. While it isn't the same type of running a CR does, it is different and can be very hard on the knees depending on the pitch. If you're doing your job properly in this kind of match, you will be nearly as tired as the CR at the end of play.

In my area, HS pays the same regardless of where you are on the field. Those who posit that the AR should be paid less, well, under our system, you get to rotate through the positions most of the time, so it averages out. There are some in our assoc who insist on only CR because of the type of running involved.

[DerbyRam54]

70/55 for our top D1 amateur league. Last fall it went from 70/45 to 70/55.
What is a bit odd is that the rates, as far as I know, are the same in the adult league I work whether you do a D1 or a D3 match. On the other hand, you might actually have some football at D1, D3 is usually men behaving badly, thinking they know how to play the game when in fact they are rubbish.
The AR pay went up when fuel costs were so high, I think the reasoning was that it cost the AR as much to get there as the CR, and usually any one of the three officials assigned could have done the middle.
At the district league youth level where I am an assignor, the rates are the usual 2:1 split and are linked to the age of the match, which seems pretty typical. I did a survey of towns in the district for the town in which I assign so that we would be competitive, and the fee structure was pretty universal at that 2:1.
I think the thought process probably includes some notion that an AR in a district league youth match is probably going to be a teenager who will happily work that match for $20 or so. Of course, it means that as an assignor, I really daren't ask an out-of-town adult to come and help out when we are strapped for officials due to the club scheduling four matches all at the same time. OTOH, there is only one adult in town who refuses to run the line, but that's nothing to do with money, he is far too good to be an AR or to work anything under U-14. :rolleyes:
Nashvillian makes some good points about what he called "competitive" youth matches, presumably the premier type teams. At that level maybe there should be a different structure. I don't do those games, I remember going to watch my girlfriend's daughter's premier team games and being appalled at the behaviour of the parents. There should be a premium fee just to put up with those idiots revealing their ignorance.
But it's hard to see that happening at the district league level. First, I doubt we get too many higher grade refs anyway, but finances being what they are having to pay a 6 more than an 8 means that the 8s will get all the games to save money. A sort of Gresham's Law for referee assigning... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_Law

[Sachsen]

What about paying by years of experience or grade level, or a matrix of both. I've seen similar structures out there that reward experience and commitment to the profession.

I just think the 2:1:1 ratio just doesn't make sense to me.

And to the guy who said the Referee is solely responsible for the paperwork, remember that in matches where there is a 4th official, he is the one to typically do all of the post game paper work (excluding difficult supplemental reports).

Very few of the leagues I ref in are 2:1:1. One rec league does pay $20/$10 for a U12 game. But any higher up and it goes $25/$15 for U14, $40/$25 for U16, etc. Seems about right to me. High school is 45/35 for varsity, 35/25 for JV. That went up for the playoffs, I did a 1st round game last week which was 55/40 I think.

As an AR, I disagree with the premise that I have earned as much money as a center. Any AR who thinks so is just angling for more pay for less work. Yes, I do plenty of running as an AR. But there is more to the referee job than just running.

[Sachsen]

OTOH, there is only one adult in town who refuses to run the line, but that's nothing to do with money, he is far too good to be an AR or to work anything under U-14. :rolleyes:

That attitude cracks me up. Off topic, but I consider myself a pretty good ref, and some of my favorite games to ref are U10 games. Don't have to worry about offside, a smaller field, and yet not babysitting, and generally no (or fewer) obnoxious parents and coaches. I get paid less than I would to do a competitive U16 or varsity high school game, but I generally have a lot more fun.

U8 and under though, that's just boring. ;)

[Ref Flunkie]

What about paying by years of experience or grade level, or a matrix of both. I've seen similar structures out there that reward experience and commitment to the profession.

I just think the 2:1:1 ratio just doesn't make sense to me.

And to the guy who said the Referee is solely responsible for the paperwork, remember that in matches where there is a 4th official, he is the one to typically do all of the post game paper work (excluding difficult supplemental reports).

I wouldn't have a major issue with paying by experience/grade level, but that is partly done via schedulers assigning higher level matches (= higher pay) to more experienced/higher grade referees. However, for matches that regularly get grade 8 through grade 5 referees, I have no issue paying for skill/experience (to a certain extent). Plus, this may motivate folks to upgrade, even if they only plan to continue refereeing the same matches that they do now. However, if they low ball the grade 8's, then don't get upset if matches are turned down due to the low pay.

I don't agree with 2:1:1; but 2:1.5:1.5 is fine. What I don't agree with is what I believe is the PDL policy (please correct me if I'm wrong) of paying mileage for the CRs but not the ARs. Why the F would I do a match where my next income would be zero or even negative when you are paying travel for the CR? That is more of an injustice than simple pay tiers.