Recerts keep getting worse and worse. This year, we have about 4 hours of materiel that I could have gotten through in about 15 minutes at my own pace. Right now in the backround, there's an instructor reading through a long slide in the slowest monotone know to man...it's taking about three or four minutes for him to read what it woud take anyone with over a third grade education about 30 seconds to read by themselves. And so...many...slides. Instead of using videos for examples, they're using multiple still frames from videos for reason I can't come close to comprehending. There was one five minute manual going throught the changes to the Laws that was actually useful. The rest is the least engaging collection of lessons that I have ever experienced. And I haven't even gotten to the test yet, which if it's anything like the last few years, will be mind-bogglingly bad. Sorry to vent, but I hate doing these things so much. But at least it's online...so there's that.
Look at them as something which every year will give you something worse than your worst game. Outside that, I got nothin'.
Grrr. The continued adding of legal requirements that apply to refs (and don’t seem particularly relevant) is a growing problem for AYSO recruiting parents to volunteer as refs. “I need how many hours of training???”
Forget the parents. At least at that age, we have a sort of understanding or what its supposed to do (whether it does or not is a completely other issue). I think of the HS senior or college kid or early 20-something who was going to recert, but finds this to be a complete waste of time and chooses not to.
There is also a non-zero and very important portion of the referee community comprised of full-fledged adults that only officiate other adults. I have to believe the annual requirements around child protection (not their goal but their length, repetitiveness, irrelevance to the job, etc.) are slowly weeding out some of those individuals, particularly as said individuals get older and are doing fewer matches on their own accord anyway.
Agree--it's death by a thousand cuts. Piling on broad requirements that are designed more to give the impression that something is being done than to actually make kids safe. If they actually though there was information important for referees/umpires, then there would be a specific course relevant to what we do in those roles, which would be more streamlined than the ones that apply to coaches who have ongoing relationships with the kids.
Yeah, that's exactly the problem with all aspects of the recent....it seems that no one involvolved in creating them makes any effort to see what part actually benefits referees and what doesn't. Would it be that hard to grab a couple of refs and do a quick beta test? If nothing else, they can fix all the typos (I saw a lot this year), and nonsensical quiz questions. At best, they can point out the points that people made here, and actually make recerts that benefit us. I think part of the issue is old notion that a recert must be at least a certain amount of hours, and then they pad it with unnecessary stuff. I remember an in-person recert a while back where the instrucuctor made us sit in the class doint nothing for a half hour after he finished all the material, becasue he had to hit the full time ampount. Felt the same online this time...I did two modules this year that came right out of the new ref course. Why? Quality over quantity.
Bingo. Let me illustrate this with an example. Several years ago, when I was 18 or 19, I was doing a game with a teenage AR who was 2-3 years younger than me, around 16. We broadly knew each other outside of refereeing, went to the same high school at the same time, I had friends who were on the track team with him, etc. He didn’t have a ride home so I did the nice thing and offered to give him a ride. If I am remembering my SafeSport training correctly, these days the ride would have technically been a SafeSport violation because I was an “adult” (technically) and he was under 18, and there was no one else in the car. Call me crazy, but what a ridiculous rule. Would it be safer for him to Uber home with a complete stranger? I also think some of the other rules have unintended consequences that are bad. While well-intentioned, I don’t agree with the prohibition on adults electronically communicating with teenagers unless another adult (usually their parent) is attached. Anyone who ever was, knew, or has had a teenager should be able to see that such a requirement puts up a real communication barrier. Very difficult for a teenager to speak openly with a coach or mentor they trust if their parent (or someone they don’t know as well) needs to be attached. I think this policy does more harm than good for most teenagers by stifling communication with adults who could be positive influences. Obviously the situations that led to the creation of SafeSport are horrific, and there are unfortunately adults who abuse children and have no place in sport. There should be no tolerance for these kind of people. But lawyers have a saying, “hard cases make bad laws,” and I think SafeSport is a perfect example of that.