Use of hand signals

[Scott Zawadzki]

Originally posted by Claymore
which in turn will probably do nothing more than make it easy for the coaches and players to challenge every single call ("that wasn't a push, that was a shove!!").

What it WILL do to help the game (and this is only based on my experience watching high school referees in Massachusetts) is stop less experienced referees who see clear penal fouls, and award indirect kicks for them because "they don't think the foul was hard enough to warrant a DFK or PK."

Either they will have to get their restarts correct, or they will recognize that the whistle doesn't have to be blown if you think that contact was insignificant. Only helps the game IMHO.

Just my 2 cents

Scott

[monop_poly]

Originally posted by Keith

I think you might be a cynic. I'll bet I can take you to any soccer game, and you can't tell me exactly what 70% of the calls actually are. Oh, you'll understand there was a foul, but not what specific foul. Maybe that's satisfaction enough for you, but others might want to know more. It's not about ignorance of the sport, it's about trying to read the referee's mind. It's about enjoyment; something soccer referees sometimes fail to consider or appreciate not just for the participants, but for the spectators as well.

I see you're from Denver. Please pay my airfare from Chicago and we can go to a game so that you can try to prove your point and satisfy your extravagent sense of superiority.

In addition to good information, this forum is full of blowhards like yourself. Sorry that I had the temerity to post w/o announcing my credentials as a referee w/1000 years experience.

How, pray tell, will a signal allowing people who do not understand the call to put a finer point on their disagreement with the call give them more enjoyment??

[Greyhnd00]

Originally posted by Keith

I think you might be a cynic. I'll bet I can take you to any soccer game, and you can't tell me exactly what 70% of the calls actually are. Oh, you'll understand there was a foul, but not what specific foul. Maybe that's satisfaction enough for you, but others might want to know more. It's not about ignorance of the sport, it's about trying to read the referee's mind. It's about enjoyment; something soccer referees sometimes fail to consider or appreciate not just for the participants, but for the spectators as well. If you are confused about 70% of calls made in matches then stopping the game to discuss every call wont help you. It is rediculous to attempt to teach the fans the game from between the white lines. Do baseball umpires try to explain the infield fly rule to dumb fans?

[csc7]

Originally posted by Keith

Well your experience is rather limited to just one team in club and one in high school wouldn't you say? I've experienced 17 years of hundreds of teams, new players every year, and so my experience is more broad in nature. I'm sorry your high school experience wasn't rewarding. It's my experience that high school tends to be more rewarding in the friendship experience than club, and it seems only obvious. You're playing with kids from your own community and neighborhood. In club you're playing with kids from all over the area, all chosen by their skills rather than their address, from which the elitist term applies. This isn't bad, but it's not negative to high school soccer either. The atmosphere in high school is so much improved all around. In club soccer, you have the players, the coaches, and parents of these players . . cheering for the team. If a player gets bumped to another team or chooses to join another club, the alligiance transfers, but still limited to the participants. In high school the entire school student body is there to support the team, parents of kids who don't play are there, the community is there to support the team. This is true American sports. Club soccer has it's place, but so does high school soccer. Maybe you'd prefer to play year round club soccer, but is this option available to you? Apparently not if you're playing high school, and not enjoying it as much. Apparently others or the majority feel high school soccer has it's merits too.


Actually, my experience ranges beyond just the club and high school teams I played for. I've reffed for several years (both club and HS) in states other than the one I grew up in. The same generally applies--crowds are the same (parents and friends at both matches), the level of play is inferior to club (but that is the design of club, so I'm ok with that part), the only good HS teams are the ones with club players.

Beyond reffing, I spent a few years as an assistant for club teams. And over my years, now 11 since I started playing seriously, I've been exposed to hundreds of club teams, rec teams, and high school teams. I've seen hundreds of these games. Also have numerous friends from different places that played club and HS, in general, their accessments are similar to mine.

So, I still feel qualified to discuss it. Thanks, though. I only stated my playing background because I think first hand experience is more important than second hand.

I did trash my HS experience (and feel it applies for my entire state) but I didn't really trash HS soccer in general. I was simply refuting what I saw as an extremely negative view of club soccer. HS has its place, I chose to play it and enjoyed it, I just liked club a lot more.

Finally, I hope the situation you describe really exists out there with HS. Beyond the friends of players on the team, no one at schools I played for and reffed cared at all about the games. The way you describe it, the stadium sounds full. I find that a little hard to believe, but if it's true, great. That's all to the benefit of the game.

All levels of soccer are useful and needed, they allow players of all levels to play. It wasn't my intent to say HS is not worth playing, if it came across as that it was a mistake. But club is definitely a worthy, and important, part of U.S. soccer. Is it too white? in general, yeah. Do the costs push people away? probably. But it's crucial to the development of players and btw, it's fun.

p.s.

As a ref and player, I thought mandated hand signals are rediculous (sp?). The refs look stupid doing it and it doesn't accomplish that much. While I'm all about teaching the game to those who are interested, I'm not about dumbing the game down to for those who aren't willing to bother. MLS tried that with some of its rules initially, and it wasn't successful. Refs can communicate with players verbally and nonverbally. Don't make them look stupid.

[Greyhnd00]

Originally posted by pkCrouse


The captain may be 100 yards from the point of infraction. Although he can't hear the ref at that distance, he can see the signal. Then he can ask his teammate who commited the foul and get the same explaination I gave him......and we can all continue playing soccer.

Originally posted by pkCrouse


NFHS has made it clear that the purpose of these signals is to improve communication with the players, as well as the coaches and the spectators. Whether or not we agree with the merits of their goal, that's what NFHS has decided, based upon what their member schools have told them. Ignoring this fact makes the rest of the debate meaningless.
Based upon what??? Based upon decisions of NON-referees who are soccer ignorant and intent upon trying to turn this game into something they can understand......american football. Just because some idiot Volleyball or football referee says that this is a good thing doesnt mean that I just roll over and accept thier word as gospel.

The only way to communicate with all of these people, especially in a high school stadium, is with visual signals, unless of course we're going to put microphones and transmitters on the officials. [/B][/QUOTE]

[csc7]

ps keith-

you've made a typical referee mistake of thinking you understand the game better than the players. as a player, coach, and a ref, i hated that.

[Greyhnd00]

Originally posted by soccernutter


And BTW, most of the world is not high school. But I think you would agree that the rest of the world HAS HIGH SCHOOL AGE players that they seem to teach the game well enough without these stupid changes.


Originally posted by soccernutter


I also realize the age difference, which was only used to illustrate a point (also keep in mind it is club level, not AYSO or similar, thus, the parents being a bit more knowldgeable). Who cares about the parents? I would be sorely dissappointed if there wasnt a loudmouth knuckledragger in the stands yelling things that amuse both me AND the players!! It happens at EVERY sporting event...WHY?? because the fans cant see the same things that the reff does and never will.......these signals wont change that.


Originally posted by soccernutter


The point of the post was transparancy of calls, and what the sticking points may be (as experience by myself). But, really, what kind of responsability do we, officials, have to the parents/fans?None..........None at all. If we spend our time trying to teach guys in the stands the game we will neglect the ones we are supposed to be serving........the players.

[pkCrouse]

Ah nuts, it's not worth the effort. I give up.

[Keith]

Originally posted by Claymore
yackity yackity yack....:D

Back to hand signals. I personally think it's ridiculous that HS federations find it necessary to complicate a simple game. They don't want to use a three-man system because it costs too much, and then they complain that the two-man system they've forced on the game results in some bizarre and inconsistent calls, which in turn causes them to make hand signals mandatory, which in turn will probably do nothing more than make it easy for the coaches and players to challenge every single call ("that wasn't a push, that was a shove!!"). YEESH.

Like I said earlier in the thread - have fun, guys. If that makes me an elitist and a purist, so be it.
Well thanks claymore for not participating with us. We prefer officials with an open mind. A lot of USSF sanctioned leagues are using the twh-man to "save costs." Yeah, we've heard all the hysteria about three whistles, will cause too many trifling calls/inconsistent calls/bizarre calls. . . yada yada yada. All intended to spread fear into a system that will become mandatory in a year or two in high school, and eventully creep into USSF. It's a no brainer. Other sports manage to use multiple officials and have less responsibility. It's about sharing the "power" (or ego). Some can't, and prefer the elitist/purist label. Other's continue to progress with the game. We'll miss you claymore. ?

[Keith]

Originally posted by monop_poly


I see you're from Denver. Please pay my airfare from Chicago and we can go to a game so that you can try to prove your point and satisfy your extravagent sense of superiority.

In addition to good information, this forum is full of blowhards like yourself. Sorry that I had the temerity to post w/o announcing my credentials as a referee w/1000 years experience.

How, pray tell, will a signal allowing people who do not understand the call to put a finer point on their disagreement with the call give them more enjoyment??
Chicago, eh. Should of guessed. Now for this to work the referee must record every one of his decisions, and you as well, and then we compare at the end of the game. But maybe. . .I'm must guessing here . . . they didn't intend the referee's signals to intended for referees from Chicago? Maybe it was for the participants and the spectators. I realize a lot of referees have an arrogance (not you of course) that keeping your decision a secret because "they" don't need to know what you called, because after all. . you're the REFEREE! Just like you keep time a secret and add time to finish an attack and make it a dirty little secret. Come on out to soccer country, monop_poly and we'll educate you. I'm sure you refuse to do high school and college so you can remain pure?

[Keith]

Originally posted by Greyhnd00
If you are confused about 70% of calls made in matches then stopping the game to discuss every call wont help you. It is rediculous to attempt to teach the fans the game from between the white lines. Do baseball umpires try to explain the infield fly rule to dumb fans?
"70%" might have might have been a little excessive. How about 50%? Why do baseball umpires signal strikes and balls to the ignorant fans. Can't they tell? Why do football referees signal the foul to the dumb fans, shouldn't they know. I'm sorry you're so offended by this. You don't do high school, right?

[Keith]

Originally posted by csc7
ps keith-

you've made a typical referee mistake of thinking you understand the game better than the players. as a player, coach, and a ref, i hated that.
Huh!?! What does this mean? I guess you're the purist attitude that you have to have played to "understand" the game? Yeah. Right.

[Keith]

Originally posted by Greyhnd00

Who cares about the parents? I would be sorely dissappointed if there wasnt a loudmouth knuckledragger in the stands yelling things that amuse both me AND the players!! It happens at EVERY sporting event...WHY?? because the fans cant see the same things that the reff does and never will.......these signals wont change that.


None..........None at all. If we spend our time trying to teach guys in the stands the game we will neglect the ones we are supposed to be serving........the players.

Don't you really mean grey, it's really about YOU, and how you keep your decisions and time secret? Sorry you have such a sordid viewpoint of spectators. Taken a lot of abuse from the spectators? Thanks for not officiating high school. We need some open minds in high school, because it's such a better environement. It's great to spin this in some obscure and excessive way to show your dislike for the rule, but if you can't come up with a valid argument, other than the spectators and participants don't deserve to know the call, then try harder; or quit putting down which you choose (or are afraid?) to try. I guess the hundreds of thousands of high school and college particpants are all knuckle draggers, and ignorant of your enlightenment? Small world.

[Claymore]

Keith - try decaf.

There is simply no compelling reason for the use of hand signals. The supposed intent of clarification is laughable - the majority of the time, a coach or player isn't confused about what is being called so much as why the call is being made - should we then be microphoned and stop play to announce the reasoning behind our calls as well? And, as Greyhound stated, the game at the HS level is not for the spectators, it is for the players.

There is no conspiracy of silence by the referees to keep the game shrouded in secrecy. The only "hysteria" being displayed here is your doing, using such terms as "dirty little secret" and the obviously pejoritive use of words like "elitist" and "purist". And despite your pleas for "open discussion", you persist in slagging off anyone with the temerity to disagree with your opinion. I certainly hope you don't referee as you write.

[Keith]

Originally posted by Claymore
Keith - try decaf.

There is simply no compelling reason for the use of hand signals. The supposed intent of clarification is laughable - the majority of the time, a coach or player isn't confused about what is being called so much as why the call is being made - should we then be microphoned and stop play to announce the reasoning behind our calls as well? And, as Greyhound stated, the game at the HS level is not for the spectators, it is for the players.

There is no conspiracy of silence by the referees to keep the game shrouded in secrecy. The only "hysteria" being displayed here is your doing, using such terms as "dirty little secret" and the obviously pejoritive use of words like "elitist" and "purist". And despite your pleas for "open discussion", you persist in slagging off anyone with the temerity to disagree with your opinion. I certainly hope you don't referee as you write.
Claymore, I apologize for too much decaf. I just didn't care for your flippant (arrogant?) attitude about something that most everyone else seems to accept, if not agree with. Interesting all this whining is coming from REFEREES. Maybe other sports officials sit back and gripe about rules and policy changes, but there's nothing like soccer referees who think only THEY should be making up the rules. This illustrates my point that relatively speaking soccer referees are more full of themselves, then other sports officials. We enjoy the power, and even the best of us forget it's not about US. Oh, we'll quote the standard mantra "it's for the good of the game," or "we do it for the players." Yeah. Sure.

If the Federation decided to change rules or policy to make the referees be more aware of something or improve their performance, I could see the referees taking issue. But when the Federation changes a policy to improve the participants or spectators understanding and enjoyment, it's always the referees that seem to be offended. I don't hear that this is going to exhaust our physical ability, or will distract us from managing the game, or affect us personally. The argument is most spectators are "knuckle dragging" morons and don't "deserve" to know, the rest. . the participants and "knowledgeable" spectators KNOW what the call is (or don't care). This seems like an assumption if not a leap.

What do you think the majority of the coaches, players, or spectators think? Do you think they're concerned about some negative affect signals will have on the game? Or do they feel there might be "some" benefit? Even for those who don't understand the game as well? I know most of us consider ourselves to be soccer experts (purist?), and we know it all, and understand everything, but an honest purist will at least admit to not understanding "a few" of the official's calls such that it causes doubt, second guessing, even frustration. How many time on this forum are we discussing "what the referee called" in some high level game? If we knew would it resolve "some" issues? And suggesting to only signal the controversial decisions sounds reasonable, until we try to define which are controversial to some, and which are obvious to others.

This is not any huge burden for us to carry out there. It's not like foot ball signals, where the referee holds up the restart, goes to the center of the field, makes a ceremonial signal, and repeats it verbally into a microphone. It's a quick signal, that takes less than a second to do, and it's not required on ALL decisions. Even the Federation expressly points this out. They recommend not holding up play or quick restarts, and if play is developing down field to abandon any signals and move down field with the play. My experience with it many years ago, was to only signal the more questionable decisions, or any that might be confusing. I don't recall any officials getting in trouble or accused of "not signaling" enough. It's just a small effort to improve the game, ideally from the coaches/players standpoint, but admittingly also the spectators standpoint. Why do we display cards?

Again, I apologize for getting overly intense about this, but I'm just always amazed at the typical response to anything that involves our participation and seems to offend our sense of tradition to this game. The notion if there's a different way or a different flavor of soccer (HS/college) then it isn't worthy of an open mind.

[Greyhnd00]

Originally posted by Keith


Thanks for not officiating high school. We need some open minds in high school, because it's such a better environement.
I do about 50% USSF and 50% NFHS.... In my area the non-playing participants are MUCH less educated about the game...........Just what Ive seen.

[kevbrunton]

Originally posted by Keith

I'm not suggesting high school soccer developed the U.S. national team; club soccer did. But I'll bet everyone of them played high school and college soccer? My point is, that HS and collegiate soccer is part of the mix and part of the tradition of soccer here; so live with it. I want the purists to stop trying to put it down and kill HS/collegiate soccer, even though it's fruitless.

Keith, I'm definitely not against high school or college soccer. However, if you want to taket his bet, you'd lose it. When you look at the most recent WC team, you'd be mostly right -- only a handful did not go to college. But NONE of the younger ones went to college and these guys aren't even playing out their high school careers. From WC2002, guys like Beasley and Donovan either went to residency or turned pro or both in their teens. If you look at the next group that are in the U20's there's a significant number of them turning pro in their teens and only playing at most 1 or 2 years of HS ball.

You are correct that most of the guys who play club soccer also play HS soccer -- but in some cases that because there's no other option. I had a big long reply providing my comments on the merits of club soccer vs. high school soccer, but that's off topic, so I deleted the rest of it and I'll just leave it at that.

[billf]

I find the discussion of hand signals in NF amusing. I don't work HS soccer, and I have no real desire to do so. Mandated signals are now part of the reason I stay away from HS. It has nothing to do with wanting to remain secretive or giving up a level of control, I just think the signals are stupid. I really don't care if each and every player on the field, spectator, or coach knows what I called. The important thing is that I saw a foul and caled it. I don't make up fouls, so I don't see the problem honestly. If a player needs an explaination, it's easy to say a couple words or give an informal signal.

In my area, I find that the referees that mostly work HS games, but who also do USSF lack the ability to communicate clearly with the players. I think this is the result of the referees, not the players, being less experienced with soccer in HS as opposed to club ball. It's simple enough to communicate a call when it is required without being mandated to do the chicken dance after you blow the whistle.

To me, being required to display a signal is just another way to fail an assessment. The NF people around here love that stuff, so I can easily see them being sticklers for that sort of thing.

Besides, no one has stated the obvious. It's harder for those involved to learn the signals than it is to learn the game. The only times a call really is questioned is when it is a subtle hold or a quick foul at speed. Many fouls are obvious. Even if you don't know what to call the specific infraction, a normal person can clearly see that a foul of some sort occured.

All in all, I'd much rather do club ball despite the better pay in HS. Club games are much more competitive at the higher levels and present more challenge. High level club soccer is about developing players for the next level. I see nothing wrong with that. The HS atmosphere is nice, but talented players should have an opportunity to play with and against the best they can. I honestly don't understand the elitism claim. Afterall, only the best players in HS programs actually play, so what is the difference? At my HS, we had 25 players on the varsity. Of those, maybe 15 played. A comparable club team would have 18 players and all would get some time. The rest could play for less competitive teams.

[monop_poly]

Originally posted by billf
I find the discussion of hand signals in NF amusing. I don't work HS soccer, and I have no real desire to do so. Mandated signals are now part of the reason I stay away from HS. It has nothing to do with wanting to remain secretive or giving up a level of control, I just think the signals are stupid. I really don't care if each and every player on the field, spectator, or coach knows what I called. The important thing is that I saw a foul and caled it. I don't make up fouls, so I don't see the problem honestly. If a player needs an explaination, it's easy to say a couple words or give an informal signal.

In my area, I find that the referees that mostly work HS games, but who also do USSF lack the ability to communicate clearly with the players. I think this is the result of the referees, not the players, being less experienced with soccer in HS as opposed to club ball. It's simple enough to communicate a call when it is required without being mandated to do the chicken dance after you blow the whistle.

To me, being required to display a signal is just another way to fail an assessment. The NF people around here love that stuff, so I can easily see them being sticklers for that sort of thing.

Besides, no one has stated the obvious. It's harder for those involved to learn the signals than it is to learn the game. The only times a call really is questioned is when it is a subtle hold or a quick foul at speed. Many fouls are obvious. Even if you don't know what to call the specific infraction, a normal person can clearly see that a foul of some sort occured.

All in all, I'd much rather do club ball despite the better pay in HS. Club games are much more competitive at the higher levels and present more challenge. High level club soccer is about developing players for the next level. I see nothing wrong with that. The HS atmosphere is nice, but talented players should have an opportunity to play with and against the best they can. I honestly don't understand the elitism claim. Afterall, only the best players in HS programs actually play, so what is the difference? At my HS, we had 25 players on the varsity. Of those, maybe 15 played. A comparable club team would have 18 players and all would get some time. The rest could play for less competitive teams.

KEITH - what he said (1st paragraph). For a guy who writes so much, you certainly don't seem to be able to read too well. The segment here arguing against signals are saying that they are either
- stupid
- inconsistent with the way the rest of the world governs soccer, or
- that the signals will be either counterproductive or not serve the intended purpose for such signals (education/information).

Only you have introduced goofiness like ref power, secrecy and sovereignity as well as an irrelevant tirade about the alleged elitism of club soccer.

LOL from Chicago - maybe you need some extra oxygen up there in Denver to get up and down the field.

[Keith]

Originally posted by Greyhnd00

I do about 50% USSF and 50% NFHS.... In my area the non-playing participants are MUCH less educated about the game...........Just what Ive seen.
. . and I guess you get to be the sole judge and expert on this? What's your criteria for evaluation. . . disagreement? Let's leave this topic for another threat, but we understand this superior attitude. So will you lose any sleep having to perform signals in your NFHS games?