I saw this on Twitter and figured it would be of interest here. 🆕 A Deep Dive into PRO Referees ⚽️The Post recently came into possession of the PRO Collective Bargaining Agreement. 💸How much are refs paid? 📊How are they evaluated?The answers to your questions, Part 1 ⤵️https://t.co/pKtivICk08— The Post Cincy - Covering FC Cincinnati & MLS (@ThePostCincy) June 1, 2023
With the understanding that a lot of people on this board already have access to this information, is this, I don’t know, “legal” to share? I’m going to use the word legal because I’m not sure what other one to use. Some contracts/CBA are confidential and cannot be shared without authorization. For the record I am not saying it’s inappropriate to post here - it’s out in the open now and it seems like a good topic of discussion.
Someone will be in trouble for this being leaked. But yeah, can’t stop the discussion here. Though I would imagine all active PSRA BU members would steer away from engaging on the merits.
I will say the paternity and maternity leave they get are really really good. Two months for paternity leave. Three months for maternity leave.
There's no way this was supposed to get out, but the newspaper hasn't done anything remotely wrong. They were handed the document and made the determination it was newsworthy. I'd be more surprised if they hadn't.
I don’t understand the KMI scoring chart. Does this mean that referees don’t get any points at all for difficult decisions in which they correctly did not call something?
Yes. Philosophically, one could argue this meshes perfectly with the idea that underpunishing something is better than overpunishing it. Whether or not that is a good thing, of course... I imagine one of the most fascinating ones for the public to read is the first one under VAR. VAR's get +1 if they correctly do NOT recommend a review for a KMI that is wrongly decided in the opinion of PRO. In other words, it's a +1 point incentive for not intervening in that grey zone that is deemed wrong by PRO but not clearly wrong. I think many here can digest that nuance but I don't believe any fans can. Overall, I suspect this forum might be the #1 location for interest in this document and attached analysis outside people who already had visibility into it. The Cincy Post has tried to drop this as a bombshell and I actually laud the effort by the author at digesting it correctly, but there's really not going to be anything earth-shattering in here for masses.
Honestly, it helps to have this info out there when people complain about refs not being assessed or such. They won't care about the details but being able to point to something and show that they're assessed on every match and there are metrics on how a ref gets dropped is actually helpful.
Wouldn’t it be the opposite? For example, there are points to be had if a referee calls a penalty and PRO says that’s correct, but nothing to be gained by calling no penalty (other than, of course, potentially saving yourself lost points if PRO wanted a penalty).
That’s very funny that you believe this. Of course it’s logical. But the masses won’t care. You’ll point this out to them when they make their unfounded “refs never get any punishment” claims, and they’ll just say “okay well clearly it’s not working because all the ref still suck so who cares!”
No, you're not wrong for the majority. But there are some (I'm thinking specifically of people in the Rapids fanbase I've had face-to-face conversations with) that will actually take the time to look at this and understand it. They may still say that PRO is not doing a good job with how they handle refs, which is fine since everyone can have an opinion on that, but they will understand that there is a system in place and being used, regardless of its working or not. That's a helpful first step.
I also find it interesting how there are a whopping 9 points of weighting assigned to Positioning and Movement, compared with, say, only 4 assigned to Match Control (which includes all non-KMI fouls and cautions) and only 1 assigned to Teamwork.
I think it makes sense. Ideal positioning and movement naturally leads to better match control, both through more accurate and consistent decision making and general credibility.
Also, if you're going to group the two positioning categories and the movement one into one super group for 9 points, I'd argue that "match control" actually encompasses the first four categories (including "interaction with participants," "game management" and "teamwork"). So it's actually a 12-9 balance in favor of match control more broadly and that's not even counting the KMIs, which is ultimately what really matters. If I had a magic wand, ran PRO and had 21 points to assign here I'd break it down a little differently (probably 14-7 rather than 12-9) but everyone's going to differ a little when creating a scoring system like this.
I guess my point is that - like the Teamwork category - positioning and movement are really a means to an end, rather than an end themselves. I figure the weight on Teamwork is so low because of that; if everything goes well during the game it doesn’t really matter how you cooperated (or didn’t) to get there. By the same logic, if you see all the fouls perfectly and sold the calls well, the position you took to make that happen doesn’t matter too much on its own. Sidenote, I think calling teamwork “a means to an end” is itself a big understatement, but PRO must not think much more of it if it’s only weighted at 1 point. Really that seems like the biggest “value statement” in this scoring system.
It would be interesting to get insight into how that compares to other leagues (glancing at the EPL).
I don’t really understand who the person is that would give a copy to a reporter. Certainly there is no official currently in PRO that wouldn’t know not to do that and I cannot think of anyone recently that was hard done by PRO or PSRA with a grudge to leak this. I also have to wonder if this is even current. All contracts have addendums and changes through their lives that may supersede or even replace sections of the original document. It’s laughable the guy is publishing this like he understands it without any context from PRO or PSRA
I think it's worth stressing just how much the KMI figures matter compared to this other score. Like, it's not irrelevant. But at the same time Elfath isn't going to suddenly get worse assignments because an assessor or two doesn't like his positioning on set pieces. It's there because it has to be there and it undoubtedly helps with the newer officials in the league. But when push comes to shove, it's almost all about the KMIs.
Without making a public accusation, I came up with one name immediately. Of course, because it was so obvious to me it probably isn't the actual answer. And it's also worth considering that people other than PRO staff and BU1 employees see this document along the way; sometimes leaks like this just organically develop because someone who wants to show they are in the know decides to show they are in the know when given the opportunity. So focusing exclusively on someone with an axe to grind might not produce the correct answer. While it's true that there are agreements and addenda all the time, I actually think the author is doing a great job trying to digest and explain this--even if he can't possibly get everything right. My question is over the actual audience for this thing. Again, I think a healthy portion of genuine interest for this is probably reading this forum.
I agree. I think there was a lot of potential for vindictive writing considering the platform, but instead they've just broken it down as factually as they can. I will readily admit that is not what I expected.
it isn’t necessarily even someone with a grudge. Someone could have simply thought it would be better if were released as it contradicts some of what the public often says about how things work. There can be lots of different motivations (on either side) for someone to leak.
Re 1 for teamwork, could also be a feel that it can be very subjective—except to the extent that it impacts the other areas. I could see PSRA not wanting an evaluation to fall significantly based on a subjective view there was not enough teamwork when the team still got the decisions right. And if they don’t get the decisions right, then they are getting dinged for that separately.