Is anyting more painful than recertification?

[Ref Flunkie]

I think not. I give the instructors credit for attempting to present this stuff, but I'm sorry, 6 hours for this is 5 hours too long. In fact, they should make this web based and be done with it. At least this year the exam was slightly more challenging and relevant. Plus I have NEVER understood why everything presented at 7&8 clinics is FIFA/professional-centric and not based on what we actually referee. Next year I'm going to count the number of times instructors say "This is the FIFA answer, but it will likely be different in the level of matches that you are refereeing".

[intechpc]

Actually I rather enjoy the recert clinics. Yes most of the stuff is remedial, usually going over 6-10 month old memos that I've been aware of for some time, but the fact is most of the referees going to those clinics aren't as involved as we here at the forum are. I look at the clinics as my chance to meet other referees, provide insights I've gained from my matches to less experienced referees and learn from the insights and experiences of other referees.

Besides, it's kinda fun to be done with the state exam in 20 minutes and have a 98 ;)

[falcon.7]

I broke my leg during a 15 mile run once. That kinda hurt.


Recertification clinics are the way it is because that's how USSF says they have to eb. The point of recertification is to make sure everyone is up-to-date on the rule changes and clarifications, and that everyone has the knowledge of the rules and procedures needed to referee at their grade level.

The things people want in a recertification clinic are things they can only learn out on the field. In my 7/6/5 recert clinic about 25-33% said they wanted to learn "man management" in the clinic. That's not going to happen. Man management is something you can only learn by doing and figuring out what works for you on the field.

The instructor can give you the USSF presentation on bench control, but you aren't going to learn bench control until you're the AR or 4th in an important game and the referee is having a nightmare in the middle. Similarly, we can show you slides on general positioning, but your positioning every game is going to be slightly different based on the circumstances.

Yes, clinics are boring, often redudant, and many times you don't learn anything new, but instead of trying to get something out of it you know you're not going to get, take what is presented and realize what its meant to do. Besides, when else during the year can you get everyone together and go out afterwards?

[billf]

I wasn't a big fan either but it was sort of a necessary evil.

[billf]

I think not. I give the instructors credit for attempting to present this stuff, but I'm sorry, 6 hours for this is 5 hours too long. In fact, they should make this web based and be done with it. At least this year the exam was slightly more challenging and relevant. Plus I have NEVER understood why everything presented at 7&8 clinics is FIFA/professional-centric and not based on what we actually referee. Next year I'm going to count the number of times instructors say "This is the FIFA answer, but it will likely be different in the level of matches that you are refereeing".

Google buzz word bingo and make yourself a card. It could be fun. :)

[Gary V]

For a basic 7/8 recert, some topics are often out of range for some of the referees there. If you're a long-time 8 or a up-n-coming 7, the content will be too basic. If you're a 8 with little experience, particularly a youth referee, some of it will be over your head. At least it's better now with separate Grade 9 recerts and 9 to 8 upgrade clinics.

I presume Chris took the clinic in Farmington; I took the clinic in Sterling Heights a week earlier. The content should have been the same. It depends so much on the instructor presenting the material. See if I can remember the order of contents:

Law updates, including the two USSF memos. (We glossed over the USSF debate over advantage vs trifling)
Test (The worst I've done in years; IMO several of the questions were worded very imprecisely. I don't know if this was a national test or a Michigan test gleaned from national questions. But I did learn that the Law says players have to be 10 yards from the corner arc, not the ball, on corner kicks.)
Test review, so everyone could understand the correct answers to the ones they got wrong
How to write a report. If the State Youth league is concerned about State Premier reports not being written correctly, why isn't this covered in the special clinic required to get assignments in that league? Several of the things mentioned are directly opposite in the regional select league and the rec league where I work.
Lunch
Review of tapes to decide foul/caution/send-off. As Chris mentions, this was from high level play; I think all of it was MLS games. In youth games there is a different scale of whether the foul is careless/reckless/excessive compared to the adult amateurs, and then again for the pros.

Is there a better way? Maybe. But given the resources the State Referee Commttee has, I'm not sure what it would be.

[Ref Flunkie]

Besides, when else during the year can you get everyone together and go out afterwards?

After 6 hrs, I'm just ready to get home and watch some NFL football. Besides, 90% of the folks there are teenagers, so going to the bar after the clinic is kinda hard to do :). I renew my contention that more learning could be accomplished by placing this online.

[njref]

I think it is bizarre that lawyers and other professionals can do their mandatory CLE or CPE on-line, colleges and grad schools can give credits for online classes, but soccer referees cannot do a stupid recert online.

There are a lot of reasons to do on-line CPE, including improved product, the option to tailor presentations to specific levels of ability/experience, increased convenience, and lower cost. I have seen instructors give completely wrong advice in the recert class; last year our instructor was adament that if the AR held the flag to ensure involvement on offside (for example the case with one onside and one offside player going for the ball) the restart was where the offside player was when the flag went up. You could have the best presenters in the country with well organized presentations talking to +10,000 people rather than 40 people at a time.

With online Recerts you could have different presentations for grade 8s with 5 years or more experience, 2-4 years, and 1 year. You could have a menu of detailed presentations on specific topics, rather than hearing the same basic stuff all the time. You could make online recert only available for grades of 85 or more on the exam. People might actually study the rules and law changes ahead of time.

Yearly in person recert classes are just another barrier to entry for referees. For example, I know an outstanding young referee attending an out of state college, he will not be in-state to take the exam, and cannot get recertified. If he was certified, he would be reffing in the late spring and summer when he is home. Bottom line - the classes are costly, inconvenient and mostly a waste of time now.

[Untroubled by Reason]

How to write a report.
Our SRA told us that this is a point of emphasis in Region 1 as a whole. Also, this year's test is 100 instead of 50 questions - and badly written. Enjoy that. :eek:

[Untroubled by Reason]

I think it is bizarre that lawyers and other professionals can do their mandatory CLE or CPE on-line, colleges and grad schools can give credits for online classes, but soccer referees cannot do a stupid recert online.
I couldn't agree more. If we had a "practical" part of the instruction, then being "in person" would be worth it. We don't, and it isn't.

[Rufusabc]

I have mine this coming Sunday. And I am at the dentist tomorrow morning. I am looking forward to going to the dentist.

R

[DadOf6]

In Utah we have referee meetings every month except during the off-season. In the regular meeting they talk about any memos, position papers, etc. that came out that month and anything else they think needs to be covered. These meetings lasy about an hour.

They also have a more advanced meeting on another day. It is for 7's and above but they also invite refs who are about to upgrade, or should upgrade.

If you attend five (of 8 or 9) of these meetings you don't have to go to the 6 hour meeting, you can just go in and take the test.

[Ref Flunkie]

Funny thing is, this meeting didn't even address position papers or memos. In fact, I don't think the whole "pass back philosophy change" was even addressed (where deliberate means the kick, not the person that it is going to). It is no wonder we have no consistency with our referees.

[scref]

If you don't like the current course then why don't you become an Instructor and try to do something about or better yet upgrade to get the advance training you are looking for.


You sound like a group of parents on the sideline of a game complaining that the referee sucks but not willing to do anything about.

[ref47]

in vdc, the upper level recert is much more interesting than the basic 8 recert. in-depth discussion of topics is the norm. the refs attending are beyond the "simple" stuff.

i agree that some of this could be done on-line, but you miss the interchange of ideas and views that in person discussion brings to the rest. the test should definitely go on-line. it is easy to provide standard explanations to missed questions on-line.

[Untroubled by Reason]

If you don't like the current course then why don't you become an Instructor and try to do something about or better yet upgrade to get the advance training you are looking for.


You sound like a group of parents on the sideline of a game complaining that the referee sucks but not willing to do anything about.
With all due respect, I'm going to call "bullsh*t," scref. In reading most of the posts above, I don't think the objection is that the instructors do a poor job, or that they aren't trying, or that those posting could do a better job, etc. The objection is that in this day and age, why can't the course be modernized (i.e., online instruction), or at least made more relevant. Plus, at least in my neck of the woods, you have to be a pretty high-ranking ref to be an instructor, and I know I don't pack that particular gear.

[JeffG]

Thanks for reminding me to check my state's website! :)

[Ref Flunkie]

If you don't like the current course then why don't you become an Instructor and try to do something about or better yet upgrade to get the advance training you are looking for.


You sound like a group of parents on the sideline of a game complaining that the referee sucks but not willing to do anything about.

I did upgrade, but I'm not going to drive 2 hours to attend the state clinic unless I have to. And again, the instructors know what they are doing....it is just the material that they are given that needs some work (It almost like they are told to take 2 hrs of info and stretch it into 6). Tell you what, put me in charge and I will hire a high school kid to put this all online. The fact is the people that want to debate and discuss these ideas and expand their feel for the game will do so outside of the recert. Those that don't and are not paying attention during this course will not. The focus of this course should be the thorough review of the LOTG, not which sorts of tackles seen in MLS are SFP, USB, or nothing; save that for the advanced clinic. I must say I never understood why pretty much only 1.5 of the 6 hours of the class was dedicated to the LOTG changes and exam...should that be the MAIN focus of the recert?

ref47, I agree that an exchange of ideas is great, but we spent 25 minutes discussing (debating) what sort of touch by a defender reset offside (meaning, what was considered to be controlled and played). This all started when one of the instructors said that a GK punching the ball (two fisted) was considered played and controlled (thereby resetting offside). This set off a whirlwind argument of fun. I almost got into a debate with one of the instructors on whether one of their example slides was DOGSO or SFP, but I decided it really wasn't worth it.

I must say that the BEST thing that came out of this was the fact that no one knows what the rules are regarding pass cards and risk management cards when it comes to each individual league. Do we play, do we not.....do we wait, do we see what happens at half time? Not even the assignors there knew. I knew the one instructor and told him that there HAS to be a central website where referees can go to get this info quick and easy. And it needs to be in writing SOMEWHERE so we can point coaches or whoever to it and say "See, this is what we are told to do". If anything comes out of this year's recert, hopefully it is the creation of a central site for referee info.

[Ref Flunkie]

With all due respect, I'm going to call "bullsh*t," scref. In reading most of the posts above, I don't think the objection is that the instructors do a poor job, or that they aren't trying, or that those posting could do a better job, etc. The objection is that in this day and age, why can't the course be modernized (i.e., online instruction), or at least made more relevant. Plus, at least in my neck of the woods, you have to be a pretty high-ranking ref to be an instructor, and I know I don't pack that particular gear.

HS just went online last season for their rules meetings. It was great...sit at home, watch the videos, take a little test, and BAM!, you are set. The recert should be for the rules only....where we can all contribute is on the local league level where these 16 year old kids are being tossed to the wolves. That is where they start to learn man management and how to deal with the temperament of the game.

[scref]

Last time I took the test it was a non open book test.

If the test was available online, how many people would cheat and use their LOTG book and/or any other material?