The Ref Stop

not even minimum wage!

Im not sure 'minimum wage' is the way to look at it as has been discussed here already. It's purely about whether the money is enough for you, alongside the development/progression side of this hobby too. I earn roughly £350 a month from refereeing. Im stable financially and I'm in my mid 30s. I'd like to progress to a level 5 and see if further progression is possible for me and if my life outside of Football could work alongside the travelling etc. Is roughly £30 a game enough for me? I suppose it is at the moment all things considered. If I was 16 then it certainly would be. Would it be enough when I'm mid 50s and only doing 1 game a weekend and no interest in progression, id suggest not but I may well think differently.

For comparison, the local cricket league I play in has struggled for both players and umpires over the last few years. Last year they increased the umpire fees to £50 from £25. Every match was covered across the season for the first time in a number of years. Cricket has the same issues with player reduction and financial difficulties. In fact the numbers are considerably worse on the playing side. This isn't to say that doubling the fee would work in football, As there's a different dynamic. But it has absolutely worked in cricket and it's something to consider when you consider the shortage of referees in some areas. I did a County Cup game this weekend and the home team hadn't played 2 fixtures this season as there was no ref.
How do we as referees work out our worth? There has to be some sort of hourly way or you'd never get to a conclusion - would you?
 
The Ref Stop
As a maths teacher, I could, quite easily, do some tutoring on the side, charging from, say, £30 to £45+ for an hour.

Instead, on a Sunday morning I go and referee a game of football for £25. I’ll turn up half an hour before kick off, will have to shower and change afterwards, travel to & from the game, clean my boots, wash my kit, do some admin (cards onto WholeGame etc.)

So why do I do the latter and not the former? Because it’s a hobby that I enjoy.

I also know that the home club I’m refereeing will have had to pay at least £50+ to hire the pitch, they’ve supplied a couple of balls that aren’t cheap, kit that needs to be washed. Plus they have to pay me (+ insurance, affiliation and league fees etc.) Putting on a game of football is not cheap.

If circa 30 blokes (including me) have an enjoyable morning then I can live with “only” taking home some pin money. If/when I think the balance of my loss of time outweighs my enjoyment I’ll find something else to do, whether the match fees are £20, £30 or £50

(I do appreciate that I am fortunate to be in a stable financial position and any extra ref-ing cash is a bonus that I could live without.)
 
How do we as referees work out our worth? There has to be some sort of hourly way or you'd never get to a conclusion - would you?

Maybe you should join a trade union mate. Lol.
But we're not talking about wages or salaries. It's grass roots football and it's at best a fee, at worst, recompense.
I don't know how old you are, or what has compelled you to think the way you do about what us proles at the very bottom of our sporting ladder are "worth" but it's clearly never going to be something we'll agree on. Maybe when you're regularly running out with 2 teams that have over 100 people or so watching them you might have a case but as it stands, for me, you don't. :)
 
I have long been an advocate for a national pricing structure. Having refereed in one of the worst paying areas for several years it is time that we were all largely paid the same. No I do not mean double what everyone gets......
At one time I was getting £18 for an open age adult game. Other areas were paying thirty and forty quid at the same time.......that's what is unfair in match fees.
Was I happy with £18 quid, probably, did I think I deserved more, then going by other areas, damn right I did!
 
I have long been an advocate for a national pricing structure. Having refereed in one of the worst paying areas for several years it is time that we were all largely paid the same. No I do not mean double what everyone gets......
At one time I was getting £18 for an open age adult game. Other areas were paying thirty and forty quid at the same time.......that's what is unfair in match fees.
Was I happy with £18 quid, probably, did I think I deserved more, then going by other areas, damn right I did!

I would take that a step further, I would support a two tier fee system. A higher fee for a certain category of referees, but they must pass an annual fitness test (basic level, perhaps 2400m in 12 minutes) and must pass an annual laws of the game exam.

I watch a lot of grass roots football and sadly some referees aren't worth the £20, £25, £30, or whatever they get per game. They spend all game in the centre circle, haven't kept up with law changes for many years, and so on. Why should clubs pay higher fees for referees like that? We have a ludicrous situation at the moment where a referee might not have even read law updates for the past 30 years but can still be actively refereeing games, and that just cannot be right. One referee even openly said to me that he doesn't care what the law says, if a player is offside when the ball is played forward he will penalise them whether they are active or not as he doesn't agree with the law. Does he deserve an increased match fee?

The alternative to a two tier system is that ALL referees have to pass a fitness and laws test, but clearly that will be a major problem as significant numbers would fail and games wouldn't get covered.
 
I'm worth at least three figures, but I only charge the standard rate ;)
edit: i'm referring to refereeing
 
Last edited:
I would take that a step further, I would support a two tier fee system. A higher fee for a certain category of referees, but they must pass an annual fitness test (basic level, perhaps 2400m in 12 minutes) and must pass an annual laws of the game exam.

I watch a lot of grass roots football and sadly some referees aren't worth the £20, £25, £30, or whatever they get per game. They spend all game in the centre circle, haven't kept up with law changes for many years, and so on. Why should clubs pay higher fees for referees like that? We have a ludicrous situation at the moment where a referee might not have even read law updates for the past 30 years but can still be actively refereeing games, and that just cannot be right. One referee even openly said to me that he doesn't care what the law says, if a player is offside when the ball is played forward he will penalise them whether they are active or not as he doesn't agree with the law. Does he deserve an increased match fee?

The alternative to a two tier system is that ALL referees have to pass a fitness and laws test, but clearly that will be a major problem as significant numbers would fail and games wouldn't get covered.
Yep, very valid points. The conundrum facing the leagues and appointment secretaries is that they are relying on some of the 30 year veteran referees to cover games, because the alternative is no referee. So clubs get a choice of either a crap referee (in many cases) or not having one, which inevitably leads to carnage.
Any new referee is typically snapped up into the promotion system quite quickly and then rapidly swimming away from the lowest end of the grassroots game where the problem lies.
In my county alone, this season there are approximately 30 referees that are going 5-4 and have passed the fitness test. God knows how many out of our number will get promoted, but if a sizeable chunk do (As there seems to be a L4 shortage) that leaves a massive hole in the number of L5’s and below to cover the grassroots games.
 
I'm not disputing your football background Ben, nor did I say you were suggesting that doubling fees was the answer.

You have however (twice now) alluded to the idea that it could work. My point was, (and still is) that it couldn't work because:

a. 90% of grass roots clubs couldn't afford it

and

b. The refereeing standard wouldn't be any different to what it is now.

I don't know where you referee or to what standard mate, but I can certainly tell you this - to put up the ref's standard fee where I operate to £50 and £60 respectively, would simply not be sustainable. :cool:

On point A, cricket clubs are no different, but they have afforded it. It's paid for by the players, which at my club, many are also grass roots footballers. One thing that is different in cricket is that the game is much longer, which possibly makes players more accepting of a subs increase. But all players are getting umpires now and see that it's a price worth paying. Let's flip the debate. Grass roots football subs have always been low. When I first started playing at 16, it was a fiver to play. 17 years later, I'd played for 3 other grass roots clubs and all of them charged a fiver. Maybe it's about time clubs started charging players more to allow for an increase in referee fees to encourage more refs?

The obvious counter argument is that player numbers are declining. But this is countered by the fact that playing numbers in cricket are declining fat quicker than in football.

As for point B, I agree.
 
Not surprising. The county my parents live in has gone to the papers to point out that umpiring numbers are so low that when retirement comes for the current crop of elderly umpires, there simply will not be enough umpires to cover the second division.

They've had issues getting people in and getting people to stay. Abuse is apparently quite commonplace in cricket as well, which has surprised me as I thought it would be a more calmer game?

Abuse of umpires has crept in to the game over the last few years. It's more and more prevalent. It's nothing like the level that we get in football, but it's on the increase. Until the fees went up, I can't remember seeing a new umpire for several seasons.
 
How do we as referees work out our worth? There has to be some sort of hourly way or you'd never get to a conclusion - would you?

The worth of the games we ref are set by somebody else. Working out our worth can only be done by the individual.
 
I would take that a step further, I would support a two tier fee system. A higher fee for a certain category of referees, but they must pass an annual fitness test (basic level, perhaps 2400m in 12 minutes) and must pass an annual laws of the game exam.

Too strict that! If I had to tweak your requirements I'd say the testing should be valid for two seasons minimum.

Also, may as well do a lighter version of the INT test, 75m run / 25m walk plus the sprints over the Cooper Test.

One referee even openly said to me that he doesn't care what the law says, if a player is offside when the ball is played forward he will penalise them whether they are active or not as he doesn't agree with the law.

Saw that this weekend when I went to watch a local game. There was a catalogue of errors and disorganised decision making that I saw, which was really frustrating as I'll have one of those teams in the near future and will have to rectify any bad 'law' or myths they pick up. Frustrating to see, but I don't want to slag off other referees... :(

Any new referee is typically snapped up into the promotion system quite quickly and then rapidly swimming away from the lowest end of the grassroots game where the problem lies.

Is the alternative basically to encourage the veterans to try and stay at the higher levels for longer? I think it would be feasible if they were fit, but I don't know if they'd make up any serious numbers. Heck, a lot of the newer refs round my way are older ex-players who are on their last legs. Some are going for promotion to the next grade up to show they can do it, but aren't seriously pursuing anything beyond that. I can't really blame the FA's for headhunting the younger talent.
 
I maintain that referees should be paid fairly, hobby or not.
And the issue is that to get to your comparison points, you are using factors like minimum wage which is only pertinent to paid employment ... not to a hobby. It really is as simple as Supply and Demand. Football is getting its current level of match coverage with the current level of fees. If the sport wants a higher proportion of games covered then you're right, likely they will need to increase fees. If they're ok with the current coverage level then no need to change. No referee is being forced to do anything against their will .... if they're unhappy with the fees on offer they can simply switch leagues or stop altogether. And if enough referees stop, reducing Supply, then this might eventually lead to an increase in the fees on offer.

What are we fundamentally 'worth'? Whatever those requesting our services are willing to pay ....
 
Just received an email from a league (11 on the Pyramid), stating that they are very short this weekend in all areas. I enjoyed being an AR in this league when I helped out last year when I had no fixture, but the ref requested we meet 90 mins before kick off at a ground that was a 90 min drive away. £25. If I'm on the promotion scheme and I'm assig ed to go there then I'm happily going. If I've no fixture I can earn more, and more importantly, go to a ground a short distance away and arrive 30 mins before, leaving me chance to do family things in the late afternoon/early evening. There are also 2 other league's who've emailed me with games available for Saturday, one of which I've accepted a game from. This is just Saturdays. On Sundays the junior league's in my area are always short without fail. I've helped out the u18/u21 league most afternoons by doing a second game for me as well. One of the Sunday League is also short every week and is doing a recruitment drive next week. Again, I'm not saying more money is feasable or the answer, but it might be and therefore might be worth a trial based on its success in another local sport?
 
Just received an email from a league (11 on the Pyramid), stating that they are very short this weekend in all areas. I enjoyed being an AR in this league when I helped out last year when I had no fixture, but the ref requested we meet 90 mins before kick off at a ground that was a 90 min drive away. £25. If I'm on the promotion scheme and I'm assig ed to go there then I'm happily going. If I've no fixture I can earn more, and more importantly, go to a ground a short distance away and arrive 30 mins before, leaving me chance to do family things in the late afternoon/early evening. There are also 2 other league's who've emailed me with games available for Saturday, one of which I've accepted a game from. This is just Saturdays. On Sundays the junior league's in my area are always short without fail. I've helped out the u18/u21 league most afternoons by doing a second game for me as well. One of the Sunday League is also short every week and is doing a recruitment drive next week. Again, I'm not saying more money is feasable or the answer, but it might be and therefore might be worth a trial based on its success in another local sport?
What on earth do you need to be there 90 minutes before KO! Is it Premier league?????
 
Quite a relevant blog post by ex-premiership referee Bobby Madley: https://therefereesword.blogspot.com/2019/10/its-hobby-not-job.html?m=1

Fantastic read. I have been refereeing the local youth league and I really enjoy it, the match fee for me is at the bottom of the list for why I ref the kids. When I thank the managers for the fee and they tell me I deserve it that makes me feel good. It's the same with the seniors when I start reffing them, the match fee is not the driving factor. I'm giving it a go because the local leagues are struggling to fulfil fixtures due to lack of refs and I reffed in the past.

On the other hand I used to find it quite offensive when people would pass comment that I was being paid. If they think I'm rubbish then fair enough I probably am but I'm there so they can have a better game with a qualified ref and not for the money
 
Last edited:
Back
Top