A&H

Promotions - Season Ending 2024

I'd say the system is a lot fairer these days, but there will always be an element of chosen people being pushed forwards, shall we say.
 
A&H International
RustyRef said:
Remember that it isn't that long ago that all promotions to L3 and above were subject to an interview at FA HQ, and that wasn't in the middle of the country, they were at Lancaster Gate and Soho Square so a lot of travel for the majority of officials. They removed this, I'd guess around 20 years ago, seems they are now putting them back for borderline cases.

Don't think there is anything nefarious at play as those finishing in the top places don't have to go to the assessment day.
Click to expand...
Not strictly true

Have to have done 15 games for auto. If you have done 10-14 you can only have an assessment day.

Any less can't be considered
 
RustyRef said:
Remember that it isn't that long ago that all promotions to L3 and above were subject to an interview at FA HQ, and that wasn't in the middle of the country, they were at Lancaster Gate and Soho Square so a lot of travel for the majority of officials. They removed this, I'd guess around 20 years ago, seems they are now putting them back for borderline cases.

Don't think there is anything nefarious at play as those finishing in the top places don't have to go to the assessment day.
Click to expand...
I remember this being discussd a while back.

Is there any way somebody higher on the merit table (is that the right name?) who DOESN'T get invited to assessment day can have somebody who came BELOW them in the merit table who DOES get invited?

If that were true i would have serious concerns.
 
Kent Ref said:
I remember this being discussd a while back.

Is there any way somebody higher on the merit table (is that the right name?) who DOESN'T get invited to assessment day can have somebody who came BELOW them in the merit table who DOES get invited?

If that were true i would have serious concerns.
Click to expand...
Yes. If the person higher hasn't done enough games they will neither be promoted automatically or invited for an assessment day.
 
JamesL said:
Yes. If the person higher hasn't done enough games they will neither be promoted automatically or invited for an assessment day.
Click to expand...
I did not explain myself.

If those 2 people have both done enough games can the scenario i stated actually happen?
 
Kent Ref said:
I remember this being discussd a while back.

Is there any way somebody higher on the merit table (is that the right name?) who DOESN'T get invited to assessment day can have somebody who came BELOW them in the merit table who DOES get invited?

If that were true i would have serious concerns.
Click to expand...
Overall, the system is now designed to use the merit table rankings as the biggest contributor to promotion but not the be all and end all. So those who have truly excelled on the tables will get automatically promoted, whilst those who have just 'done well' will be given the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities more holistically at an assessment. Subject to admin / quantity of match issues, those attending the assessment days will be there purely 'on merit'. However, from within the pool of those selected for assessment days, I'd fully expect the FA / PGMOL to then have a preference for choosing to promote (in part) based on continuing the (laudable) shift towards greater diversity in higher level match officials.
 
Russell Jones said:
Overall, the system is now designed to use the merit table rankings as the biggest contributor to promotion but not the be all and end all. So those who have truly excelled on the tables will get automatically promoted, whilst those who have just 'done well' will be given the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities more holistically at an assessment. Subject to admin / quantity of match issues, those attending the assessment days will be there purely 'on merit'. However, from within the pool of those selected for assessment days, I'd fully expect the FA / PGMOL to then have a preference for choosing to promote (in part) based on continuing the (laudable) shift towards greater diversity in higher level match officials.
Click to expand...
What percentage of promotions are "auto" v "selected"?
 
Kent Ref said:
What percentage of promotions are "auto" v "selected"?
Click to expand...
I believe in theory, that the proposal is that 50% of those promoted will be 'automatic' and then the other 50% will be selected from twice that number. So for example if 20 referees were to be promoted and they were ranked in a single table, 1st-10th would get automatic, 11th-30th would be invited to an assessment event from which 10 more would be selected. (Obviously it isn't that simple due to other complications of games completed etc.)
 
Kent Ref said:
I did not explain myself.

If those 2 people have both done enough games can the scenario i stated actually happen?
Click to expand...
A Referee below me in the Merit Table was promoted ahead of me. His/Her Club Marks were likely better than mine, but mine were good enough at that point in time to be considered

I'm not that bothered. I'm realistic. I'm a 50 year old bloke, heterosexual, white, born in England Ref who doesn't declare Religious Orientation. I know the world we live in. The only aspect that bothers me, is the FA make claims that the selection is merit based only
I don't believe for a moment that's entirely true
 
Big Cat said:
A Referee below me in the Merit Table was promoted ahead of me. His/Her Club Marks were likely better than mine, but mine were good enough at that point in time to be considered

I'm not that bothered. I'm realistic. I'm a 50 year old bloke, heterosexual, white, born in England Ref who doesn't declare Religious Orientation. I know the world we live in. The only aspect that bothers me, is the FA make claims that the selection is merit based only
I don't believe for a moment that's entirely true
Click to expand...
You're on fire today BC. :D

Gan on Big Lad. Ye tell em' ... ;) :p
 
Big Cat said:
A Referee below me in the Merit Table was promoted ahead of me. His/Her Club Marks were likely better than mine, but mine were good enough at that point in time to be considered

I'm not that bothered. I'm realistic. I'm a 50 year old bloke, heterosexual, white, born in England Ref who doesn't declare Religious Orientation. I know the world we live in. The only aspect that bothers me, is the FA make claims that the selection is merit based only
I don't believe for a moment that's entirely true
Click to expand...
in recent years there have been Referees very similar characteristics to you who have been promoted to L3 at 56 (not me)!
 
As i said last time why not just use the merit table and nobody csn make claims of unfairness.

This is a sad scenario.
 
Kent Ref said:
As i said last time why not just use the merit table and nobody csn make claims of unfairness.

This is a sad scenario.
Click to expand...
In an ideal world, this would be the case. But even then, the outcome can be manipulated how they like. If it was 100% based on merit table, certain officials would be given certain observers who are known to mark higher than others.
 
Kes said:
Merit and "inclusivity" are not good bed fellows.

There.

I've said it. :hmmm::angel:
Click to expand...
Because the merit in refereeing is subjective. A lot of observers are white male and old, so they subconsciously will favour and be more lenient on white, male and old referees. Happens everywhere.

So when judging those scores you should acknowledge the potential bias that helped make them by balancing with some bias
 
OnlyUseMeWhistle said:
Because the merit in refereeing is subjective. A lot of observers are white male and old, so they subconsciously will favour and be more lenient on white, male and old referees. Happens everywhere.

So when judging those scores you should acknowledge the potential bias that helped make them by balancing with some bias
Click to expand...

Very judgemental and how do you know that! Last season I attended 55 matches from L4 to L2B and all were white males or females & had any been black it would not have made any difference to me.
 
OnlyUseMeWhistle said:
So when judging those scores you should acknowledge the potential bias that helped make them by balancing with some bias
Click to expand...
That's a different thread to be honest (not that such a thread would survive moderation - like BC said, that's the world we now live in).

That, and your post are an example of what's wrong with it all ...
 
David G said:
Very judgemental and how do you know that! Last season I attended 55 matches from L4 to L2B and all were white males or females & had any been black it would not have made any difference to me.
Click to expand...
It's a scientifically tried and proven fact that people subconsciously do this. It's an evolutionary reality, kept us safe in 10,000 BC but now creates bias
 
OnlyUseMeWhistle said:
It's a scientifically tried and proven fact that people subconsciously do this. It's an evolutionary reality, kept us safe in 10,000 BC but now creates bias
Click to expand...

Well all I can say is that it has never occurred to me to be any different to me in any shape or form or whether it be home, work or play & nor will it - consciously or unconsciously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top