We do not require ball holders. When my daughter was in Massachusetts, they required two ball holders even for sub varsity. Can you imagine how hard it would be to get two ball holders for a JV girls game at 3:30 p.m.? And if they didn't have them, no game. One time I was doing a varsity boys' game. The home team had more than two ball holders, who all appeared to be about 9 to 11 years old. In the first half, I sent off a ball holder. He had been standing behind the visiting team's goal line and was verbally harassing the visiting keeper. I'm such a mean guy.
And if they don't, and the visiting team doesn't, you still play the game and manage it using your judgement . Had a similar situation last night, under 2:00 to go, home team is up by a goal. Home team player clears a ball, as far as he could possibly kick it. 40 yards off the touchline. I know I can't determine what was in his mind, but its not my first time on a soccer field either. At that point. Yes, we stopped the game for a reasonable amount of time to allow for retrieval. Home coach (his father is a referee) doesn't say a word. He fully understood. As I'm at my car, changing, a couple parents approached and we had a nice civil conversation about that situation. I explain my options are to do nothing (as home team didn't provide ball boys, that's a no go), I could yellow card the kid, already on a yellow ( he did play the ball on the field in a legal manner, but it was shithousery) but that would be extraorinarily harsh and having to fit that into a discipline category. My best option is to stop the clock (or add time on if it were FIFA rules). They thanked me for taking the time with them.
Probably not. Just sticking their finger in the one hole in the dike for the now. No assignor/league program can take a long view beyond a few weeks.
This should go in the bad stories. I am doubtful they'll continue this practice. They probably have some MLS clubs where they need referee's and the assignor over there can't cover their own matches. If it was a Non-MLS club they would just push the game. Exactly. But if they need it for a weekend a couple times during the year... why not? MLS can invest some money. Now if they could do this for their tournaments and showcases....
There’s no way they do this for tournaments or even need to. There are plenty of refs, and probably good refs, regionals, who will fall over themselves to pay their own way to these mls next tournaments because “a pro2 assessor will be there”. They’re almost like scabs in a strike who are suppressing wages and benefits for other refs because they put up with this crap I was just surprised to see the travel pay offer, even though this was a 300 mile 6 hour car drive from our location. Obviously no one would do this on their own for a weekend without being paid for it
Yes, that is what I would do. But what I am finding is that most refs don't give them crap about it. They just play the game. I harp on it before the game . I say things, like, "you can't pay 2 kids a few bucks"? "What about your 19th and 20th players on the bench"? And if they are still reluctant, "It's mandatory - what are you going to do"? And like I said they always comply. If only to shut me up...... Similar situation - JV games and I ask for rosters. "oh, we never do that. no ref has ever asked before". Well, you're going to do it for this game. Bad on them, but worse on those other refs.....
Worst case scenario is to play the game and then report them to the state. ADs generally don’t like having to deal with calls from the state about administrative matters.
Oh, I have all this training and knowledge, don't think I don't vocalize what they 'should' be doing.
Lots of stuff in first game today, my career game number 3,600. JV boys, two smaller schools. Green (home, of course) has 14 players. White has about eight. We get things underway before the game when I ask the green coach the magic question, "Will all of your players be legally and properly equipped by game time?" He replies, "They're teenage boys." I said, "That doesn't sound like a yes." "I'll do my best." The game starts and I notice green #5 has his socks down around his ankles, making it clear that he doesn't have any shin guards. When green scores their second goal, about 17 minutes, I tell him, "Five, come with me." He doesn't even ask 'what for.' We walk across the field to his coach, I point out that his player clearly isn't wearing shin guards. A teammate exclaims, "Oh, man. Really?" I show the coach the card and number 5 starts to walk back onto the field! "You have to put on the shin guards in order to play." The coach subs for him. As the game is starting, some JV age girls from the home school start chanting "V A R D, we are vard!" They are the aardvarks. Late in the first half, white is awarded a goal kick. A field player places the ball properly for the kick and then signals "first down" like a NFL referee. At halftime, white's coach comes to tell us, and the home coach, that their goalkeeper had a previous concussion and his doctor had ordered that he not play more than one half. They were, therefore, unable to field seven players for the second half and were forfeiting the game. And I got an hour's rest before the varsity game, which the white team won in a stunning come back, scoring two in the last six minutes to win, 2-1.
Had the chance to work with our local PRO2/National referee (he started both last year) on a D3 college doubleheader on Sunday. It was fun to work with someone who can make a lower-level college men’s game look pretty easy and have such rapport with the players. I also learned a lot from him about PRO’s instruction for using comms that I’ll take forward into future games (and he was holding me accountable in real time on following those instructions, which I highly appreciated). I always enjoy working with really good officials. I try hard to take things away from why they do well to manage games like this.
Mens Amateur D3 game - though it's a newly created division and new teams who are both near the top of the league and will move up soon enough. Still, not without the usual lower level physicality and recklessness. Winning Team is mostly older players (30s and 40s); losing team is younger - literally HS and college aged. Just about 90 mins and team leading 3-1 gets a corner. I actually know one of the two players near the corner (let's call him Chris) because we played together on a team for years. Teammate says to Chris: "Stay here. We'll play short." Chris: "No, I'll take this defender away and just play a normal corner." Teammate: "No. Stay here, we can kill it off." Chris: "OK, but I'm playing to you." Teammate: "What do you mean. I'm already on the ball." Me (sighing): "Chris doesn't want to inevitably get kicked in the ankles on what is likely the last play of the game. But we've wasted enough time talking and gotta get this ball in play now, so sorry Chris, he's tapping it to you..."
So last night I had my maiden voyage with comms on a HS game. Good rapport with the guys I was with, and a game that was conducive to devoting some bandwidth to the shiny new tech. I liked having them and get that this is a tool with a skill curve. For erstwhile Grassroots Referees not privy to USSF guidance on comms is there any neutral guidance that would be useful? I came up with: You can talk a lot but what you say should matter, and what matters depends on who you're with, and sometimes a hand signal is just fine or even better than talking, and there's a line between verbalizing every onside defender position and verbalizing the close ones. Also if you're giving an opinion or a viewpoint, don't frame it as a question, and the reverse holds as well.
You've got the gist already down @Pittsburgh Ref. Nice! Comms get more and more complicated the more you think about them. Here are some general theories I have: Communicate only for a purpose so that way the comms serve as a tool rather than background noise you can selectively ignore. Consider when you should communicate non-emergent information. Best time for that communication is when the ball is out of play or being kicked negative where there is no immediate attacking threat. If the decision is easy or straightforward, there's no need for communication. Many foul and misconduct decisions fall on a spectrum. Don't immediately verbalize decisions as an AR unless you're sure what you are communicating is accurate and consistent with the way the center wants to use the game. Let the center ask for help first. Say "help" if you're the center and you want an AR or 4th to extend their area or assist on a foul decision. Don't immediately use the comms on high-stakes decisions unless you are 100% sure in what you are communicating, let everyone process the moment first (e.g. a speculative "SPA SPA SPA" on the comms from an AR while a center is taking a DOGSO snapshot could create an error, rather than prevent an error). Questions can be effective if done at the right moments (e.g. "Tom are you thinking SPA there?", "He's on my radar for PO. How many fouls does he have?", "Joe did you have an attacker in an offside position there? If he was he challenged the opponent.")
Um....really? So it's okay to put yourself at risk just as long as it's not for the normal amount of time. What kind of quack doctor is this?
I've worked with several D1 referees over the last calendar year who have provided me a lot of good feedback on how to use comms. Here are some of the tips. I know some of these may contradict each other. They are coming from different people. (From the referee on Sunday) - Give the decision or recommendation. Keep communication to one word ideally. For example, "Defender, Defender" if a defender deliberately plays the ball. If the ball goes out, you don't have to say, "Out". Just say the color of the team with the throw. (From a different D1 referee) - The closer the ball gets to the penalty area, the less "chatter" he wants. If the ball is in the middle of the field with no challenge for the ball, it's OK to discuss things about the game that aren't related to a decision. Use "good" to describe pretty much anything that involves keeping play going. Play is onside, ball remained in play, and not wanting to call a foul in the AR's quadrant are three examples. Don't use "on" to signify "onside", as that could easily be misheard as "off". (From Sunday) - only use "position" to signify a player in an offside position if there's a set piece. If an offside position occurs through active play, then say "hold" if a goal is scored and you aren't sure about involvement. This is the equivalent of standing at the flag with no comms (and obviously, we should do that even with using comms). Obviously, every referee will have different preferences on how to use comms. From what I learned Sunday, fewer words are better and you don't have to always verbalize a decision. Hope that helps - I'm always happy to expand on some of these more. EDIT - The "help" from the center is good advice. If I know it's a long ball and the center will have to catch up, I will say "I'm here" to signify that I'm on top of things and can assist more. I'll have to find it again, but @coreyrock did a fantastic NISOA session on using comms that I'll have to go back and watch for a second time. There was a lot of great advice in that session, and this discussion has prompted me to review that to refresh myself.
The fact that US Soccer still has their, in my opinion, very dumb and misguided directive of not allowing their use if any members of the crew are below regional is ridiculous. Plenty of people don't want to jump through the hoops required to become regionals and stay grassroots and still can get pretty high level matches, and of course NFHS/NISOA don't have that requirement anyway. MLS Next is a perfect place where refs (usually dedicated grassroots or regionals) can get practice using them in an environment that is still youth but is relatively serious competition. Instead, you end up with situations where people may have absolutely no experience using comms until they potentially get the regional badge, and then no one knows a good way to use them, and have situations like the above where refs have to rely on hearsay from experienced refs where one ref's desired terms and usage can completely change from one ref to the next and you basically have to "re-learn" using them every time.
My biggest quibble with the rule is that absolutely no one wants their first experience with comms to be on the sort of game that gets a full crew of regional referees assigned to it. That would be probably a USL2 or NPSL game in most places. Maybe a UPSL game if you’re “lucky,” but not like that’s any better. There should be opportunities on easier games for referees to practice using comms for the first time rather than giving them a baptism by fire.
In my opinion, you don’t need communication devices on youth games in the first place. I feel like so many people use them as a crutch. If you have a good pregame and use good eye contact, then communication should not be a problem. I guess I’m just old school.
Good stuff, but you forgot the most important one: Shooting the shit in a blowout game when you'd be bored out of your mind otherwise. They were a lifesaver in last night's 12-0 game to talk with my partner.
I find it ridiculous. The best games I've done, both as an AR and CR, have been with comms and all at tournaments where the assignors/tournament directors allowed their use (apparently against proper protocols). We kept a focus on proper mechanics, but the unpredictability of some youth matches (errant long balls, deflections, poor touches, etc.) results in situations where the CR can be out of position through no fault of their own. The comms allow for both ARs to be in a good position to assist as you recover to a proper position. Also, when you are working with new people every game, it can be helpful in building a quick rapport, especially if the time between games is so short so as to not allow for adequate pre-game conferences.
I haven't done an MLS Next match in over a season now, but IIRC correctly, the rules specifically state referees cannot use comm's systems under the guise that 'this is a development league.' Huh??? Don't want referees to train too??? It was a very odd statement.
I've used them on UPSL games. I can assure you, none of us were anywhere close to regional referees. I feel the comms make us a much more effective crew for these sort of games which probably are our upper level of our refereeing universe.
Yes "Help" is the correct term for needing assistance, what you're actually going to hear is, "F***! Help!" I agree that 'Only all Regional Referees' is on the ornery side, but I think there was a problem of referees whom had no business using comms were using them. My 2nd-5th time using comms they were provided by a guy that had traveled for an event over two days. Day one he gives a 10 minute pregame to two people that had used comms once between them and part of his pregame is, "When the ball goes out, tell me who touched it last." Great, now I have to translate my thoughts. The next day there is some confusion and our third gets to the field 10 minutes before kickoff but he decides to use them anyway. It just wasn't a good experience. I think US Soccer is missing training materials on proper use of comms. I think there are a few cases where communication devices are appropriate for games where the whole crew isn't regional. I would guess that I do fewer than 5 of those games a year. Otherwise it will be referees who don't properly communicate without headsets now trying to communicate with headsets.
This is one of those examples where I agree completely with the theory of this edict, but not with the practice. Yes, I've also seen referees using comms on games they have zero business using comms for. But for any games U16 and up and where the crew is comfortable using them, why can't we have that flexibility without running afoul of policy? Here's an example. I've been assigned to the center for a U17 boys State Cup final at the end of October. For high school and college, I probably use comms for 2/3 of my games since I also like getting my more inexperienced ARs comfortable with using them. I'm an AR and a fourth for a smattering of D1 games each season where comms are mandatory. My two ARs are veteran high school officials. One of them is a college official. We have all used comms in the past when we have worked together in all three positions. We are very comfortable using them. Why wouldn't we be allowed to use them when they will help our performance? I totally get if I'm working a U17 game with a young AR who has never used them and I know won't understand how to use them effectively. Yes, I won't use them. But for a State Cup final, I want every tool at my disposal that I can use to be the best official I can be as long as I know how to use them. As part of my pregame, the second line I tell my ARs is "We do not referee any differently with the comms than without them. I want eye contact, soft signals, etc. I will continue to look at you when the ball is played forward and there's a chance of offside. We just use the comms to help us more." The MLS Next edict is also stupid, in my opinion. If these are officials you are developing to hopefully be your next generation of PRO officials, why not use them? By that point, if the officials on the game don't know the "old school" ways of refereeing, then that's the fault of previous trainers. Short of a training course with certification, I don't have a great answer for how USSF can address this short of what they are doing from a theoretical/academic point of view. But I do think it's a "baby out with the bathwater" kind of rule.