A&H

Promotion 17/18

But the criteria that I have been sent, this year, for 2017/18 have changed vs previous year. How are they second guessing the changes in criteria?

Its possible that these are only county level changes, I assume to be nominated to FA in 1st place.
It does not quote any distance/average mark. That is to be set.
But why should you need to know what the average mark is to be observed? If its 73 or 70 or 75. Your observation would still be valid - why wouldnt it be? Again I dont see why you have to wait to have completed the test before being observed. Its the referees responsibility to be ready to pass any such test of fitness seeing as the scheme for promotion, initially at least, is a.voluntary one.

Because observing candidates costs money. Most CFA's can't justify observing candidates who might not even get close to passing fitness tests.

The email I referred to above was from Neale Barry, so definitely not a county criteria as he is head of national refereeing at the FA. It may be that your county have their own criteria for nomination, but they will still be snookered if the FA change their criteria. Let's just say, for example, that in August the FA say that 5-4 observations are now to be done using new criteria and on the new style form. Your county could have wasted a huge amount of time, effort and money on observations that are no longer valid.
 
The Referee Store
I do see the logic - it's more cost efficient, and more efficient use of the limited number of 5-4 qualified observers to use the fitness test as a first filter. But yeah, I don't really know how many suitable games I'll have between August and Feb.

There are 5 nominated leagues, plus the highest level of county cup competition. Of those 5 leagues, I've been running lines on one and doing middles at lower divisions of another (only prem division counts). And I have no idea if, or how often those two appointment secretaries will feel the need to take a chance by using me over one of their existing rosta of referees...
 
each to their own of course - I personally wanted the double jump ... but my society chairman is also chairman of the CFA so I daren't do anything to make him think less of me etc
Exactly what is wrong with the 'system', too much individual opinion involved........should be no room for it!
 
It was the FA who stated you need to complete the fitness test requirements before you will be assessed but a number of CFAs will allow a number of assessments before this is done (my CFA is 1)

The new assessment criteria is for 2A, 3 & 4 referee's only, 5-4 referees are marked againist the level 5 criteria!
 
Had the feedback for the first assessment, disappointed firstly at myself and then slightly with the observer as I felt he was a bit harsh given our discussions at half time and post match..... final mark was 69 :( I'll include their feedback in the next post
 
Right so the feedback i got on the first observation for this new season (L5-4)
1. Application of Law:
During this match it was noted that you applied Law in a consistent manner throughout the match. It was also noted that you practised the ‘Stepped Approach’ to discipline during this game. You spoke to players regularly and not just on matters of discipline thereby gaining some semblance of rapport with the players. By being consistent and sharp in your decision making, as well as being fairly close to play, you prevented any dangerous or reckless tackles taking place.
There were two numbers official sanctions issued during this match, together with one dismissal from the technical area of a team official. The first caution on 69mins was for a push in the back whilst engaged on a tackle from behind by No6 B.Ams. The second caution on 70mins was for a tackle from behind and a trip by No.10V.M. The dismissal was that of the manager/coach of B.Ams. for loud and continuous dissent against a decision which was correct.
2. Match Control:
During this match you were in total control with only two instances of attempted undermining of your authority. Both these incidents were dealt with, though not without room for improvement. The No6 B.A. the team captain refused to face you and continued walking away whilst you were in the process of cautioning him. As we discussed Post Match.The second incident was with the official when you attempted to calm him down. By regularly talking to players, reinforcing signals, and being positive, the rapport you built up in the early stages stayed with you.
There was very little dissent in this match and when it did occur you quickly stepped in and closed it down.
3. Positioning, Fitness & Work Rate:
Fitness levels were really good with an ability to change to a quick sprint as required. Constant movement around the pitch ensured that you were nearly always in contact with the action. Positioning on corners was not very good in that you had a tendency to position yourself inside the ‘D’ on the edge of the penalty area. You were also static and did not move when the ball was in flight. At least you did not have your back to the kicker on corners. Because you did not utilise a diagonal patrol path for period of time you were always had a one dimensional view. As we discussed. You had a high work rate during this match, well paced.
4. Alertness & Awareness, Including management of stoppages:
Management of stoppages and injuries was as per the guide lines and managed competently. In the early stages of this match your Awareness and Alertness was a slightly awry. You were caught in a ruck of players on a number of occasions and were forced to take avoiding action. This was because you did not take cognisance of players’ movements and actions. Fortunately you did recognise your problems and became more aware and alert which aided your game.
5. Communication:
This was a good point in your favour during this match as you built up a rapport and maintained it. This empathy with the players aided you considerably. With sharp whistle signals, varied in strength and length meant all players were aware of your requirements. With reinforcement of these signals with positive hand indications there was no doubt as to the decision. By talking to players, your communications meant that the game went without dissent.
6. Teamwork:
With club linesmen assistance was somewhat scanty.
7. Advantage:
During this match you made use of the Advantage clause on two occasions. Both were good calls, in reasonable attacking positions with clear runs on goal. Arm signals were held until the move finished only the shout requires being louder.
Strengths:
Fitness levels good, with the ability to change to sprint mode as required.
Good levels of communication with all players.
Match control was of a good standard throughout the match
Development:
When cautioning a player you must follow the guide lines Go to, a less crowded space., call the player to you, if he refuses and walks away, go to him Caution him for the first offence, Then show a 2nd Yellow card for delaying a free kick then show the red card
On the stepped approach to discipline utilize a Public Rebuke, as the final warning.
On Advantage ensure everyone can hear the call Advantage, Play on.
Marks:
1. Application of Law 3.3
2. Match Control 4.0
3. Positioning & Work rate 3.0
4. Alertness, Awareness 3.0
5. Communication 3.5
6. Team Work 3.5
7. Advantage 3.5
 
The positioning advice is poor and does not reflect current L3-4 guidelines.
Which bit? the one about the corners? or the diagonal path?

For the movement in a diagonal path, what we've been taught so far is when you are on our own in the middle adopt our runs to more of a figure 8, which i believe i carried out to a great extent. As for the corners, I'm not sure TBH. I'm getting mixed and conflicting messages, again this is a scenario with no NAR so the positions taken must be slightly different. What I've been taught and told over and over again is to vary my position between the corners which i did, no one advised me to be deeper in the penalty area during the CK. I'm happy to take this advice (as shown in his feedback) if that's what's expected at higher levels. What seemed bizzare in their post match feedback was that their advice was for me to take a position opposite to the kicker at all times! and then move across, that goes against the vary your position on your own advice which i was getting up and till this moment!!
 
Which bit? the one about the corners? or the diagonal path?

For the movement in a diagonal path, what we've been taught so far is when you are on our own in the middle adopt our runs to more of a figure 8, which i believe i carried out to a great extent. As for the corners, I'm not sure TBH. I'm getting mixed and conflicting messages, again this is a scenario with no NAR so the positions taken must be slightly different. What I've been taught and told over and over again is to vary my position between the corners which i did, no one advised me to be deeper in the penalty area during the CK. I'm happy to take this advice (as shown in his feedback) if that's what's expected at higher levels. What seemed bizzare in their post match feedback was that their advice was for me to take a position opposite to the kicker at all times! and then move across, that goes against the vary your position on your own advice which i was getting up and till this moment!!

The issue I have with the advice is that no reason is being given for it. There is no decision being listed as being wrong due to your positioning. E.g. "You missed a push on X due to your positioning on corner Y. This was because of Z, and you could have prevented this by...". You get the idea. You can't criticise someone's positioning if they are getting all the decisions correct.

"Vary your positions on corners" is meaningless without context.
 
Also if as pointed out in their feedback and strengths listed, if my communication, fitness and work rate were my strengths i expected a slightly higher mark in these categories... to which I'm disappointed. This is not me whinging (ok maybe a bit) but i'm genuinely surprised with the marks provided against the feedback given during HT and post match. I felt that they had a good evaluation of how i performed with some development points to take and work on, looking at the grades i fell below the expected standard!
 
"Vary your positions on corners" is meaningless without context.[/QUOTE]
Ah pardon me, on that earlier on when I first started I was advised to not stick to a specific side at every corner (ie opposite of the ck) but rather mix it up depending on the wind, if i detect a pattern for the kick or identify certain prone culprits in the PA; and just so that i can catch any sly pushes/pulls at the other side which I would have a restricted view to originally. Hope that makes sense, it made sense to me at the time.
 
I have to say, I'm fairly concerned about what I'm supposed to do at corners. My default position is around the edge of the D on the opposite side to my AR (assume I have CAR's), but as a result of some feedback in my first 7-6 assessments, I also use the other side and will push deeper if I find myself on the opposite side to the kicker. I don't like the ball coming in over my head so will stay near the edge if on the same side as kicker.

In my final 6-5 observation, the observer questioned me on why I positioned myself so deep on one occasion, noting that I'd had to use a lot of energy doing a full sprint for a relatively long distance to keep up with a counter attack as a result. My answer that I try to use a variety of positions to keep the players guessing seemed to make him happy, but it did make me wonder if I should stick with my instinctive shallow position unless there's a particular "battle" that I need to move in to watch more closely.It sounds like the observer you had would have seen this as a good thing and not questioned it as he did your positioning...

I'm concerned that not every observer thinks the same on this and it could be a source of lost marks if you happen to get unlucky with the observers preference.
 
I have to say, I'm fairly concerned about what I'm supposed to do at corners. My default position is around the edge of the D on the opposite side to my AR (assume I have CAR's), but as a result of some feedback in my first 7-6 assessments, I also use the other side and will push deeper if I find myself on the opposite side to the kicker. I don't like the ball coming in over my head so will stay near the edge if on the same side as kicker.

In my final 6-5 observation, the observer questioned me on why I positioned myself so deep on one occasion, noting that I'd had to use a lot of energy doing a full sprint for a relatively long distance to keep up with a counter attack as a result. My answer that I try to use a variety of positions to keep the players guessing seemed to make him happy, but it did make me wonder if I should stick with my instinctive shallow position unless there's a particular "battle" that I need to move in to watch more closely.It sounds like the observer you had would have seen this as a good thing and not questioned it as he did your positioning...

I'm concerned that not every observer thinks the same on this and it could be a source of lost marks if you happen to get unlucky with the observers preference.

That's exactly how I felt TBH when i heard his remarks! well as i said if that's the official advice then i'm happy to take on board to aid with my development. Anyhow, we got an academy meeting this Sunday so i will ask and enquire about this. If i get any specific advice on that matter I shall share
 
I generally tend to stand diagonally facing the goal, varying my position to either side each time if I don't have ARs. On my first observation I was advised to get closer to the goal line on corners, the idea being that we're also the goal line technology at this level. The observer just said that once the ball is in flight, take a couple of steps towards the goal line so you're in a more credible position.

As Graeme says though, the advice appears to be totally different depending on who you get.
 
right taken from our holy bible itself LOTG 16-17:

Under Practical guidelines section 1 General positioning and movement:
" The best position is one from which the referee can make the correct decision. All recommendations about positioning must be adjusted using specific information about the teams, the players and events in the match. The positions recommended in the graphics are basic guidelines. The reference to a “zone” emphasises that a recommended position is an area within which the referee is likely to be most effective. The zone may be larger, smaller or differently shaped depending on the exact match circumstances."
Recommended posistion for a CK when working with a NAR:
upload_2017-3-17_15-44-11.png
 
Yeah, that's exactly where I'd stand with neutral ARs who I know I can rely on for things like ball in & out, ball over the line etc. But with CARs or no ARs at all, it seems that there is some inconsistency of advice.
 
As always, the biggest issue here is that we are all humans and see things differently.

We all receive (both referees and observers) advice / guidance from academies / mentors / colleagues / here etc. and draw our own conclusions on where is best to stand on corners (and every other facet of the refereeing). I've heard so many different observers have so many different issues on the same thing that I find myself just nodding and agreeing rather than challenging them. You just need to remember who gave what advice so they don't pick you up on a second time months or years later. At the end of the day "my last observer / mentor told me to do X, Y or Z" won't have much impact during the de-brief.

Before you get any thoughts about this @lincs22, you're not one of those I just nod along to and ignore!
 
Yeah, that's exactly where I'd stand with neutral ARs who I know I can rely on for things like ball in & out, ball over the line etc. But with CARs or no ARs at all, it seems that there is some inconsistency of advice.
ergo the first line that the optimal decision is one where the referee can make the right decision and where i totally agree with @Mewcenary. In their feedback, there was no mentioning of any fouls that i missed because of my positioning; only the observer view and personal preference of what was optimal.
And I'm not debating their experience, far from it but I just found their advice a bit inconsistent with what I've been told before that's all!
 
No timed examples, no indication of what you missed/got wrong by not doing what you were supposed to do or where you were supposed to be, not a lot of developmental advice.

So far this has been about the report; what were you disappointed in yourself about?
 
Back
Top