The 'OLD BOYS SCHOOL' of officials in the CCL

[HKP]

I am not that old but this does seem to be more of a Society problem. Very few people have respect for those in authority now. Whether it be Police, the courts, Social workers or Referees.

I will tell a referee if he’s had a good or bad game, but never be abusive it shows a lack of intelligence if you are abusive.

 

Referees do not go out there with the intention of runing a game, as previosuly posted they do make mistakes, but very few make as many mistakes as your average player.

Edited November 14, 2011 by HKP

[Mewcenary]

I think Krooner has already said much of what I feel on this topic.

 

Firstly, clubs should absolutely report officials who they feel have underperformed. There really should NOT be a fine for doing this if the report is appropriately constructive. I have seen that complained about before, and I did ask if the person in question wanted to put the report on here (appropriately anonymised!) so we could decide whether it was constructive or not.

 

Equally, clubs should consider writing reports on officials who have done really well!! I am always keen to do this when refereeing. I may (thankfully very rarely) have to write things about a club who have been less than hospitable, shall we say, but far more often I am writing notes about great behaviour and hospitality. Of course, for me, this is when refereeing at 'parks' level as I'm not in the middle on CCL.... yet!

 

For a referee to officiate at Div 1, they must be a level 5. Now, they will have been assessed to get to this level, but there is no requirement for assessment afterwards, if they are not trying for promotion. So, yes, a referee could continue to be involved in Div 1 football despite not having been assessed for a long time.

 

However, club marks are taken into consideration, and it is the case now that the referees in the lowest club mark band on Div 1 will be removed from the Referees' List... and those on the waiting list can step up.

 

Equally, Assistants are marked by Referees. Those marks are used to determine which assistants go on which games. Again, on Div 1, no Assessors are normally involved.

 

Hope that gives some info into how it all works. Obviously, for any exact details on appointing you'd need to go to the League Officers in question...

[Terrence Collina]

We were going to write a report for the referee we had against Cobham last week, but the club ended up marking him above the report threshold when the chairman asked them not to. These were the points we were going to make. Krooner etc, is this the kind of thing we should be pointing out, or should there be more? Clubs, hopefully will help you if you need to write a report:

 

Who wrote the report would have marked the referee 55 but was not sure what any report card may look like now.

 

Positioning

 

The referee ran poor diagonals preferring to run up and down the middle of the pitch. This resulted in him having to rely too much on his assistants for a decision because he was out of position. On one occasion a foul occured about 20 yards from the referee but he enquired of his assistant some 80 yards away on the other side of the pitch.

 

Consistency

 

He was inconsistent. Early in the match, he cautioned one of the Hartley Witney (our?) players for swearing. Notwithstanding this incorrect decision (if action is going to be taken for foul and abusive language it should be a sending off) he then proceeded to ignore any further swearing from both sides for the rest of the game.

 

Match Control

 

There were two instances when head injuries occured, one for each side. In both cases, the referee was slow to stop play and allow treatment fo what might have been serious injuries.

 

He had a habit of putting his whistle to his mouth but then not blowing it. This was misleading for both sides even though players know to 'play to the whistle'. He was also late with his decisions on many occasions and gave the impression of going with the side which called the loudest.

[Ace1]

IMD, I would be interested to know if any of the Red Cards are appealed and rescinded?

 

If anyone on this forum is from the league?, Do you volunteer your senior officials or assessors to go into clubs and give lectures/discussions with players and managers?

[Krooner]

TC I would consider that report could not warrant a score of 55 and I would expect the report to be dismissed.

 

 

I think the idea of a meeting between assessors and club reps would be a good idea to see what exactly is being looked for.

 

A nice easy example is for a penalty that seems obvious not being awarded. As an assessor my job would be to see where there referee was at the time of the incident so the first point is the referees positioning rather than the decision alone. If I felt he had a clear view I would ask him after the game why he had not given the penalty and go from there.

 

That is just one example of how things differ from the clubs perspective and maybe a session on this would be beneficial. I would ask do you think each club would send their managers/secretarys to this ?

[Terrence Collina]

I spose a good thing we ended up not sending it in. I don't know if the club were going to add to it though.

[HKP]

It is my understanding that you can only appeal a red card with video evidence.

[newby marvel]

not true ive appealed many, an not got off many, but i have appealed

[EversleyFc]

Is there any point of appealing. I don't know for certain the way these things work so forgive me if this is wrong . ( or say the right way). I think you have to pay £ 100 just to appeal. All that would happen is both warlingham and eversley would say it was not a red card tackle ( for both)and the ref would say it was. Have never known them to not back the ref. So the player has a £35 pound fine then the £100 on top plus any think else. Again not sure how appeal process works so sorry if this wrong and happy to be put right

[Mewcenary]

not true ive appealed many, an not got off many, but i have appealed

 

newby, this is a change with the new Match-based Suspension system. No appeal of red cards without video evidence.

[newby marvel]

i appealed a red whilst playing for lammas paid the £100 an the £35 went to soho sqaure with this one with three senior citizens an a guy from aldershot army league the three seniors werent interested in any appeal only the fine an money the guy from the army league was so embarassed to be a part of it he actually told us afterwards i ended up with an extra charge on top of what i paid an a lengthy ban. you could say then that unless you have video evidence its not worth it anyway

not true ive appealed many, an not got off many, but i have appealed

 

newby, this is a change with the new Match-based Suspension system. No appeal of red cards without video evidence.

cheers mewey so basically all levels up to conference cant appeal?? im saying this as who has there games televised at lower level..............unless trs or guernsey are there

[Mewcenary]

Essentially, yes. That said, video cameras are pretty cheap nowadays! I certainly see them lurking on some of my 'Park' games.

 

Note that this only applies to so-called normal on the field discipline incidents. Stuff off the field, or managers being sent from technical areas etc, falls under a different form of misconduct and may still be appealed in the usual way.

 

As a referee, I do still need to put in a written report when sending people off though.

[The Dishwasher]

I think it would be helpful if both sides agreed to support each other when putting a poor score for a referee this would weedle them out quicker. All to often its only one team who put the poor report in. The ref we had against guernsey had already ruined 1 of games this where both sides felt he was very poor. Had both teams put in a poor report he may not have been given the Guernsey game.

[HKP]

not true ive appealed many, an not got off many, but i have appealed

Thought this was new for this season? Heard this from someone at the GFA the other day.

[inmyday]

A lively debate and some contsructive comments from former and current referees. 2 days on I am still as frustrated by what I saw on Saturday but the referee has been marked down and report compiled. Hopefully Warlingham will do the same.

We will see what ensues.....

[Krooner]

Is there any point of appealing. I don't know for certain the way these things work so forgive me if this is wrong . ( or say the right way). I think you have to pay £ 100 just to appeal. All that would happen is both warlingham and eversley would say it was not a red card tackle ( for both)and the ref would say it was. Have never known them to not back the ref. So the player has a £35 pound fine then the £100 on top plus any think else. Again not sure how appeal process works so sorry if this wrong and happy to be put right

 

Well funnily enough Eversley I have been to 2 in my life and on both occasions the red card was overturned. One corrcetly so and the other it was overturned on the word of the player and his manager over the referee. So taking your view I have never seen a ref win.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Krooner

[Terrence Collina]

TC I would consider that report could not warrant a score of 55 and I would expect the report to be dismissed.

 

 

I think the idea of a meeting between assessors and club reps would be a good idea to see what exactly is being looked for.

 

A nice easy example is for a penalty that seems obvious not being awarded. As an assessor my job would be to see where there referee was at the time of the incident so the first point is the referees positioning rather than the decision alone. If I felt he had a clear view I would ask him after the game why he had not given the penalty and go from there.

 

That is just one example of how things differ from the clubs perspective and maybe a session on this would be beneficial. I would ask do you think each club would send their managers/secretarys to this ?

 

I have thought a bit more about this Krooner and what I don't think helps is the FA continually moving the goalposts. Once upon a time it used to be 4/10 and below you had to write a report, then it became 50/100 and now it is 70/100. I get the impression that the FA have deliberately done this to perceive the referee getting good marks rather than identifying that a referee may have had a bad game. I would argue that 55 is a generous mark and the areas identified are the reason why the referee did not get a higher mark. Had this been better then he may have got a genuine 75.

[Krooner]

You have to write a report if a ref gets less than 70 !!!!

[Terrence Collina]

ok so it has moved from 4 to 50 to 69.9 in a short space of time

[Karen Browne]

You have to write a report if a ref gets less than 70 !!!!

In the South Midlands League and with the Herts FA we have to mark the referee out of 100 and we have three sections we have to mark them upon - a) Overall Control, Overall Decision Making and c) Communication & Player Management. We are required to tick one of the four options in all three sections - Disappointing, Reasonable, Good and finally Excellent.

 

 

If any area is marked “disappointing,” or the overall mark awarded is 50 or less, detailed, constructive comments which could help improve the referee’s future performance are required.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Karen Browne