A&H

Far too many L4/5s

Tom_R

Tom_R

Member
Level 5 Referee
Hi All, just curious if anywhere else in the country is experiencing the problem we’ve got down here in Kent? From what I’ve heard there’s far too many level 4s so they’re getting a middle and two lines a month if they’re lucky. We’ve also got another 60+ 5-4s this season who normally referee step 6 but are also lucky to get one middle a month. Experienced level 5s used to also get appointed to this but not anymore as the 5-4s take priority in appointments. 5-4s also referee the county prem (step 7) but there’s a mixture of 5-4s and experienced level 5s so they’re all lucky to get two middles on this a month. It’s also now been confirmed that next season step 6 will be completely covered by level 4s. So then a massive number of level 5s will be competing for step 7 middles and even more if the fa decide to reclassify any 4s as there’s also far too many of them.

Is this happening anywhere else in the country and has anyone got any hypothetical solutions because either way you move people (promote or reclassify) I think you still have the same problem?
 
The Referee Store
Tom_R said:
Hi All, just curious if anywhere else in the country is experiencing the problem we’ve got down here in Kent? From what I’ve heard there’s far too many level 4s so they’re getting a middle and two lines a month if they’re lucky. We’ve also got another 60+ 5-4s this season who normally referee step 6 but are also lucky to get one middle a month. Experienced level 5s used to also get appointed to this but not anymore as the 5-4s take priority in appointments. 5-4s also referee the county prem (step 7) but there’s a mixture of 5-4s and experienced level 5s so they’re all lucky to get two middles on this a month. It’s also now been confirmed that next season step 6 will be completely covered by level 4s. So then a massive number of level 5s will be competing for step 7 middles and even more if the fa decide to reclassify any 4s as there’s also far too many of them.

Is this happening anywhere else in the country and has anyone got any hypothetical solutions because either way you move people (promote or reclassify) I think you still have the same problem?
Click to expand...
I reckon the unpopular answer could be to increase the money observers get paid to encourage ex referees to get involved in grassroots observations.
 
I’m in Sussex. We seem to have a similar problem to some extent. However, we have too little level 5’s who have passed the fitness test.
It’s interesting you say that step 7 is refereed by level 5-4 candidates ? As a level 6, we can referee step 7 down here.
I’m currently waiting (and hoping) for my mid season to level 5 to come through. I’ve completed all my games and had enough observations and the RDO seems happy with me. I took the level 5 fitness test in the summer and passed, so I can go onto the senior list of referees for the Southern Combination League and referee Division One games (step 6). Our Premier Division (step 5) is done by level 4’s.
Our level 5’s who have passed the fitness test are getting middles pretty much every single Saturday without fail.
 
JamesL said:
Some counties have their own testing..if I recall correctly we have a test for our step 7 league/s
Click to expand...
Some leagues do as well. A local supply league have a fitness test to be AR1 on step 5 games, and a different test for L5s to referee to step 6 games.
 
My observer todaysaid the amount of level 4s right now is a joke and if I decide to go for level 4, it will be difficult as they want to try reduce the pool.
 
Before COVID and immediately afterwards, there was a shortage of L4's, so they have pushed massively to increase the 5-4 candidates.

This has worked, but now produced too many L4's, which allows the FA to pick the best for promoting. But this then leaves L4's going nowhere and becoming de-motivated, so the FA will either have to restrict the flow upwards or reclassify some of the poorly performing L4.

Either way, not helpful
 
They can only reclassify those that meet the criteria. I do fear for those on the 5 to 4 scheme as I suspect a large number will average way over 70 and not be taken. Even in the London area where there are loads of step 3 and 4 teams within easy travel distance L4s are only getting 1 or 2 lines a month, back when I was L4 that was more like 6 or 7 games.
 
Nothing wrong with this. In the past, promotion to level 4 was almost a certainty from application. The FA need to work on numbers of officials from Step 1 to Step 6, in particular 2Bs have far too many free open dates and ascertain an expected availability for the majority of officials to prevent disappointment and demotivation.
 
RefGod said:
Nothing wrong with this. In the past, promotion to level 4 was almost a certainty from application. The FA need to work on numbers of officials from Step 1 to Step 6, in particular 2Bs have far too many free open dates and ascertain an expected availability for the majority of officials to prevent disappointment and demotivation.
Click to expand...
The challenge is that referees have paid for promotion, will have met all of the criteria to be promoted, yet realistically have very little chance of being promoted. Almost feels like the FA should be telling CFAs to limit the number of 5 to 4 candidates, but then of course you have the challenge of who to allow to go for it.

Perhaps making the fitness test more difficult to pass would be a natural selector to get the numbers down.
 
Paid for promotion ?

Fitness testing is an option, within senior levels however the BF needs to be stricter. Specifically for ARs at Step 1/2.
 
RefGod said:
Paid for promotion ?

Fitness testing is an option, within senior levels however the BF needs to be stricter. Specifically for ARs at Step 1/2.
Click to expand...
Yes, it started out as a refundable deposit but I think most if not all CFAs now charge a fee.
 
RustyRef said:
The challenge is that referees have paid for promotion, will have met all of the criteria to be promoted, yet realistically have very little chance of being promoted. Almost feels like the FA should be telling CFAs to limit the number of 5 to 4 candidates, but then of course you have the challenge of who to allow to go for it.

Perhaps making the fitness test more difficult to pass would be a natural selector to get the numbers down.
Click to expand...
I'm still of the opinion that the new passage from 7-5 is far too easy. Having stricter marking criteria, maybe a mandatory fitness test and perhaps even a mandatory number of seasons between promotion levels might be something to consider .. (?)
 
Kes said:
I'm still of the opinion that the new passage from 7-5 is far too easy. Having stricter marking criteria, maybe a mandatory fitness test and perhaps even a mandatory number of seasons between promotion levels might be something to consider .. (?)
Click to expand...
There's a large variety of problems to solve imo.

There has to be a way to get the best through quickly. I think there is a push on trying to have a younger workforce (on average) operating at the higher levels. Which makes sense, many referees arrive at these levels at towards the end of their physical peak and at the Plateau/downward spiral that catches us all up in our late 30s to early 40s. Of course it's possible to maintain a very high level of fitness but it's long accepted best years are early adulthood.

Mandatory fitness testing might help, and I'm starting to expect fat tests to make their way down to level 3, especially those operating on national leagues as ARs.

This has to be balanced between making sure.you have enough referees, but not to many in the various pools within the NLS.

There has always been a bottleneck though at different parts of the structure. To me it makes sense for this bottleneck to sit outside the NLS.

And lastly, I'm not aware of it not happening, but wholly expect reclassifications to be strictly applied. Changes to the free season for mid season candidates will help with the flow of referees up and down through the system
 
Kes said:
I'm still of the opinion that the new passage from 7-5 is far too easy. Having stricter marking criteria, maybe a mandatory fitness test and perhaps even a mandatory number of seasons between promotion levels might be something to consider .. (?)
Click to expand...
I agree. Some counties are promoting everyone that meets the criteria, doesn't matter what the match day coaches put in the reports, as long as they have met the criteria they are promoted even if the coaches give them below standard in all competencies. That just results in level 7s and 6s that are no better than a brand new referee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kes
RustyRef said:
I agree. Some counties are promoting everyone that meets the criteria, doesn't matter what the match day coaches put in the reports, as long as they have met the criteria they are promoted even if the coaches give them below standard in all competencies. That just results in level 7s and 6s that are no better than a brand new referee.
Click to expand...
Surely there is a competency relating to minimum performance criteria for promotion. It's not just do the games get promo'd is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top