Refereeing

[ctreferee]

I have been a referee for 7 years now and have finally worked my way to the top amateur ranks and am hoping to start at the pro level within the next few years. Unfortunately I tore my ACL and meniscus this past march playing lacrosse and am out for the season.

During this time i have been doing alot of mental analysis of the way i referee and how i can improve. My biggest weakness in refereeing is having never played extensively myself, which is many time a big disadvantage for me. I thought it would be interesting to get the players perspective on a few issues.

1) What do you look for in a "good" referee overall.

2) How much do you like the referee to dictate what level of physicality is allowed in a game versus calling what it seems like the players are tolerating.

3) How do you react to "verbal discipline" versus cards, does a stern talking to by a referee encourage you to change your ways or fo you only react to cards?

4) How much do you notice the referee on the field and do you tailor the way you play to the referee? Also do you ever notice where the referee is on the field and how much do you try things based on whether you think the referee has a good angle on you or not?

Thanks alot guys, id also be more than happy to answer any quesations you have in regards to refereeing if you would like.

[doctor_mooch]

1) What do you look for in a "good" referee overall.
What i look for in a good referee is one that is not easily swayed by coaches yelling at a bad call. They try to help the game run as smoothly as possible.
2) How much do you like the referee to dictate what level of physicality is allowed in a game versus calling what it seems like the players are tolerating.
If both teams are playing physical, and it is getting out of hand, warn both teams, but otherwise, if it is an intense match let them continue playing.
3) How do you react to "verbal discipline" versus cards, does a stern talking to by a referee encourage you to change your ways or fo you only react to cards?
Verbal warnings help very much, they are much like a yellow card themselves.
4) How much do you notice the referee on the field and do you tailor the way you play to the referee? Also do you ever notice where the referee is on the field and how much do you try things based on whether you think the referee has a good angle on you or not?
I've never personally notice the referee and try to take advantage because of the angle. What i do notice that is somewhat annoying is when the referee is just standing in front of you when their taking a goal kick, and you have to move around them. Let the players play, but still make sure ur presence is felt when too much roughness is happening.

[rca2]

1) What do you look for in a "good" referee overall.

Someone who is in position, is consistent, and keeps the game safe without interfering with play more than necessary.

2) How much do you like the referee to dictate what level of physicality is allowed in a game versus calling what it seems like the players are tolerating.

I have no idea what you mean by "physicality." I expect the opponent to play a clean game. I want the ref to enforce the LOTG. I hear so many people saying "soccer is a physical sport" thinking that phrase justifies foul play. Soccer is very physically demanding, but that doesn't mean its a contact sport. When a player does not retaliate is that what you call "tolerating?" There is enough contact in soccer already without players intentionally adding to it.

3) How do you react to "verbal discipline" versus cards, does a stern talking to by a referee encourage you to change your ways or fo you only react to cards?

I have never been carded. I expect a referee to use verbal discipline appropriately. I would think things like time wasting or persistent fouling should be noted with a verbal warning before a yellow card is necessary. Often a few words of warning to players will calm down situations before they get out of hand.

4) How much do you notice the referee on the field and do you tailor the way you play to the referee? Also do you ever notice where the referee is on the field and how much do you try things based on whether you think the referee has a good angle on you or not?

A bad referee draws a lot of notice and play sometimes has to be adjusted for bad referees. If a referee allows rough play, then play adjusts and not in a good way. Players have to give it right back until the offenders settle down and play soccer instead of playing the man. The danger is that the rough play will escalate out of control. Normally its just one or two players, and normally even their own team mates want them to play soccer instead of hockey without sticks. For experienced players, playing with no referee is better than playing with a bad referee.

[gosh1976]

Soccer is very physically demanding, but that doesn't mean its a contact sport.

but isn't soccer a contact sport even within the laws of the game??

anyway I'll make just a couple points. To question number 4 as a coach I notice alot the positioning of the AR's and how they are calling offsides and will change tactics a little based on that.

To question 3 both as a player and a coach I react very well to a verbal warning. I have only been carded a couple times as a player and never as a coach. I have been verbally warned before and I always take it to heart. More so if the ref is basically calling a consistent game. I have never been carded after first getting a verbal warning.

[rca2]

...but isn't soccer a contact sport even within the laws of the game??...

I took this as a serious question so I did some quick research and discovered that within the last eight years the usage has changed (at least among some members of the medical community). What was previously referred to as contact sports (ice hockey and American football) are now called "collision sports." Martial Arts (except full contact) and boxing are "semi-contact sports" and soccer is called a "contact sport" because bodies touch during play. Under this water-downed definition even cheerleading and pairs figure skating are contact sports because there is physical contact involved, so the label "contact sport" does not imply that violent or semi-violent (striking with padded surfaces) contact with another player is allowed as part of the play. One source attributed a quote to Vince Lombardi "Football is a collision sport; dancing is a contact sport."

[gosh1976]

I took this as a serious question so I did some quick research and discovered that within the last eight years the usage has changed (at least among some members of the medical community). What was previously referred to as contact sports (ice hockey and American football) are now called "collision sports." Martial Arts (except full contact) and boxing are "semi-contact sports" and soccer is called a "contact sport" because bodies touch during play. Under this water-downed definition even cheerleading and pairs figure skating are contact sports because there is physical contact involved, so the label "contact sport" does not imply that violent or semi-violent (striking with padded surfaces) contact with another player is allowed as part of the play. One source attributed a quote to Vince Lombardi "Football is a collision sport; dancing is a contact sport."

I was specifically refering to the "shoulder to shoulder" or "fair charge" and how this is reflectied in the laws of the game. This sets it apart from cheerleading, tennis, or figure skating.

There is clearly contact that is not within the spirit and laws of the game such as pushing, tripping, kicking, shirt pulling and then there is contact that is as far as I know within the spirit and laws of the game such as the shoulder charge and probably some other minor contact.

Soccer may not be a contact sport in the sense of rugby or NFL football but is as much as say basketball. not that I know the rules of basketball.

[rca2]

The LOTG actually include charging in the same sentence as kicking and tripping. The traditionally allowed shoulder to shoulder contact is incidental to an attempt to dispossess an opponent of the ball. My point about the changing definition of contact sport was not reflecting on what you said, but explaining what I had meant by contact sport. I should have said soccer was not a collision sport instead of a contact sport.