A&H

Q4 promotions

Tom_R

Member
Level 5 Referee
Just had the email from my RDO asking for submission of game logs for end of Q4. Does anyone know when decision/ promotion confirmation emails will be?
 
The Referee Store
Why don’t you ask your RDO ? I can’t see that anyone would be better placed than them to advise
 
Hehe I'm sure he'd love that 😂
If someone was sending me a lot of emails, then a phone call would probably be better as cumulative amount of time spent would be significantly less...
So yes, I am sure he would love it, it you think he is going to be annoyed at the number of emails you've been sending him ☺️

In reality, and to back up @Keeday point, only he and a very few number of people are going to know the answer,.as there will be a meeting of some committee that will be scheduled for a specific date which will be the earliest date any decisions are made and then that meeting will determine when those decisions will be communicated.
 
If someone was sending me a lot of emails, then a phone call would probably be better as cumulative amount of time spent would be significantly less...
So yes, I am sure he would love it, it you think he is going to be annoyed at the number of emails you've been sending him ☺️

In reality, and to back up @Keeday point, only he and a very few number of people are going to know the answer,.as there will be a meeting of some committee that will be scheduled for a specific date which will be the earliest date any decisions are made and then that meeting will determine when those decisions will be communicated.
Exactly that. With the new system some counties just seem to have the RDO making the decision, but others still have promotion committees and dates will have been set for these, and will be different for each county. The end of progression periods are the end of October, December, February and April so I would say you would expect to be notified in the days or weeks following those dates.
 
If it's promotion to 6 or 5 it can't be before 30th April. Most CFAs will tell you within a week of that. Most of them don't use committees to decide promotions at that level any more, promotion is more or less automatic once the criteria are reached. Remember there's no marks.
 
If it's promotion to 6 or 5 it can't be before 30th April. Most CFAs will tell you within a week of that. Most of them don't use committees to decide promotions at that level any more, promotion is more or less automatic once the criteria are reached. Remember there's no marks.
Correct, there are no marks, but that doesn't mean anyone meeting the eligibility criteria gets promoted. Take an example where a referee has a report full of focus for development, there is no way they should be promoted. The difference is they don't need to wait a whole season to try again, now they can be considered again a couple of months later.
 
Correct, there are no marks, but that doesn't mean anyone meeting the eligibility criteria gets promoted.

In practice this is exactly what it means. I've been told unofficially that the FA refereeing dept might be open to discussing failing a candidate if the CFA presents a case but there is no formal or official process for not promoting somebody who meets the criteria. That was basically the whole point of dropping the marks - make it easier to go from 7->6->5. Counties now have to keep a promotion tracker spreadsheet up to date so the FA can see exactly who has done what.

You might think a referee who is, according to his or her MDCs, nowhere near ready for the next level should not be promoted, and I might agree with you, but that's not the process, or at least not officially.

The relatively new women's pathway tellingly only has one level below the equivalent of level 4. I think if the FA could do so without a massive outcry from existing level 5s they would simply put all referees over 16 who pass the course to level 5. (It's probably going to be 5a, 5b and 5c next season).
 
In practice this is exactly what it means. I've been told unofficially that the FA refereeing dept might be open to discussing failing a candidate if the CFA presents a case but there is no formal or official process for not promoting somebody who meets the criteria. That was basically the whole point of dropping the marks - make it easier to go from 7->6->5. Counties now have to keep a promotion tracker spreadsheet up to date so the FA can see exactly who has done what.

You might think a referee who is, according to his or her MDCs, nowhere near ready for the next level should not be promoted, and I might agree with you, but that's not the process, or at least not officially.
I can assure you it is the process.
My County FA simply will not promote a referee 7-6 or 6-5 for whom both MDC reports are littered with "Development Points" especially if they're repeat points.
I'd hope that would be how all others operate as well, otherwise what's the point?
 
I can assure you it is the process.
My County FA simply will not promote a referee 7-6 or 6-5 for whom both MDC reports are littered with "Development Points" especially if they're repeat points.
I'd hope that would be how all others operate as well, otherwise what's the point?
Yes, this was fed back to the FA when the plan first came out, as in how can we decide who to promote without a mark, and did it mean that everyone should be promoted. They conceded that this was a valid point, and CFAs can hold people back who have met the eligibility criteria but have worrying trends in their match day reports.

I fully expect an overall grade will appear on the reports in due course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kes
I can assure you it is the process.

I write web application software which 16 CFAs use to administer their promotion schemes. Among those CFAs there have been 1748 promotions started. 34 candidates have withdrawn. 306 have been promoted.

Guess how many have failed.
 
I write web application software which 16 CFAs use to administer their promotion schemes. Among those CFAs there have been 1748 promotions started. 34 candidates have withdrawn. 306 have been promoted.

Guess how many have failed.
Well we are on that system, and at least 4 haven't been promoted. But they don't fail, they just roll onto the next period.
 
Well we are on that system, and at least 4 haven't been promoted. But they don't fail, they just roll onto the next period.

Presumably they must eventually either pass, fail, or withdraw? How do you decide whether to promote them at the end of the following period, do you send more coaches out?
 
Presumably they must eventually either pass, fail, or withdraw? How do you decide whether to promote them at the end of the following period, do you send more coaches out?
No, if they aren't promoted they just stay at the same level and the CFA try to get them another two match day reports. Using an example, if a 7 to 6 candidate isn't promoted at the end of October then can have another two reports and then be considered at the end of December. That's no different to how the old system was, previously if you failed 7 to 6 you automatically rolled onto the next season's 7 to 6. If you passed 7 to 6 you automatically rolled onto the next season's 6 to 5, although in both cases you could obviously choose to opt out.

Automatically promoting people for refereeing 25 games, attending a seminar and passing an exam would be ridiculous. Not on the current pathway, but I observed a 7 to 6 candidate who didn't know how and when to blow his whistle, had no idea where to stand or run, and turned an easy game into a complete car crash. I also know that he wasn't much, if any, better in his next game, why on earth should he be promoted?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kes
Would any CFA be on the position to withdraw you from the promotion pathway because you haven’t met the criteria for the season?

I don’t think I am going to make the amount of games in time for the end of the season, I know that they are supposed to roll over to the next season but my CFA have said that I have to pay again and do everything again if I do not meet the date?
 
Back
Top