Three from five's ok.....and it went up......
5-4 Promotion Season
- Thread starter Justylove
- Start date
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
I don't follow the marking system on the card, so maybe am being unfair, just to offer differing opinions though, saying its, ok, is probably hitting nail on head as to why candidate never got his step up, you need to be, more than ok.
I serious do not mean that to be offensive, merely shining a light on how things are viewed elsewhere. Someone whose fitness was average, would be struggling for promotion here, (and yes, we all know that is not always how it should be, but fact is, it is)
The fitness element also includes positioning, related Iknow. I was told the the standard mark starts at three from five and then is adjusted, up or down, related to your performance.
Don't forget that the weighting factor is a multiplier reflecting the importance or not of each element of the marking scheme.
What's the marking scorecard like in Scotland?
I remember it used to be a 0-100 here in Wales, but I don't think it had those 7 splits...
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Depends at what level. If its a grass roots trying to get to next level, it's not marked with figures, candidates get say, 5/6/7 observations, report complied, but graded as, Excellent/Very Good/Good/Satisfact/Poor
Within the reports, you look for the patterns, or, things which have clearly been improved on. So it can vary, 6 reports and you come away with 1 VG and 5 Goods would be along lines of what would be put forward for promotion, as a guideline
we don't do club marks. But training attendance and meeting attendance and attitude etc is considered.
That isn't right for the previous 5-4 scheme, which these mars relate to. 3.0 means "Satisfactory" and the description is ...
This mark will be awarded when an official has displayed some errors in a specific section in a “normal” game. Suitable constructive advice must be offered
Whereas 3.5 is standard and that is effectively where you start, the description for this is ...
Standard level of performance in a game which is “normal” for this standard of football. There will be advice to offer to aid development in various areas. This is the expected level of performance at this standard of football.
3.5 in each competency would only give you a mark of 70, so short of the 73 needed for nomination to L4. 3.0 in each section would only give you a mark of 60 so massively below the required total.
Well I was nearly right and it's a long time since I was promoted.........
So, that would apply to @telboy2000 's assessments?
The only common theme seems to be related to fitness/positioning.
You really can't afford to get below 3.5 in application of law or match control as the weighting is so high, and that has happened to telboy2000 in 2 of his 3 games. That missing 0.5 becomes 2.5, whereas if you gain 0.5 in the lesser categories that only gains at most 1.5, and for teamwork just 0.5. 50% of the overall marks are in application of law and match control, so they are two areas you just cannot get less than 3.5 in, and really need to be getting 4.0 in those.
Also worth adding that averaging 73.0 against your three, four or five games isn't likely to be enough. If might be in some counties if they are short of L4s, but you are likely to be towards the bottom of the ranking that they send to the FA as you have only just scraped the required average and others will have a higher average.
Be interesting to see the written text for the 2.5 in positioning & fitness, as 2.5 is classified as "Unsatisfactory" and there should be in depth advice offered there.
Having said all of that, there won't be any further observations carried out against those competencies, so something of a moot point going forwards.
I'd add to this that anyone getting 2.5 in fitness surely is gunna be way of the mark to pass the fitness test, surely?
What's the point in marking fitness when there's a separate test for that? Positioning, yes, obviously, but fitness... hmm
And i understand that the fitness test will be at the start of the campaign, thereby not wasting anybody's time?
Truth be told most make it be taken before observing. I'm picking at the marking, rather than the individual.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Again sorry if am talking out of turn on this one.
When am observing, i have no care or concern about the tests
I want to see how fit the referee appears in the game am watching
Box to box sprinting, stamina, can he last the whole game, short sharp sprints when needed, does he look in good shape, is he out of breath, everything
The fitness test is the tick box exercise.
I get what you're saying. Although the fitness test 'should' be indicative of work-rate in games, it may not reflect laziness and has limited relevance to positioning or ability to think clearly when fatigued
(Amended wording!)
Last edited:
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Correct. If I have a ref 50 yards behind play in the last min for his big DOGSO call, am not in the least interested about his fitness test
Ah, well, thank you for taking the time to explain it all.
It's also a bit different imo. Fitness test is just mentally focusing on the exercise. When refereeing I'm having to move whilst concentrating on the action. I do feel I probably lose a bit of pace because of that, I don't know if it is the same for everyone else though, it just seems that way to me. So the key for me with fitness/positioning on the field is anticipating play on top of the fitness work. None of that is accounted for in the tests of course.
I have the exact opposite problem to be honest - I'll glide around a match quite happily mixing up sprints and jogs, go well over 8km and won't even really notice that I've been running. But take away the distraction of a football match and I really struggle to even jog the 2.6km, let alone do it at the pace required.Ah, well, thank you for taking the time to explain it all.
It's also a bit different imo. Fitness test is just mentally focusing on the exercise. When refereeing I'm having to move whilst concentrating on the action. I do feel I probably lose a bit of pace because of that, I don't know if it is the same for everyone else though, it just seems that way to me. So the key for me with fitness/positioning on the field is anticipating play on top of the fitness work. None of that is accounted for in the tests of course.
The FA will select from those nominated. Having a nomination does not automatically mean you will get promoted.Evening All,
Just received my L5-4 nomination through this afternoon
Quick question do The FA actually restrict the nominations and what would be the reasoning behind it?