Ex Pros becoming referees

[Big Cat]

Don't agree at all. Some of my hardest games have been at step 5, and in the same supply league as you, a referee with just basic experience would be way out of their depth. Not in every game, but certainly in the more challenging ones. I've also observed new L4 referees on that competition that have really, really struggled. I've also coached a L4 on that league (before I was an observer on it) who had a row with the away chairman during the game by the corner flag, abandoned it, and then immediately quit refereeing. That was an interesting phone call after the game

Sunday League is an entirely different kind of challenge, much less discipline and general unruly behaviour. At step 5, and even more so steps 3 and 4, you have players that have played at higher levels and they will absolutely jump on an inexperienced referee and be in his ear the whole game. They just don't have that level of footballing intelligence at Sunday league. I've refereed ex-Premier League players and they are a different animal. Junior Lewis when he was at Welwyn Garden City, openly told me that he was impressed he couldn't manipulate me like he could the younger referees. And I sent off James Scowcroft whilst he was playing for Bury Town for a very sneaky off the ball elbow that I was very lucky to see, he couldn't believe he had been caught out as he was used to getting away with it at that level. They might not be the brightest, but when it comes to football intelligence they are steps ahead of the majority of grass roots players. A new referee, even an ex-senior player, won't be able to cope with that.

The hardest games I've done have both been Sunday League. Rogue Club Assistants, no team sheets, ragged side lines, Stella Artois, whacky backie, 3 off in first half for violent conduct with another in the second half type thing. Give me the clear Rules of Step 5 footy over that virtually impossible riot. I've had challenging Step 5/6/7 games, but just find them more manageable because of the team of 3, the clear rules, somewhat safer environment and so on. Then also, the footy is more predictable at higher levels. I could go on, but maybe it just depends on our own personal experiences

Merry Christmas by the way. Can't have a Christmas Day without a brief foray and squabble on RefChat!!!

 

[RefIADad]

I’m 100% in agreement with @Big Cat here. Targeting those in the 16-23 age group who “fall short” is a great target audience. Combine that with a real effort to curb abuse (and I mean legit penalties for bad behavior), and I think this can work.

As much as my own ego doesn’t want to admit it, higher level players have a better chance of being better referees all else equal. I see it with my own son. He’s 14, and he’s an upper level player. It’s just so obvious that he “gets it” as a referee and understands the game so much better than someone like me who played only to U14 rec/park league. He knows what fouls are misconduct and which fouls can be let go. Given foul recognition is clearly the most important part of our jobs, he just has that over someone like me. He also knows the player mindset. I feel like my biggest strength is my communication with players, and I know that this always takes work. But he already has that mindset and knows what a player is likely thinking.

In the US, we have to target those who have played high school and college. For those not playing in college, refereeing is a fabulous job in college. You make good money, can set your own schedule, and you develop a lot of skills that look really good on a resume. I do think that a reasonable accelerated program is a good idea, but I also feel like these referees still need to have the adult amateur experience to really get the “chops”. For example, I’ve said in the US that the best games for developing your management skills are junior college (two-year) men’s matches. If you can manage players and get foul recognition right in those matches, everything else all the way up to the professional level is fitness and speed of the game. You need to have your promising candidates still work these types of matches.

 

[santa sangria]

I’m 100% in agreement with @Big Cat here. Targeting those in the 16-23 age group who “fall short” is a great target audience. Combine that with a real effort to curb abuse (and I mean legit penalties for bad behavior), and I think this can work.

As much as my own ego doesn’t want to admit it, higher level players have a better chance of being better referees all else equal. I see it with my own son. He’s 14, and he’s an upper level player. It’s just so obvious that he “gets it” as a referee and understands the game so much better than someone like me who played only to U14 rec/park league. He knows what fouls are misconduct and which fouls can be let go. Given foul recognition is clearly the most important part of our jobs, he just has that over someone like me. He also knows the player mindset. I feel like my biggest strength is my communication with players, and I know that this always takes work. But he already has that mindset and knows what a player is likely thinking.

In the US, we have to target those who have played high school and college. For those not playing in college, refereeing is a fabulous job in college. You make good money, can set your own schedule, and you develop a lot of skills that look really good on a resume. I do think that a reasonable accelerated program is a good idea, but I also feel like these referees still need to have the adult amateur experience to really get the “chops”. For example, I’ve said in the US that the best games for developing your management skills are junior college (two-year) men’s matches. If you can manage players and get foul recognition right in those matches, everything else all the way up to the professional level is fitness and speed of the game. You need to have your promising candidates still work these types of matches.

One big advantage higher level players have is that they also know how better referees talk with players - when to use more authority etc.

Example came to mind- One of the best futsal referees I work with is 27 and plays top flight futsal, he is his team’s backup GK, and can’t get in the side as the main GK is in the national team. Anyway, his reading of the game, foul detection and understanding of the dark arts are excellent. As a GK, he can also process difficult situations with GK slides - but what marks him out and I now see through a new lens - is he is very very good with players and dissent. He knows when to be confrontational and when to be supportive.

 

[JamesL]

One big advantage higher level players have is that they also know how better referees talk with players - when to use more authority etc.

Example came to mind- One of the best futsal referees I work with is 27 and plays top flight futsal, he is his team’s backup GK, and can’t get in the side as the main GK is in the national team. Anyway, his reading of the game, foul detection and understanding of the dark arts are excellent. As a GK, he can also process difficult situations with GK slides - but what marks him out and I now see through a new lens - is he is very very good with players and dissent. He knows when to be confrontational and when to be supportive.

How do you know that isn't confirmation bias?

Plenty of referees who are not ex pro or high level players are equally as good.

 

[RefIADad]

How do you know that isn't confirmation bias?

Plenty of referees who are not ex pro or high level players are equally as good.

I don’t think anyone is saying that someone who didn’t play the game at a high level can never become a good referee. But I do believe that, all else equal, a player has a better chance to become a good referee.

If I had ever decided to become a higher level baseball umpire, my experience as a catcher would have helped me a lot. As a catcher, I was the organizer on the field. I knew how pitches moved. I talked to home plate umpires a lot. I may or may not have ever made it to the major leagues or to work Division 1 college matches, but I would have had a step up over someone without my experience.

Meanwhile, I’ve made it to the point where I work some high level college and lower level semi-professional soccer despite not playing past park level. Is it MLS? Of course not, but I’ve worked hard and improved myself to get some pretty good matches over my career. But our best referees in my area generally are those who have played in college or some higher level.

Long way for me to say that while eventually how you do on the field should determine how far up the refereeing ladder you go. I do firmly believe those who have played at a higher level start a rung or two higher all else equal because of their experience. It’s why, as a mentor, I want to see upper level players get certified and at least try refereeing. There’s a much better chance that group will like it and want to get better at it.

 

[socal lurker]

I even think there is overlap from playing different sports. Just as playing one sport well helps in another sport. A basketball player, for example, is very familiar with jostling bodies and jumping players, as well as who had position first.

 

[santa sangria]

How do you know that isn't confirmation bias?

Plenty of referees who are not ex pro or high level players are equally as good.

Good question and TeflaRefladad gives a good answer.

Story is actually I had had a few consecutive challenging matches - due to the referees rather than the players. Futsal is a weird one with the two referees - and I am at a level where the players and refs are mixed ability, but the matches are serious, and it can be hard and revealing when the two referees are not in sync - with e.g. foul tolerance, dissent, movement, even temperament. Great learning experience tho, especially for AR work.

Confirmation bias maybe, but still worth exploring. The guy in question is a well trained and constructive ref to start with. Where I am there is a clear divide between the “solo fliers” of whatever age who mask or don’t really do teamwork - compared to those with the team mindset, who often the better trained and academy types.

But this guy definitely has this extra dimension - and part of my experience the last few weeks has been with two top flight futsal refs, one a Uefa regular - and even compared to these, this guy’s decision-making I trusted more. Of course, I have no evidence this is directly due to the playing career. And it’s futsal, different game - levels of ability may stand out more in a smaller pool.

 

[RustyRef]

I don’t think anyone is saying that someone who didn’t play the game at a high level can never become a good referee. But I do believe that, all else equal, a player has a better chance to become a good referee.

If I had ever decided to become a higher level baseball umpire, my experience as a catcher would have helped me a lot. As a catcher, I was the organizer on the field. I knew how pitches moved. I talked to home plate umpires a lot. I may or may not have ever made it to the major leagues or to work Division 1 college matches, but I would have had a step up over someone without my experience.

Meanwhile, I’ve made it to the point where I work some high level college and lower level semi-professional soccer despite not playing past park level. Is it MLS? Of course not, but I’ve worked hard and improved myself to get some pretty good matches over my career. But our best referees in my area generally are those who have played in college or some higher level.

Long way for me to say that while eventually how you do on the field should determine how far up the refereeing ladder you go. I do firmly believe those who have played at a higher level start a rung or two higher all else equal because of their experience. It’s why, as a mentor, I want to see upper level players get certified and at least try refereeing. There’s a much better chance that group will like it and want to get better at it.

I don't know about other countries, but in England there is very little evidence that being an ex-player makes you a better referee. If there was you'd expect to see the pro refereeing positions with a significant percentage of ex semi-pro or pro players, whereas in reality there are few if any.

The best teenage referee I've even watched, who fairly quickly went onto the EFL, had by his own admission never kicked a football in his life. I'm not against ex-pro players getting involved in refereeing, and there being opportunities for them, but I cannot see any justification whatsoever that they would be better than someone who has come up through the ranks, whether they have never kicked a ball or only played at grass roots.

It is driving me round the bend that the media are still harping about the "Polish referee who was an ex-professional player" being brilliant in the WC football, and how as a result it should be a blueprint for all referees. He was an amateur player, and that could mean anything from the pies i kaczka (look it up) to semi-pro football.

 

[JamesL]

I don't know about other countries, but in England there is very little evidence that being an ex-player makes you a better referee. If there was you'd expect to see the pro refereeing positions with a significant percentage of ex semi-pro or pro players, whereas in reality there are few if any.

The best teenage referee I've even watched, who fairly quickly went onto the EFL, had by his own admission never kicked a football in his life. I'm not against ex-pro players getting involved in refereeing, and there being opportunities for them, but I cannot see any justification whatsoever that they would be better than someone who has come up through the ranks, whether they have never kicked a ball or only played at grass roots.

It is driving me round the bend that the media are still harping about the "Polish referee who was an ex-professional player" being brilliant in the WC football, and how as a result it should be a blueprint for all referees. He was an amateur player, and that could mean anything from the pies i kaczka (look it up) to semi-pro football.

I think what's happening is that there are a couple of examples of players having moved over and being quite good refs too. This is being attributed to them having played rather than some of the qualities that non-players also possess that make good referees.
Similarly there are examples of former players (men in black anyone?), Whom based on their contributions on here were abysmal.

 

[Will_A]

I think it can both ways, as a former player (step 6/7 standard) I find that I have an advantage over some close friends who also referee in terms of reading the game and my man management. However, having also worked in sales for many years I’m inherently good at talking to people and getting them on my side anyway.

I’ve also seen some ex players attempt to take up the whistle and they lack the basic communication skills to get anywhere past Sunday League.

Spending close to 15 years playing certainly adds to my list of useful skills but it by no means makes me the referee that I am. Without a LOT of other life skills that playing experience is useless.

What I will say though is that having now refereed for 3 and half years, when I do occasionally put my playing boots back on to help out a local grassroots side, I’m a MUCH more intelligent and composed player! I know what to do to win a free kick and where to make little tactical fouls without getting in trouble!

 

[Mooseybaby]

Can remember Tony Philliskirk taking up the whistle towards the end of his pro playing days in the '90s, but quit within a few years as he felt progression was too slow.

Given that many pundits, ex-players who played at the highest levels of the game, have a such poor understanding of the laws of the game does little to suggest they would make a better referee than your average Joe off the street.

Additionally I can't imagine the average modern player, who has been pampered and seen their bank balance swell by £50-200k a week for 10/15 years, being interested in turning up to referee the Dog & Duck on a wet Sunday morning for £20/25!

 

[RefIADad]

I don't know about other countries, but in England there is very little evidence that being an ex-player makes you a better referee. If there was you'd expect to see the pro refereeing positions with a significant percentage of ex semi-pro or pro players, whereas in reality there are few if any.

The best teenage referee I've even watched, who fairly quickly went onto the EFL, had by his own admission never kicked a football in his life. I'm not against ex-pro players getting involved in refereeing, and there being opportunities for them, but I cannot see any justification whatsoever that they would be better than someone who has come up through the ranks, whether they have never kicked a ball or only played at grass roots.

It is driving me round the bend that the media are still harping about the "Polish referee who was an ex-professional player" being brilliant in the WC football, and how as a result it should be a blueprint for all referees. He was an amateur player, and that could mean anything from the pies i kaczka (look it up) to semi-pro football.

The media will always take a narrative and run with it. Unfortunately, those who aren't able to really think critically about things will latch onto those types of things, and they take on a life of their own.

Your example above absolutely can and should still happen. Like I said, there will be outstanding referees who haven't ever played a game, and there will be great players who couldn't referee to save their lives (same thing with coaching/managing). I don't see this as a black/white or "one way or the other" type of situation. As the mentoring director for my state's referee governing committee (similar to your county RAs in England), I constantly think about these kinds of items. For me, exposing players who are 15-21 years of age to what refereeing is and getting as many players interested as possible is only going to deepen the pool. We all realize that a deeper pool of referees quantity-wise will most likely start to find higher-quality referees. It only makes sense to target that age group of players.

I also agree that you aren't going to get the players who have made millions to referee. They don't need to do it, and they won't. But those players who are 19 years old and aren't going to ever see the first team are the ones that should be encouraged to considering refereing. The classic case like this is Michael Oliver. Obviously he also had his dad as a role model, but Oliver was an academy player before realizing he wasn't going to ever make it as a footballer and decided to focus more on officiating.

Like I've said elsewhere, I don't think a 19-year-old academy player should be a rookie one year and then refereeing in the EFL next year. But I do feel like if you can identify those ex-players who show potential and promise that you can develop a program where they can get experience fairly quickly. But like anywhere else, you just don't pick a random player and throw them into the fire straight away. You can work them in academy-style matches first so they get the mechanices down, then start working on the adult amateur and semi-pro matches to learn match management.

 

[RustyRef]

Additionally I can't imagine the average modern player, who has been pampered and seen their bank balance swell by £50-200k a week for 10/15 years, being interested in turning up to referee the Dog & Duck on a wet Sunday morning for £20/25!

In fairness, even those that are advocating ex-players being "fast tracked" have acknowledged that players from the top divisions would have no interest. As I said before, even League 1 players who earned several thousand a week would take a lot of persuading to referee even for the kinds of fees on offer as high as the National League.

 

[RustyRef]

The media will always take a narrative and run with it. Unfortunately, those who aren't able to really think critically about things will latch onto those types of things, and they take on a life of their own.

Your example above absolutely can and should still happen. Like I said, there will be outstanding referees who haven't ever played a game, and there will be great players who couldn't referee to save their lives (same thing with coaching/managing). I don't see this as a black/white or "one way or the other" type of situation. As the mentoring director for my state's referee governing committee (similar to your county RAs in England), I constantly think about these kinds of items. For me, exposing players who are 15-21 years of age to what refereeing is and getting as many players interested as possible is only going to deepen the pool. We all realize that a deeper pool of referees quantity-wise will most likely start to find higher-quality referees. It only makes sense to target that age group of players.

I also agree that you aren't going to get the players who have made millions to referee. They don't need to do it, and they won't. But those players who are 19 years old and aren't going to ever see the first team are the ones that should be encouraged to considering refereing. The classic case like this is Michael Oliver. Obviously he also had his dad as a role model, but Oliver was an academy player before realizing he wasn't going to ever make it as a footballer and decided to focus more on officiating.

Like I've said elsewhere, I don't think a 19-year-old academy player should be a rookie one year and then refereeing in the EFL next year. But I do feel like if you can identify those ex-players who show potential and promise that you can develop a program where they can get experience fairly quickly. But like anywhere else, you just don't pick a random player and throw them into the fire straight away. You can work them in academy-style matches first so they get the mechanices down, then start working on the adult amateur and semi-pro matches to learn match management.

Agree with that, but I think it might be easier where you are than in England. I just can't see how they would attract 15-21 year old players to have any interest whatsoever in refereeing, unless perhaps they knew for sure that their very short playing career was coming to an end very soon. And even then the majority would want it handed to them on a plate, the prospect of having to take a course and exam, and then go and referee on Sunday mornings to get experience, would have them scratching their heads.

 

[santa sangria]

Agree with that, but I think it might be easier where you are than in England. I just can't see how they would attract 15-21 year old players to have any interest whatsoever in refereeing, unless perhaps they knew for sure that their very short playing career was coming to an end very soon. And even then the majority would want it handed to them on a plate, the prospect of having to take a course and exam, and then go and referee on Sunday mornings to get experience, would have them scratching their heads.

That’s where the whole support/system comes in. Up my way refereeing is well organized, travel straightforward in the metropolis, great student/first job - and so much youth and non-mens footy that you don’t have to get sucked in to relentless Sunday league stuff.

 

[RustyRef]

That’s where the whole support/system comes in. Up my way refereeing is well organized, travel straightforward in the metropolis, great student/first job - and so much youth and non-mens footy that you don’t have to get sucked in to relentless Sunday league stuff.

I understand the support thing, and that could be made better in England. But that doesn't fix the "them and us" mentality that exists between players and referees here, it really is a culture thing.

 

[santa sangria]

I understand the support thing, and that could be made better in England. But that doesn't fix the "them and us" mentality that exists between players and referees here, it really is a culture thing.

That is the main barrier. I thought it was marvellous (not) when Peter Crouch did loads on referees on his podcast, only to readily admit he could never imagine being friends with a referee and basically considers them a lower form of life - all the while becoming friends with sports journalists. Oh the irony.

 

[Kent Ref]

This is pointless talk. It's been said 100 times before and players NEVER want to take up the job.

 

[deusex]

Utter tosh fed by the myth the WC final ref had a pro football career before he turned to refereeing.
Compete and utter b*****ks and shame on Webb for encouraging it.
L4 referee after a few months? I'd pay to watch that!

 

[Big Cat]

L4 referee after a few months? I'd pay to watch that!

Did anybody say or infer that?