Dissollusioned and confused by assessments?

[Jacko]

Thanks guys this has been really interesting bearing in mind the marks I actually got.
Assessment 1: I felt harshly done by for a couple of reasons. I had really worked on my positioning and whilst I got wide I am adamant that I did penetrate the penalty area including to give one penalty and deny a goal! Also I do feel I was docked marks for the two assistants one entering fop and other for not doing subs at half way. I felt I had a really really good game. Actual Mark 73.
Assessment 2: not as good a performance as the previous assessment. I was trying to get deeper and so my patrol path was narrower and as a result got caught up in play. I did miss a couple of undershorts too but felt the feedback in person after the game especially was fair and constructive. Actual Mark 73
Assessment 3. Effectively a supply league game. I won't badmouth the assessor but let's just say it helps if they actually watch the game. I certainly should have got the cards out earlier but again I thought I had a decent game. I agree with isolating the player for cautions - I didn't on two occasions in this game and I also played advantage once when it was only really retaining possession. Actual Mark 72
I await your response on those!!!!!

Honestly. Get ready to work hard and if you get level 4 and have assessments like that you will be band E for assessors and clubs.

 

[Jacko]

Is 72/73 a poor assessment now? Bloody hell.
I can see nothing in Assessment 2 to make it a 73 (not saying you didn't deserve one, but the assessment leaves me struggling to guess where he's awarded you 4s instead of 3.5s ESPECIALLY considering his comments on the late tackles would suggest a 3.0 for me )
Same Assessment 3 but only 2 marks out.
Have to disagree with Jacko, the development points are def there.

You're right, I've re read them.

They are just boring to read. Not to the point. My attention was lost on the opening sentence on most sections.

 

[Monotone Whistle]

Frustration with assessments, and their inconsistency, is perfectly normal and understood. You really can't tell what mark an assessor will give you, even after the debrief.

However, being frank, you don't have bad marks here. You need to average 73, so you are almost there. Just have one or two slightly above average games, takes on board the development areas, and you'll be fine.

I don't see any reason to be disillusioned considering you have every chance this season. We all want to be averaging higher so we have the safety net of having a bad game and not being affected, but I'd imagine there are a number of L5-4 who are well below you (I know two in my county). There are no prizes for averaging higher than the minimum.

 

[ARF]

There are no prizes for averaging higher than the minimum.

There could well be. For example, due to the number of referees who have applied for 5-4 in Dorset, even if every one of us averaged high enough marks to be nominated it's very unlikely that the FA would take us all. So the higher our average, the more likelihood of the FA accepting our nominations for L4.

 

[Jacko]

There could well be. For example, due to the number of referees who have applied for 5-4 in Dorset, even if every one of us averaged high enough marks to be nominated it's very unlikely that the FA would take us all. So the higher our average, the more likelihood of the FA accepting our nominations for L4.

Really? Must be the only area they have this. Everywhere else, providing you have a pulse and get 73 average can roll around a track you're a level 4 next season.

 

[ARF]

Really? Must be the only area they have this. Everywhere else, providing you have a pulse and get 73 average can roll around a track you're a level 4 next season.

Well as I understand it, in previous seasons we've been struggling for 4s (nationally, that is), and as such Supply league games were occasionally being refereed by 5-4 candidates. This also meant that few 5-4 candidates who were nominated by their CFA were not promoted (I can't think of any from Dorset since I began refereeing who weren't promoted, provided they were nominated and passed the fitness test). Now there's a good number of 4s nationwide, the promotion criteria have been tightened (e.g. 20 middles and 10 lines instead of 15 and 5). So I don't think it's just Dorset that will have some disappointed nominees come the end of this season!

 

[Jacko]

Tightened when they lowered the mark from 75 to 73? You should easily get 20 and 10 to show you're committed to getting to level 4.

 

[lincs22]

Well as I understand it, in previous seasons we've been struggling for 4s (nationally, that is), and as such Supply league games were occasionally being refereed by 5-4 candidates. This also meant that few 5-4 candidates who were nominated by their CFA were not promoted (I can't think of any from Dorset since I began refereeing who weren't promoted, provided they were nominated and passed the fitness test). Now there's a good number of 4s nationwide....

This does not mean they will not promote 5-4 candidates, it will be EE and DE L4 will be dropped. In the past few years, L4 have been retained due to lack of replacements. That will end now.

The more important question for grassroots football is whether these ex L4's will go back to L5 or quit instead.

 

[ARF]

Tightened when they lowered the mark from 75 to 73? You should easily get 20 and 10 to show you're committed to getting to level 4.

No problem for me - I've already done 27 middles and 23 lines since March 1st. But that includes 11 middles I've done on Sundays, and I know a couple of guys who don't have that luxury due to work, and might find it hard getting the games in depending on the weather over the next couple of months.

 

[Jacko]

This does not mean they will not promote 5-4 candidates, it will be EE and DE L4 will be dropped. In the past few years, L4 have been retained due to lack of replacements. That will end now.

The more important question for grassroots football is whether these ex L4's will go back to L5 or quit instead.

And the demoted level 3's who haven't been in the top 40% for the last 3 seasons, whether they want to go back to 4, go to 5 or quit too.

Going to be an interesting summer.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

And we have there 3 poorly written assessments, but you have cost yourself a few marks. Need to go out with the mind set. This is my promotion and enforce the basics and do the mandatories.

I'm not going to make a guess because what they've written some of it is total BS. If you don't get it this season, just humour the same assessors for next season. There is nothing in those 3 assessments to help you develop.

And if that one assessor has been assessing level 4 for 6 years. God help them! Quantity over Quality!

Assessments 1 and 2 are poorly written and use up space to comment on things that don't matter. Assessment 3 has obviously been written against the Supply criteria. To gain a standard mark (3.5) when going 5-4 you have to be seen to be ticking off half of the criteria (providing they occur in your game) by responding/acting correctly.

Agree with @Jacko that these are really are a waste of space in helping you develop. If you must rely on them to help you develop, then look for patterns and work on those things.

Having seen the latest positioning advise from N Barry, the penalty area is indeed a no go area (for L3, which will no doubt roll to L4 soon enough).

 

[Jacko]

Assessments 1 and 2 are poorly written and use up space to comment on things that don't matter. Assessment 3 has obviously been written against the Supply criteria. To gain a standard mark (3.5) when going 5-4 you have to be seen to be ticking off half of the criteria (providing they occur in your game) by responding/acting correctly.

Agree with @Jacko that these are really are a waste of space in helping you develop. If you must rely on them to help you develop, then look for patterns and work on those things.

Having seen the latest positioning advise from N Barry, the penalty area is indeed a no go area (for L3, which will no doubt roll to L4 soon enough).

Yeah I shared that privately with @forest96

It needs to be rolled out to all assessors at all levels so that everyone is signing off the same hymn sheet.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

Yeah I shared that privately with @forest96

It needs to be rolled out to all assessors at all levels so that everyone is signing off the same hymn sheet.

I don't see why referees have to work in the dark. Why can't they see the assessor's handbook and guidance notes? After all, it's like expecting a conductor to conduct a concerto without the sheet music

 

[Jacko]

I don't see why referees have to work in the dark. Why can't they see the assessor's handbook and guidance notes? After all, it's like expecting a conductor to conduct a concerto without the sheet music

I agree, it should all be out there and easy to obtain on the FA website.

All that happens is when a referee gets to 3 is they have to work hard to change their natural movement during open play, whereas if it's worked on correctly at 7, 6, 5, 4 then there would be no issues.

 

[jofusref]

i dont see too much wrong and nothing that cannot be easikly fixed, the substution point is simple enough to make sure you do it properly in the next game, and varying your whistle tones just takes time and practice

 

[Golden]

update - had assessment no4 this weekend - any comments / ideas on marks for this

 

[Golden]

one comment I would make is that largely due to there being a hell of a gale blowing I never really needed to or had the opportunity to run into the penalty area!!

 

[forest96]

I've got AOL 4, MC 3.5, P/W 3, A/A 3.5, C 3.5, T 3.5, A 3.5, giving you 72. That is a poorly written assessment, couple of the competencies are only one line!

 

[Golden]

Correct overall mark if not quite the same breakdown. Was quite pleased with my game overall and this particular assessor is known to mark quite low so not too disheartened. Just means I need a 75 at least in my final assessment. I had two very experienced ARs on this game who both thought I did well and I value their opinion. Bit miffed with the comment re shouting play on advantage as I did do that and it's not my fault that as he was sat in the stand 60 yards away in the middle of a gale and couldn't hear me - I'm sure an assessor on the FL games wouldn't be able to hear a referee shout and that is what the signal is for?!? Also I played a few advantages one of which led to a goal! Just got to make sure I nail the last assessment I guess

 

[bester]

Talking to the player after you've played advantage is a contrived piece of nonsense, if you would've talked to him for a non-advantage foul then you'd obviously do it after playing advantage.
Seeing to be doing something rather than doing things that really aide match control is a common theme in most of the 5-4 assessments posted.