I read about how a player is held accountable for his actions, either by way of a card, suspension or verbal warning. How is a bad referee held accountable for his poor performance? Paul
Most leagues have a system that allows coaches to "ding" a referee. After a certain number of "dings" a ref is usually given some kind of punishment. I know in NCAA basketball, three "dings" gives the ref a suspension.
Many on this list know a little better than I, but in the pros, referees are assessed every match. In MLS if you fail two assessments, then you're done for the year. Referees need to recertify each year as well. You can see some evidence of this via th public database at www.ussoccer-data.com Just search the names of some referees from year to year to see additions and subtractions. Also, look at the referees that get the tough matches in the regular season and playoffs. If you do well, there are rewards. The referees are held accountable, just look at what happened to Noel Kenny. In theory, MLS coaches can't blacklist or ding a referee like they can in NCAA or HS ball.
Paul, First, let me state that this answer applies to USSF referees, not high school or college. And I am assuming you are talking about the youth level, not the professional level. Second, there is a difference between holding someone accountable for violation of the rules or laws of the game and holding someone accountable for a poor performance. On the one hand, they get fouls called on them or receive cautions or ejections for violating the laws. On the other hand, the only repercussions for a poor performance is to be subbed out by the coach or to be benched for the next game. So when you talk about "holding a referee accountable", are you talking about a poor performance where perhaps the referee was inconsistent in his/her calls, perhaps didn't "manage" the game well, perhaps didn't maintain proper positioning, perhaps didn't utilize his/her ARs as well as possible, etc. All referees have off games or bad days where we might be guilty of one or more of these "offenses". If you are talking about technical mistakes in the application of the laws of the games, that's rarer -- certainly among referees above the lowest grade and level of experience. For all referees above grade 8 and some grade 8's who truly want to improve their game, they receive assessments on how they referee and work to improve their game. Can they still have a "poor performance"? Of course. They're human. If you are talking about an entry level referee in their first couple years of refereeing, then perhaps they need some mentoring to improve their ability to call a game. To answer your question, here's the things that you (or your coach) can do... Write up your assessment of the job of officiating provided in your game. Obviously, if the opposing coach agrees with the assessment and is willing to participate in the process, it will carry more weight -- shows you're not just venting about not getting the calls. When you make the writeup, be specific about incidents that were handled inappropriately. Make sure that you have the names of all parties involved -- both the center referee and the ARs if there were licensed ARs. Send this report to the league president governing the game you are referring to. He will generally forward it to the referee assigner. The assigner will generally then investigate by talking to the referee and talking to the ARs if there were some there. The referee associations that I have been involved with will take some action to insure that the referee is doing things properly. They'll send observers or mentors out to watch the referee in question work and to provide feedback on improving their game. It will take time, but if you have a truly bad referee -- someone who hasn't taken the time to learn the game, doesn't taken the advice of mentors to improve their game or doesn't take the time to stay current with the game -- then eventually, these actions will have an affect. Either the association will recommend to the individual that perhaps they are not best served to continue in their efforts to referee and would better serve the soccer community by participating in other area. The assigners can enforce this recommendation by no longer assigning the individual games. Sometimes, it's just a level of game issue. Some referees who are very competent at the recreational level just can't make the step up to higher levels. Other referees do perfectly well working girls games where there tends to be less physical play, less dissent and the game is not quite as fast, but they struggle when doing older guys games. So it's just a matter of assigning to the level of game they're capable of doing. Note: Before I get flamed for saying the girls games are easier, I said TENDS to be. I have had some tough U14 girls games just as I have had some very easy U18 guys games. At the beginning when I mentioned that I assumed you're talking about youth and not professional level that's because at the professional level, the referees are constantly assessed. With rare exceptions, they are assessed on every game they work. If they fail these assessments or if they fail too many of them, then they will no longer be included in the pool of referees to work professional games.
Actually, I am talking about collegiate refs. And I mean a poor job officiating, whatever that entails... poor positioning, unable to control a game, etc.. I find it troublesome in everything you mentioned, there is no real effective measure to hold a ref reponsible for his poor performance. Paul
Re: Re: Referee Acountability Where do YOU work? I hated doing girls' games in Mass because I found exactly the opposite to be true.
I know one thing for certain: Abusing the referee does absolutely zero to improve his or her performance. So, if it accomplishes nothing, other than possibly making -- in a coach/parent/player's eyes -- a shaken referee's performance even worse, than all the abuser is doing is making him or herself feel good. In other words, the abuser is mentally masturbating themselves.
In general , USSF referees who perform poorly stop getting assignements at that level, or grade, though they might get lower level games, but even that can be impacted depending on what aspect of peformance is in question. There can, for example, be fitness issues, or judgement, or accountablility. I am an assignor and, for example, there have been referees, over the years, who I have had to drop from my list. Plus assignors network, so you learn of other assingors' experineces. Most of the referees who are dropped soon stop officating and are out of the system. In many cases I have been able to provide some guidance to referees so they can get back on track after receiving complaints or having problems.
Not only that, but in youth games, when parents and coaches start shouting, all they do is teach their children to yell and shout when things don't go their way.
Re: Re: Re: Referee Acountability I work mostly in Northern Indiana and Southwestern Michigan, but also work elsewhere around Indiana.
Well, to be a collegiate referee or a high school referee, you only have to take a test. There's no ongoing REQUIRED education or certification and there's no onfield training involved to become certified. A lot of the high school and collegiate referees are also USSF referees. However, some are guys who have officiated other sports and decided to pick up soccer to have something to do in the fall. They only referee soccer a couple months out of the year, do no ongoing education or training and so by definition, are not going to be as good as your higher grade USSF referees. The bigger conferences like the Big Ten, Big East, ACC, etc. all do assessments and their pool of officials are fairly proven. But that's not the case across the board.
One thing I learned in the military is that leaders have to support each other, and no more so than when in front of their subordinates. So, if a leader has issues with another leader, they need to settle it in private. If they fight (verbally or otherwise) in front of the troops, then they undermine both of their authorities. Likewise when parents fight in front of their kids. Or when parents fight with referees ...
Suggest that we follow a policy of club marks to be turned in on every match evaluating officials performence. Assessing is a problem in terms of numbers and the fact they want referees to pay for it themselves in some leagues. But if both clubs request one as a result of the same match they should be done automatically. Newer Referees should be assessed at least once every five matches in my opinion 1st 5th 10th and 20th Actually as referees we are highly critical of our performances and expectations to do well everygame is our goal. Not perfection but as fair as an apraisal as we are capable of. After we consider options and see where we might have better handled certain situations. If one is able a video review is a great tool but needs a good vantage point to cover the match properly. Request feedback from both teams and any referees or mentors in attendance. Converse with spectators for an opportunity to comment as well. Avoid arguments but enjoy explaining points of law and view to those receptive to engage in a polite debate. I suggest a simple philosophy, CARE what people think but NEVER worry about what they choose to think. Although we have our detractors most of us thoroughly enjoy the action and use humour, selective hearing, patience and try to keep options as Could I (having choice and possibilities) rather than Should I (infering must do and feeling guilty)
I've never had an official assessment in 26 years of reffing so I'm still a level 8. When doing high school games, my best feedback is from my team. Doing centers with more experienced ARs and doing ARs for more experienced CRs. When I'm one of the more experienced in the crew, I like to give feedback where appropriate. In anycase, I like to solicit feedback at halftime and after the game from my crew or any other experienced ref who happens to be in attendance. Sharing, formally and informally is how we improve. At one time, our league asked for comments from coaches, but dropped that policy along time ago. I don't think the league got an adequate response from coaches, since reporting was voluntary. As a coach, I'm seldom concentrating on the ref. I'm usually trying to figure out what we can do to stop or score on our opposition. Or what skills we need to work on at practice. Or who needs to go into the game next.
Assessed? No. Observed and mentored? Yes. Personally, I do not think that a new referee should have a formal assessment (long or short form) until after two years. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't have peer feedback and mentoring, but it is useless to expend an assessor's time (and the league or state money) to watch a referee commit 200 mistakes and try to select the key two or three items to work on. Our league still uses coach's referee report forms. Be very careful how you use the information and consider the relatively uninformed (and possibly biased) nature of the observers. Somewhere I have the cards from the opposing coaches in a 6-0 blow-out. One coach has me walking on water and the other thinks I'm the devil incarnate. I suspect the truth is somewhere in between.
Probably a better choice of words NSA I agree formal assessments would be wasted. I was referring primarily to the fact that far too often an inexperianced or new referee is not monitored or given support in the early part and in two years likely not to be around. In the UK, club marks are an important element in obtaining promotion. of a referee. I am not sure if it should be a coaches job so much as a teams' opinion by select observers. It comes down to the fact at the grass roots level time people and money is not readily made available and the idea that only another referee can assess correctly is not infallible. I have always thought we discount the opinions of players, parents and coaches too easily. If we really want to impose a no abuse no crap policy on the field we need to respond better to critizims then dismissing all players or coaches rantings as illinformed opinions with no idea. I find the adversarial approach is the basis for most of our on field problems. I also feel many referees have demonstrated they are not worthy of the matches they have been selected to do. On this board and others I have seen rips on certain referees in the limelight by other referees. As well as a defiant defence of other referees whereby a player or a coach or a fan feels something was off. I know we like to seperate the components of us and them. The game is a world wide effort and while in my referee mode I truly support the concepts of fairplay. As a player and a coach my concerns are no different in that reguard. When I watch a referee having a less than stellar game in my opinion I refrain from outright abuse but admit it is difficult when the centre is quite plainly a pompous twit who thinks he knows everything, a lazy so and so who fails to give the proper effort, a referee who clearly is having problems in managing the game or not protecting the player's safety. I do not need to be a referee to understand those things and while full understanding of each law allows us to make a proper restart it does not translate into a good match that the players enjoy or people who come to watch understand. I believe that comments biased as some are must be forced out into the open to reveal the quality of the referee or the nature of those that coach, watch and play. I wear the boots at centre and know the difficulties but excuses that only the players and coaches are the problem does not sit well with me. There needs to be prestart league meetings to address complaints not on a personal level but reflect the true ability to do the job well.. Codes of conduct , Go over the basics of the game at registration with parents, players and coaches. Have regular information meeting, quit seperating the players, coaches and referees. Look for quest speakers and offer to help a team understand the laws by showing up at a prearranged practise and go over the things they feel upset or fail to grasp. Nothing we do needs to be kept secret or that with a bit of training some players or coaches could excell us in short order as a referee on the FOP. As a coach I have my players take the basic referee course and would get them to fun referee other team's practises. They pick up both the difficulty that the duties actually entail and the responsibility the referee has to the players and the game Egos aside many leagues fail miserably not set the bar high in reguards to dress codes, showing up on time, fail to offer support be it via observation or mentoring. Having a body or a volunteer is good enough according to some. Only a small select group of referees achieve the cookie status and 90 % of games at the grassroots level have 90% of the problems because they formulate 90% of the people who watch, play, coach and referee .