RefBlog

A practical example of Referee Capital

I expected to be booked - I half expected to be sent off. I was clearly guilty guilty guilty, but got away with just a foul. I was shocked! I decided that if the ref reached for his back pocket, that I wouldn't complain, because I knew what the situation was - I was the last player, I hooked the striker's ankle, and if I hadn't, he had an easy goal. But I got nothing.

Dang.

Two weeks ago I wrote about my Theory of Referee Capital, a mixure of, "Don't piss of the ref, in case you get him again". Well, actually, not a mixure, but it also includes getting into his good graces and getting yourself out of a cardable sitaution.

I was clearly guilty of Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity (DOGSO): I was playing goalkeeper, and a ball had been placed between myself and an oncoming striker, behind our defenders (it was a problem we had all... night... long). The striker took off, I took off; I didn't have as far to go, but the striker was much faster. I was late, I barely missed the ball, but squarely hooked his ankle, sending up both flying. The whistle was sounded, and I stood up and calmly faced the referee to take whatever punishment I earned. I knew a red card was possible (although many referees, and I've said the same about myself, feel uneasy about issuing red for DOGSO when there's so few people in the game to begin with), but knew I would get a yellow. I had to, I was clearly late, and it clearly prevented a goal. But I didn't.

This was actually the same ref we had two weeks ago when I initially wrote about Referee Captital. At the time, I wrote about how one team expended theirs foolishly, when they had a commanding lead, over piddly stuff; and how we kept quiet, got ourselves back in the game, and was able to expend ours when the game mattered more, when free-kicks had an added importance. I would content that it also helped me from getting booked two weeks later.

Has the situation changed, and the other keeper from two weeks ago been in my position, would he have gotten off scott free? I doubt it; referees who are berated to enforce the rules enjoy (even if we don't show it) enforcing them upon the berater. Think about it, players.

27 February '04 - 09:32 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

What do I do when frustrated

... and can't run around for a few hours? Apparently it's work on upgrading the technical aspects of the blog.

It's far from done; I need to clean up the template, find a different color scheme and find a spot for my nifty whistle graphic . It does add searching and a bunch of nifty back-end features that my current version (0.12 for you geeks out there) lack.

On the original page, I had a link to the test-blog. Either I've switched over, or you're reading the test-blog now.

26 February '04 - 13:16 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Best Ref Association Site Ever

It started out as an annoyance - if Pierluigi's Collina's book The Rules of the Game will be published in the US, I coulnd't tell you when. In a vain and fruitless search for domestic shipping I came across something positive, quite possibly the best referee association website I've ever seen: The Reading Referees Association. It's a very simple site, with gobs of content (and probably the most innocious animation, yet appropriate, animation I've seen. It's blows me away, even if you just look at the section called "more for fans and players". Let me repeat:

BEST... SITE... EVER!

Let's look at a small, portion of what's on their site:
When innocuous and clumsy can become cautionable
When fourth officials take the middle
What kind of football do spectators want?
Referees have human rights too
Is it time to give blades the boot?

Over 100 articles in that section alone.

You must visit this site - for the love of god, visit this site!

Returning to my original search, you can get Collina's book in the US, through Official Sports' web site.

25 February '04 - 10:36 - theref - default| - § ¶

Common Soccer Misconceptions II

Over the weekend it hit me - for some reason the griping about it had been quiet, but a singular incident brought back hundreds of whining players all saying the same thing:

"But I got the ball first!"

And the second in my series of Common Soccer Misconceptions was born. It's probably too wordy, not that I expect people to actually read them (I suppose I'll be happy if they just shut up), but I tried to actually quote portions of the Law and the ATR, which involves words, which involves reading. Hopefully the whiners are up to the task, since most coaches, let alone players, never read the Laws.

Here was my idea: first confirm that yes, getting the ball first is absoultely important in challenging for the ball - but then hit them with the idea that a technically perfect challenge can still be a foul by introducing the idea of "careless, reckless, and excessive force"; a little bit of the ATR is quoted for additional backup. Finally, I used the traditional summary: tell them what you already told them; by explaining again that a challege where you got the ball first, can result in a foul, yellow, or red card.

Please feel free to use these yourselves. If you have comments, suggestions or corrections, please let me know.

24 February '04 - 16:17 - theref - default| - § ¶

Bits of Web Violence

Another bad week for referees - it seems every newspaper is enjoying the idea that fans of Spanish club Valencia will be sueing the referee after a critical penalty kick call in stoppage time. It almost seems like gloating, because there's absolutely nothing about if the suit has any chance of suceeding, if the Spanish FA will be defending the referee (the USSF's membership fee includes insurance for this type of thing), or if Spain has regulations against frivilous lawsuits.

UPI brings up the story of a British team that attacked a referee after another penalty call. The team first broke his jaw in two places (requiring "two metal plates and nine screws"), then proceeded to rip his trousers, take his car keys, and destroy his dressing room. "Westfield's games have been suspended while soccer officials decide whether to bring charges." Decide?! Like there's a question?!

Fans charge and attack both players and officials following a game at Kwaebibirem's training grounds. Sigh...

24 February '04 - 12:11 - theref - default| - § ¶

If she was really doing that, I'd be laughing!

I really think the new system of tracking cards is working; an informal survey of myself and one other referee difinitively proves that problems with players has dropped dramatically. I'd ask more people, except I had the same guy on the other field both Saturday and Sunday. Although only three to four (depending on the team) games into the session, there are a few players that have already collected a pair of yellow - I haev to admit that I'm looking forward to someone collecting that third, to see if the league decides to enforce the policy, and thereby prove that they mean business, or if they crumble. If they buckle, the good session we've had now will go to pot, and I'll probably be able to add to my resume a skill called "eXtreme man management".

This is not to say that, even with the overall better attitudes people seem to be displaying, that my job is a piece of cake. Displite going card-free on Saturday, I had to do a bit of verbal judo on some annoyed players.

Player (after being denied a drive through the penalty area by a relatively unskilled opponent): "Common ref, she had her hands all over!" The closest thing I can approximate this to are people trying to be a tree in Charades, except in a very windy day.

Me: "If she was doing that, I'd be laughing so hard you'd have to pick me up off the ground."

It shocked me that it actually worked!

Sunday, I did mostly competitive-level adult games, and found that I wasn't running as much. Most of these games were stuck in the midfield, and I've decided that's because teams know better than the just launch the ball down-field, and all the teams are good enough definsively to keep their opponents from breaking away. The final game of the night produced three yellow cards, mostly on really rinky-dink stuff: player didn't like a call, so he punted the ball away (filling out paperwork, this was his second in four games); two minutes later, I book one player for a reckless challenge and the foul-ee comes in, after being told to walk away, to shove the foul-er - so I book both. All three of the cards came in the final five minutes of the first half. The second half would have had one more card, but the player who wanted to get booked wasn't fast enough to catch up - you could just tell that if he could, he would have a layed out his opponent. I was amused (still am, really) because his intention was so transparent - but the target-player just used him, since he didn't give a fig about marking, to open up a teammate on the other side. Nice.

23 February '04 - 14:07 - theref - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Found something to do

Just finished Stanley Lover's Masterclass for Soccer Officials, and decided to write a brief review of it (actually, I decided to do it a while back, but since I just finished it, it seemed like a good time. I'll put it in the right-hand-pane, for posterity. :)

Comments are always welcome.

20 February '04 - 14:50 - theref - default| - § ¶

Slow Time

Been pretty slow - not a whole lot the last few days in the news searches, and of course I've been game-less for a couple of weeks. I've played a few games, but there hasn't been a whole lot of issues (although I did see one of the rarest of yellow cards issues yesterday, one for Failing the Respect the Distance at a free kick).

I'm thinking of working on some more Soccer Misconceptions pages, like this one, to help address common issues that people just don't understand. One issue I'm thinking of is dealing with Dangerous Play (especially "High kicks" and playing while on the ground), but don't really have others. I mean, let's face it, most of the other ones I get is pretty stupid, and pretty isolated, stuff. Stuff (such as the comment I heard last night, before my game, by a player insisting that impeding/obstruction was cardable, or that a goalkeeper can pick up his own teammate's throw-in (and, if I called that foul, that it should be a penalty kick). Maybe, because it's been a while, the common misconceptions just aren't surfacing in my memory.

20 February '04 - 12:51 - theref - default| - § ¶

Maybe it's time for a Referee Militia

Maybe that's what we need, a posee of vigilante referees physically righting the physical abuses sufferered upon or bretheren. A honest and true "Knights of Whistle" (I still love that term). Well no, it is a bad idea. But after reading about abuse and then being denied compensation, you tend to be skeptical, even when a player recieves a 20 year ban for hitting a referee. In the process the ref had three teeth broken. I think the referee is being awfully gallant here, saying he won't persue legal action unless his insurance comes up short on the dental work. Most people in the US would be sueing for pain and suffering and lost wages, let along the actual dental work. But I just keep thinking back to that Ghanan referee... that we should hire a couple burly guys, preferably named Guido and Bubba, dress them up in referee kits, and just before they beat the living crap out the original offenders, let them know they're being red carded. (more)

19 February '04 - 08:07 - theref - default| Only one comment - § ¶

What could be in the books for next year

While I was on my trip, an email from SocRef came in about IFAB's (International Football Association Board, which is composed of the English FA, Irish FA, Scottish FA, Welsh FA, and FIFA) 2004 agenda. What all the refs look at, of course, are the proposed Law changes, which would officially go into effect in July, but for most of us won't take place until later (because our seasons are already half-way though).

The entire agenda is here, but here's a summary for those who don't want to wade through the PDF.

Law 1: Mostly a change in verbage, from a natural and artificial surfaces, to natural and approved artificial surfaces (the "FIFA Quality Concept for Artificial Turf"). While the proposal does allow FIFA to give special dispensation for unapproved surfaces (like rugs/Astroturf), I won't how freely they'll hand it out.

There's also a proposal to reference the Technical Area inside Law 1, instead of just having it sit in the appendix. Myself, I'd love to have it made manitory for competitve matches, because too many coaches don't know (or don't care) where it is (just because it's not marked, doesn't mean it's not there).

Law 3: a drop in maximum number of substitutes from seven to five. I'd love to see youth games, especially the periere levels, drop the unlimited number of subs, but that's another rant for another time.

Law 5: Adding duties of the Fourth Official into the actual Laws, much like the Technical Area proposal above.

Law 7: Increasing the maximum halftime interval to 20 minutes; although not mentioned here, I think this was spearheaded by the German federation to increase vendor sales at Bundesliga (German top division).

Law 10: Formalizes ways to end tied matches: away goals rule, extra time, Golden Goal, Kicks from the Mark. This does not bring in the "Silver Goal" which supporters claim is much more exciting than the Golden Goal. Silver Goal, unlike Golden Goal (or Suddent Death to you negative types) doesn't end the game at the goal - but rather the game proceeds until the end of the period, allowing the team to frantically try to even things up; if there were two extra periods scheduled, and the silver goal is scored in the first period, the game would end at the end of that first period.

Law 12: FIFA tries to finally put to bed the debate of if removing a jersey after a goal celebration is misconduct or not. If the proposal is approved, it is.

Law 13: This is the big one for me - it's been an experiment for a year or so in the English Premiere League, and has been meet positively, and has, for the most part, been expected with eager anticipation. It says on if a free kick has been granted for an infraction of Law 12 (so no, goal kicks or kick offs), and the defending team is nauty (specifically, by encroachment, delay of game, booked for dissent, or "Indulges in any other form of unsporting behavior"), they get yellow carded, and the ball is advanced 10 yards. The idea is to reinforce two important principals: than an offended team is allowed a quick free kick, and that the referee is in charge. I'm looking forward to it, myself.

17 February '04 - 12:59 - theref - default| - § ¶

The Economics of "Referee Capital"

I came into the game about as neutral as any player can be... totally expecting to lose and lose big. That is to say, I'm still totally biased, but I found myself more amused by the antics of our opponents last night than anything else.

This is parts of the new men's team I'm playing on, and we played the best team in the league - apparently they haven't lost a game in three years, and in our first week (which I missed) we got beat, badly. So badly, in fact, we turned to the last refuge of the celler-dweller: creating a goal for a "moral victory" - to not be behind more than five for either half.

You see? No serious or delerious expectations of victory; I was simply there to have fun, and to get about three to four dozen shots blasted at me, gaining me lot of practice (and possibly a broken thumb). Does that make me biased? Oh, heck yes - but it does make a good story (more)

13 February '04 - 08:49 - theref - default| - § ¶

They don't play with intensity, just with stupidity

OK, just I got my dates wrong, President's Day weekend is actually next weekend, not this. This means I actually reffed yesterday, but will get a week off starting next week, as I'm out of town visiting relatives.

Last winter, I decided that, when doing these shorter (50 minute) games, that the third seemed to be the ones that had issues. I reasoned that perhaps it was that by the third game, I was a bit tired; but by the fourth, I either had a second wind, or had adjusted to compensate. This winter, it does seem to be the fourth game; as I've been fooled a few times thinking that I might actually make it throug the night without cards, only to grin (internally) as I reach for my pocket.

I didn't really have problems; but I did book a few people in the fourth game. I'm just a useful excuse to the fact they lost; and they're going to continue losing unless they stop playing so stupidly.

But I'm slightly ahead of myself. Here's a quick rundown of the games yesterday:

First game was pretty standard. One team was short in players, and the other team won handily (3-0). Sometimes these get ugly, and I know of one ref who has had problems with the losing team (I haven't, but I've only refed them twice), but they seemed to be in a good humor. They have some good players, but couldn't string their passes together to form a coherent offense.

Second game was the most fun: intense intense intense! The game ended 1-0, but for most of the second half, I forgot that one team scored - both teams were just going at each other so furiously that you couldn't tell that one team had an advantage of another. In situations like these, people will have emotional outbursts, depending on the calls: one guy started doing the finger-waggle "tisk-tisk" motion, and I immediately steped in front and reminded him that it was my job, and the whistle did that for him. Another player, from the other team, burst out, "How can you call that ref?" Technically, I can explain the Laws of the Game, clarifying with the Advice to Referees, but that isn't going to help; in fact, it'll probably piss him off more (I'm only now beinning to read players well enough to figure when to fully explain, and when not to - and it'll be a long time before I'm good at it) - so I decided to throw him for a loop, and agree with the underlying statement that I'm just calling stuff for the hell of it; so I say, smiling, "I'm the ref - I can call anything I want." Not strictly true, of course, but it IS my opinion that matters in the game - how can one argue with that? Don't answer that :) (more)

09 February '04 - 15:53 - theref - default| - § ¶

A Ref that Makes Us Laugh.... In a Good Way

More from The Daily Telegraph, on the latest English referee controversy: Premiership referee Jeff Winter, who is retiring after this season, is also a stand-up comedian. No, really. Apparently he's been doing gigs both professionally, and for charity events. The schtick is, as you might imagine, pretty heavy on the football (hey, it's a British paper, let's call it propper for a change), and has concerned some because he lets loose about players, coaches, referees, and game situations. A quote:

"To suggest that the Whistler's Tales are an abuse of privilege is a bit rich when you consider the ritual abuse referees suffer on a weekly basis. If they can poke fun at themselves as well as those who constantly question their parentage, they may even be human after all. "

Sounds like a good idea to me. Sounds like we're both doing a bit of the same thing: explaining what refs go through to the unwashed masses. Only differences are: he's funny, he's a (far) better referee, and he's making money. More power to him!

06 February '04 - 10:15 - theref - default| - § ¶

Follow-up to the last entry... and more links of interest

Another search of Google News provided a Match Report from the game I commended on yesterday.

Apparently coaches and players are confirming a theat against the referees. I once had an Athletic Director tell me, after ejecting a coach (who, like in this game, recieved his second yellow card), "I"ve told him before: I don't care how bad the officiating is, once you get a yellow card, you shut up." Words to live by, coach.

In a different vien altogether (well no, not really) a San Antonio columnist agrees with me that more parents are getting out of control. Their battlefield are phone calls from these insane people: "Most such managers would rather be a tackling dummy at a Bill Parcells training camp than take one of those phone calls." No real new information (just a different point-of-view), but a nice read nonetheless.

Apparently dealing with adult problems at youth games is a hot topic in Texas, as I also found another article on parent abuse at kid's sporting events - this time on the kids themselves. Maybe I didn't notice as much the first two years because I was more worried about not screwing up, but this last year I noticed more kids imploring their parents to quiet down. What does that tell you, Mom and Dad?

Breaking away from from parents, but sticking to violence, I find this article awfully disheartening. Let's break it down to the basics: Referee officiated a school soccer game in Ghana. Referee blew the whistle to announce a good goal. Two adult fans of the opponents came out and attacked him until rescued by some teachers. Said fans were arrested, pled guilty, and were fined 1M Cedis (just under $113 according to The Bank of Canada). What did the referee recieve (who documented the injuries from medical facilities? Nothing. And I wonder why all the African papers keep whining about the poor officials.

05 February '04 - 15:13 - theref - default| - § ¶

Oh yeah, THIS will help the ref shortage

Saying it's compiled by The Evening Telegraph, Peterborough Now published an article about lawyers sueing to find out who reffed a game.... in 2001. I don't know where there Peterborough League is in English soccer, but it seems to be pretty local in nature. But does it even matter? Here's a rather disturbing quote:

"He blames the government's decision to allow solicitors to advertise for the new phenomena, with many advertising their services on a 'no win, no fee' basis in sports publications like the Non-League Paper and Sports First."

Ick.

---

You have to wonder about a sports writer who calls himself "The Lounge", but I'm willing to give him some slack when he says he's generally very supportive of high school officials. I wrote to him, and wish to share with you answers to some of the issues he raised (this is not word-for-word):

First, soccer officials are accountable for their answers - moreso (in many states disproportionally so) in high school, because officials don't carry nearly the weight that they do in the USSF.

Second, If a coach threatens me, like in the game he describes, I would do the same thing, too: game over, then get he hell out of Dodge. No reason whatsoever for me to stay on the field (unless there's no easy way out, then the first thing I do is grab my cell phone, ready to dial 911); if the high school association comes down on me for it, I quit reffing high school, and then take it public.

Third, I can understand why the officials don't want to talk to you. Talking to the media can cost you your badge - in my dealings with them (which weren't sports-related), they're not to be trusted (not malicious - but usually not on your side, either). Also, even though the game is over, the work for the official is just beginning; see my fourth point.

Fourth, the official will have to explain the incident - but it needs to go through propper channels. Having been in a terminated high school game as an assistant referee, I can tell you that it's a very ugly, and very involved, process, involving a lot of paperwork, supplimental paperwork, phone calls, emails, and more paperwork.

Unlike club soccer, where officials are members of the USSF (and heavily involved with USSF administration), which provides an avenue for officials to defend themselves, there's no such avenue in place inside the National Federation of High Schools (if there is, I've never seen it put into practice); the NFHS is ruled by coaches and athletic directors - one public comment and your career is over.

We've swapped another set of emails, and I hope this will turn out to be a positive. I cetainly understand his frustration (I think most refs shared it, prior to picking up the whistle); unfortunately, in those situations - we're just not able to safely address that frustration.

04 February '04 - 16:00 - theref - default| - § ¶

Things on my to-do list

I don't know if I wrote about it before, but I fucked up on my physical test for upgrading last year. It's one of those deals where I know I can do what's necessary (run a mile in 12 minutes fer crying out loud) - but I didn't have the mental preparation. While I know I can run it, you also run it at the same time with people getting their State and National badges; and I screwed myself by not setting my own pace, going too fast, then panicking. End result: opps.

Sad but true, I need to train for the test. I need to get used to running on a track (even though that won't be feasible for another month) - even though it will have little bearing in the types of running I do in the field. So, I've vowed to start training (not just running - my girlfriend wants me to get into some stretching classes - it'll be good to do this together) this month. It'll still help my game, which is a good thing; although the USSF, according to this National Referee, they'll be switching to the "Beep Test" which sounds somewhat like wind sprints. Better for me, but I'm going to try to make it as it is now.

I'm also going to get the book I mentioned here earlier - I'm sure I'll write about it some as I go through it (nobody had it locally, so I ordered it online).

03 February '04 - 08:40 - theref - default| - § ¶

Ratings Rather Pointless

Ratings were made available for the high school season. Overall, mine were pretty good; just hundreds of a point lower than the average that went to the tournament (and considering that all the centers were USSF Nationals - how do you give them anything other than an "A"? - I'm not going to complain). They went via the typical letter grades: A through D, with A's and B's being the coach's blessing to attend the state tournament.

Of the handful of coaches who filled out evaluations, roughly 70% were A's; of the remainder, 20% were B's, and the rest were C's, with one D. Gee, could that D have come from the game where the center never left the center circle, wearing a pink hat? I also wrote about this guy here. I worked my ass off to keep the game from going over the edge, as an AR. But since the evaluations have no positions, it's awfully easy for the coach to vent on me - not even knowing (or possibly caring) if I was the person he should have been pissed about.

It's also possible that it was the "Ugly Train" game (see the Best of 2003 section); but I knew right away that I would going to suffer guilt-by-association with the former.

Despite getting good ratings, maybe because of it, I don't mind repeating that the whole system is just screwed up. I've ranted about them before, but here's just a summary: coaches don't do them religiously; it's rare that both coaches on the same game both fill them out; and more than anything else, coaches are biased. It's not a condemnation (this time), but it's reality - if coaches were unbiased and everyone agreed on everything, you wouldn't need referees.

I don't know how much stock were put into the ratings - even the high school association admitted that it was pretty pointless without differentiating between being in the middle, and being an assistant. Of course, their other method of acquiring knowledge was having evaluators appear at the games - but I overheard that they barely did two dozen of those. That's probably why they selected only Nationals to center the boys games, which is of course a smart thing to do - but technically NFHS associations are not allowed to use USSF designations to assign high school games... just like so many indoor soccer places aren't supposed to require USSF certification for their unaffiliated games - although in both cases they do. This hurts us as referees, not as much in NFHS games, because we're not covered by USSF insurance (NFHS has their own insurance for referees).

They vow to make the whole process better next year - we'll see. If nothing else though, the review and ratings should, in theory, allow people who don't run the USSF route (including the sacrifices, and there are a lot to get that National badge), to still their own moment of glory. I haven't been doing this long enough to see if that actually happens, though. (more)

01 February '04 - 00:41 - theref - default| two comments, already - § ¶