RefBlog

End of season trends

The indoor season is finally done - it started out with a fizzle, the dome I do most of my games in being deflated, and even when up looking like it was held together with duct tape. I had a few moments of players going apeshit, but it was otherwise one of the calmer winters I had reffing. The season ended without any incidents, although with one wild game that ended 8-9 that included two own-goals, and a corner kick that bounced twice off the ground, over everyone's heads, before going into the goal unmolested. The things that happen indoors.

The other thing that seems to happen indoors are trends. Because of the size of the field, teams, and number of players (smaller on all counts), you tend to read things easier than you do outdoors. Also, indoor adult teams aren't saddled with coaches who try to enforce a "style" on the players, or wacky little things like discipline (maybe coaches need their own coaches, so it's not merely a "Do as I say, not as I do," scenario that all-to-often occurs). Last year the trend was an increasing aggressiveness of women. That trend continued, but unlike last year, the men started adapting, so situations didn't get as explosive as last year. This year the trend was the rise of people buying myths concerning the Laws, and inventing new ones.

The most common, as it always is, is the "handball" call. The biggest problem with that isn't the players, but other referees who call it any time the ball hits the arm. I saw a return of players kicking it into someone else's arm point-blank and wanting a call, although thankfully not a tactic to get a penalty kick like in years past; as well as many people saying that it should be called if they get an advantage from it. The later is a new one for me; although it apparently started in this league over last summer (where I rarely work, as they're unaffiliated) - even to the point where there was a discussion about actually codifying it in their house rules. As you might imagine, I was strongly against that change, and armed with the Laws and ATR, was able to convince them to not make things harder by reinforcing the myth. The problem is, someone is telling people that, and I had four people this year challenge me after their games regarding that myth; at least one of them pulling the, "I'm a ref, too" chestnut.

The other myth I ran into, which was also brand new and spouted by multiple teams (which means someone somewhere is actively spreading this misinformation - ignorance of the Laws may help it spread, but it has to start somewhere) has to do with shielding the ball. For some reason, people are now saying that in order for a player to shield the ball, they must first have touched it! In case you're wondering, that's wrong. As long as you're within playing distance of the ball, you can shield others from it - it does not your opponents an excuse to bowl into you or throw you down to the ground.

I'm wondering, now that the USSF has "The Laws of the Game Made Easy" along with the new publication, Offside Made Easy", can we possibly have them pass it out to everyone who joins an affiliated league?

Things will be quite a bit slower for a while, as I'll be sans games for about the next month-and-a-half. I'll still have things to get off my chest from time-to-time, but there's not a whole lot that's interesting about running at the track.

28 March '06 - 17:08 - - default| - § ¶

Punishment priorities

I had a pair of finals; one of which ran into a couple of complications, one of which was my choice, one of which I really couldn't have helped.

In this league, subs are on-the-fly, and with one referee, it's the honor system. I have written about in the past where people have alerted me to abuses, but because as a single referee, it's just not in my interest to play attention to subs during the course of play (what would you rather have me pay attention to: the play in front of the goal, or the other end of the field to ensure the sub procedure is correct?). It's actually never been defined in this league if it's the referee's responsibility - when people have asked, I've told them out-and-out that it's an honor system, and then usually add, "Like I could keep track of it all," which has satisfied everyone who's asked.

I can name three times in six years that I've had substitution issues in this league: the first was a sub who came onto the field for the express purpose of getting a yellow card. He told me after the game that, even though he didn't have to, because he made little effort to conceal his coming onto the field to play the ball, then going back to the bench. The second was a new team that didn't understand that there's a limit on the number of males on the field; the third was a team that was very tired and started subbing out on their goal line and subbing in at center (it was pointed out to me, I observed it, and asked them to cease, which they quite nicely did). This one was like the third, or at least that's the charge - except he came on and took the ball all the way in for a score. The other team had a single irate player, and all I could tell him was that I didn't see him enter the field, so I couldn't see if it was a legal substitution or not, and reiterate that with one referee, it's an honor system.

I have monitored subs in indoor before, but it's been with two referees. When you have two, it becomes the trail-referee's responsibility to watch for illegal subs; and in those situations, it does happen, but it's also supposed to be a more competitive league than the ones I'm at right now (and most of those subs involves the wall-ball variety of indoor soccer, and players jumping the boards). If it's true, it sucks, but there's little I could have done, unless it was pointed out to me sooner.

The other issue was a big deal for the coordinator, but not as much for me. The coordinator instituted the god-awful "two minute penalty" if anyone gets a yellow card; the team's not short, but they must sub out. There was less that a minute left, and one team was frantically trying to score a goal to even up the game, when one took a foul as he was driving toward the goal. I issues a quick card and let the team have a quick restart. At the time, I didn't even think about making the woman sub out, because I knew the real problem wasn't that, but the other side bringing the ball back in play as soon as possible - not just because time was running out (I could add that in), but because stopping to force her off the field would lose a huge advantage. So, even if I did think about it, I think I made the right decision, bend the rules to achieve justice. But to the coordinator it was a big deal; but it would have caused the game to blow-up; the foul was an attempt to slow down the game, all that would have to be done is make a scene, and all the sudden they'd have all their players back, ready to jam to goal neatly closed; it would make a cynical move pay off in dividends they weren't entitled for. I think I like my solution better. (more)

24 March '06 - 16:22 - - default| - § ¶

I don't want to be in a game he refs

It's a pretty common plea when someone doesn't like your call: "I'm a ref and..." Most of the time, it's pretty bogus; they took a Grade 8 course when they were 13, and then decided to keep that line 15 years later when they disagree with the call. The reality is that most referees don't use that line - they're absolutely awful to ref against (because they aften want the calls to go the way they want them, and percieve you as inferior if your view doesn't correspond with theirs) - but they usually leave their credentials out of it. I've heard that one local National referee (I recieved several expressions of condolenaces when I had to fourth official a game he coached), who plays defense, and makes a habit of being the last defender and watching the AR to make sure that s/he's in line with him, then glares and complains as appropriate.

But that's slightly different - a National, like them or not, definately knows the game. And in this situation, the person defiantely did not. If the guy is currently a ref, I defiantely don't want to be in a game he's running. Early on in his playoff game, I called him for running into the player with the ball from behind; he later got pissy because when he had the ball, he would run into another player with his back.

Can you see the difference? In both cases, it was him running into people, both had a right to be there; the former was a foul because it was dangerous, the second wasn't because neither were going at it hard, and the defender was legally blocking his progress. However, apparently in his referee class it was taught that you're allowed to go anywhere unimpeded when you have the ball. Goalkeepers take note, feel free to dive after balls kicked toward the net, but apparently you must let players dribble the ball in at anytime. Referees, get clickers that can record scores in the basketball range. Players, prepare to find a sport that's more interesting.

Can we see how ridiculous this is? The guy cannot be running into him, like he did, when his feet are flat on the ground. Easy stuff. But apparently it wasn't enough when the other guy had the ball again, and he shoved the guy with two hands to get at the ball... and he wanted to argue the yellow card.

I was (or rather, he was) rather forunate that he had cooler heads on his team that kept him calm through the rest of the game. Because it doesn't take a referee to guess what color would have come out next if he hadn't.

23 March '06 - 23:22 - - default| - § ¶

Am I that obsessive?

Small FYI - in the never-ending fight against spammers (I hope there's a special place in hell for them), I've thrown up a small hurdle: you have to answer a question before you can post a comment. It's the first field, and it's not difficult. You can thank those people who are trying to ruin the internet.

And just so I can have some soccer content - I was dreaming about refereeing last night, in Egypt. I even woke up for a bit (thank you, cat), went back to sleep, and resumed the dream.

Yup, I'm ready for spring to be here.

18 March '06 - 07:36 - - default| - § ¶

Why it's difficult for us to card dives

As I was doing one of the games in the second-to-last week of the indoor league, I ran across one person who started giving me trouble in the last five minutes of an otherwise trouble-free game. I had two playoff games that night, one given to me specifically because she wanted me to handle the teams (both had potentially explosive players that I've handled before - in fact, I had their last regular season game, and the coordinator was equally worried then as well) - both playoff games were fast and for the most part clean (I got to do a little yelling, as well as a little joking, in the game the coordinator was worried about, but it was otherwise just a slightly more difficult than normal game).

I'm writing about one of the other, bonus games, that I had that night. It involved the second-to-last chance for an 0-7 team to pick up some sort of point. Then a female player, who was big had a nice touch on the ball and surprising speed caught the other team by surprise in the first half, getting off several nice shots; unfortunately, and this happens a lot with co-ed teams, the men didn't pass it to her all that often - especially the other man on the team who provided any type of offensive spark (he was much faster than her, but didn't have the same ball skills). One has think the woman was wondering why the hell she plays - when she's trying to support her teammates, she doesn't get it, and when she had possession of the ball, she didn't get any support, either.

In any case, she got a little feisty near the end of the second half, probably when it became clear that they were still going to remain win-less in the lowest bracket with only one match to go. She started playing much more physically, which as a player and observer I like, but as a referee I need to watch closely because all too often guys can't handle a girl playing the same way they do. Then she took a dive. It was a good dive, too - I'm pretty sure I would have bought it if I were anyplace else on the field; she was trying to box in a defender with the ball near his corner and I ran to cover it from in-touch near her bench in order to be very close as it's very common for elbows to be thrown when that happens in that area. I saw it clearly: no contact whatsoever, and down she went crying for a call, I waived her to get up in the fashion that trainers tell you not to do, but you see MLS refs do all the time, and let the game continue. Her bench even joked about the dive, "Can't you give her something for her effort?" She was too close for me to joke back, so I stayed neutral, said no, and went back to play.

I should have carded her. The USSF said I should have carded her. FIFA says I should have carded her. Collina says I should have carded her. But I didn't. I could have said it was because it was late in the game, would have only inflamed the situation (in fact, any tension on that team pretty much evaporated at that point - not sure why, maybe it was my showing that I really was on the ball even in such a slow game as that), but I would be lying to myself. I can't speak for every referee, but I think even when we "know" it's a dive, there's something way back in the back of our minds that asks, "But what if it's not? Would the caution make the injustice of a non-call, worse?"

It's really easy to sell a call for a reckless challenge. There's contact, it goes further than you want, and it doesn't matter if the player got the ball or not - it's simply a crossing of the line, issue the card. OK, there's grey areas too, when you can at least try to get away with a stern talking-to because you'll get more milage out of it than flashing some plastic. Diving is cheating of the worst sort, and as referees, we, I, aid it because we want to be 100% sure before declaring that this player is of the worst sort; because when it comes down to it, I don't think there's anything referees fear more (aside from assaults, injuries, lawsuits, and others) than carding someone who doesn't deserve it.

The downside is that we (I) have erred too much on the side of caution, and have let things get away from themselves. Yes, a card for diving should be something you're very very sure about, but I think we (I) need to drop the bar a bit, from that 99.999% to simply 90%. We have to be willing to face some heat for making the call, and not just get by with the path of least resistance, because that action will be repeated. I saw it earlier in the season, when I let a dive go (albeit with a warning to a teammate who also agreed with me that it was a dive), and I'm certain she'll try it again, too. (more)

17 March '06 - 18:14 - - default| two comments, already - § ¶

No playoffs, no problems

The winter season is wrapping up, and with that most of my entries on this. I mean, how exciting is running? Which is all I'll be doing until my physical runs around. As it turned out, the games I had weren't terribly exciting, either. I know full well that just because teams are out of the playoffs (these are "bonus" games so everyone plays the same number of games, even those who fall short of the coveted t-shirts), that players are burning with cabin fever and tend to get a little over-entrusiastic when it comes to their games.

But as it turned out, there was little to worry about. The first game was a very slow 0-0; there were a few changes for each team, but aside from a few clangs off iron, there was nothing to worry about for either defense. The second game also was a tie, and aside from the best player on each team marking each other, really didn't provide much more than exercise for me. The third game, also a tie had even less to write about; and the fourth, which had a result (4-1) is about all that needs to be said.

Maybe I'll get all finals next week.

14 March '06 - 17:48 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

There's a name for someone like that: liar

So far, the playoff games haven't been the difficult ones. I had one card in the single playoff game I did, when a guy took a mighty whack at the ball, but missed the ball (got a shin instead) deep in his own end - I had another opportunity, but held my card (although I had him look at my fingers on it, asking him to keep me from pulling it out), in a pretty tame game. The other games were tame as well ("Look ma, no [red] cards!").

The thing that piqued my interest was later, watching the Fox Soccer Channel, with a pair of EPL teams going at it. I don't recall off hand who was playing, but one play really burned itself into my mind. The keeper for one team bobbled a shot, losing it, and before he could dive on top of it, another attacker toe-poked it into the goal. There was some cute commentary about how the guy scored from six-inches out, and how defenders are quite lethal from that distance. They also confirmed that the keeper didn't have possession of the ball and it was a good goal. But something was missing. Something important, something even beyond the public admission that the referee was spot on.

They said nothing that the keeper ran out to protest the goal claiming it was in his hands. Despite his never being touched by the other team, and despite it clearly not being in his possession. There's a name for someone like that: liar. We're not talking about being on the wrong end of a judgement call, or in one of those grey areas that make life so interesting (on both good and bad ends of the word) for referees and players where you can understand based on position, knowledge, or ignorance of the game; we're talking about blatant untruths for purposes of winning the game, and it receives nary a single word.

Is this how far we've fallen in this culture, when we accept a player doing a verbal dive as part of the game?

12 March '06 - 23:08 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Following through on a threat

Referee enough and you've heard of the tactic of taking one's yellow card(s) and handing them off to someone. It's saying that things have reached a certain point in the game were cautions have become meaningless. It's a threat to both teams: do anything wrong at all, and you're out of the game. I've heard of maybe half-a-dozen people use this tactic on SocRef, and a few more in person. The thing is, I've never known anyone who's had to follow-through on this threat... except me.

I had three games, the first a playoff game that went relatively well (a shooting gallery on both sides, with one side shooting better than the other); the only issue was that one of the goalkeepers liked to carry the ball to the edge of the penalty area and then carry it along with his feet - several players thought he was taking the ball outside of the penalty area, but then it became clear than they were used to playing at the other facility where the PA is smaller. Once that was settled, it was a pretty intense, but extremely clean game.

It was the second game that was interesting, and the key was one single player on the blue team. A woman who excelled in pissing off people. Over the course of the game, she got two PKs called in her favor, and two people were given cards for blatant shoves. The cards came in quick succession within the first five minutes of the game, the PKs were one in each half. The one team (the one without that particular woman) started figuring out what was going on, and after the two cards, really weren't that big of a problem, the problem was that the woman and the rest of her team, decided on a tactic of, "Piss the other team off", because it worked so well in the first half.

The problem was, that I quickly lost my sympathy; they instigated, even if they got worse in return, and when the other team stopped buying, they started exaggerating - especially that one female player. She'd bounce around, and it would look absolutely dreadful, but she also went in specifically looking for that, exaggerating and using her size to make things look worse than they were - and I stopped buying it as well. Eventually things did come to a head, and after a dissent card from the blue captain, I really started tightening the game - much tighter than I normally call, and it seemed to go well for a while; except for no discernible reason, a blue player came up behind an opponent, and grabbed him by the neck from behind - I really can't figure out what set him off - it was a goal-kick restart, he hadn't been particularly nasty, nor had the person he did it to.

Despite the relatively few cards at that point (four, including the red for violent conduct), I could tell that tensions were high and about to boil over. I called over the captains for both sides, and tried to lay it out as plainly as possible: "I want a quick discussion on whether you guys want to finish this game or not. If you both want to walk away, that's fine by me and I think we'll all be happier for it. But if you want to play, I need to make sure that everyone's calm, and nothing will happen for the remainder of the game [five minutes]." The Blue captain said he didn't want to play, at first. I said that's fine, but if there was no consensus, I'd have to make a note that he walked out - not that it was a big deal, he was losing by a substantial margin. The other captain was emphatic that he'd like to finish the remainder of the game, and promised that there would be no problems from his players; the Blue captain agreed, and before broke up, I game them the ultimatum:

"One thing, if you're going to play, then I am done with yellow cards. If I see anything happen, they will be red-carded. Anything. Make sure your teammates knows this, because I will red card them for any infraction." I made very sure to repeat the red card threat, and the nearby players also heard it too, including Instigation Woman. Referees, usually the same ones who mention doing something like this, also say that you should never every issue an ultimatum unless you're willing to carry it out. Since I've never heard of anyone testing their metal after issuing the threat, I can't say if it was contradictory or not - but for me, I was ready to carry out sentence should I be tested.

Now, the astute of you may ask the question if referees can legally up anything from yellow to red, and it's a good question. The answer, like much of the Laws, is shaded in gray areas, and Law 18 (aka "Sprit of the Game" or Common Sense. Most physical fouls that would garner a yellow card can pretty easily be stretched to Serious Foul Play and a red, because aside from some mandatory situations for a send-off, FIFA is pretty vague (the USSF goes a bit further to say that Serious Foul Play involves the change from a reckless foul to one with excessive force, but still not difficult to stretch if the circumstances are correct). If the regular caution was for mouthing off, it's also not difficult to stretch things to, "uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures" - four letter words are not a prerequisite.

So when Instigation Woman started mouthing off to another player, essentially calling into question his masculinity and honor, it was pretty much red card her for abusive language, or watch a bench clearing brawl break out after she was slugged. I stretched, and darn it, I stand by my stretching. After all, she knew I said everything was going to be red, she was trying to provoke the other person, and I think my biggest mistake was not sending her off sooner.

The really dumb, but totally expected result was they all complained to the coordinator, who was thankfully totally on my side this time around (no idea what B.S. she spouted to them), but to me, she was totally supportive, and even went as far as saying, "I hate that team," and, "they're always instigating things", and "they're always like that." The first guy (the one who grabbed another guy by the neck from behind) had the balls to complain about his red card, and Instigation Woman tried to use that she was a woman to get around the card - that never ever works on me. I've done too many games with high level women to buy that they never foul or commit misconduct. It sounded like the coordiantor was rather happy they got what they got, even if it meant suspensions going into the playoffs.

The other thing, which it'll be interesting to see if the coordinator follows up on, was that the team captain refused to give me the names of the players who were red carded. Because there are no passes, teams are required to give up the names of players who were sent off. We talked about what could be done about that, and I mentioned that USA Cup has a procedure (because coaches, unlike in league games around here, keep their passes during the game) which is a referee asks for the send-off player or coach's card, and if it's refused, he fills out a missing pass report, and the team is punished by the tournament. I made a couple of suggestions: upping the team's yellow card points for each player's name that was refused (last year if a player was sent off, the team played short in their next game; that was scrubbed, but now if a team gets so many yellow cards they'll be forced to play their next game short), or even put a suspension on the captain (this was from years ago, when the previous coordinator said that if a guest player gets a red card, the captain had to sit out a game).

I had a few days to sit and stew about the last game with a red card, but so far I feel pretty darn justified in both, and pretty darn good in how I handled it. Blue had many many chances to take control of themselves, but refused, and instead tried to bait the other team into getting players sent off, and in the end getting it themselves. I think in all honesty, it serves them right.

09 March '06 - 11:24 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Some pondering on red cards

As I do after some intense games, I try to do some thinking on my performance, my attitude, and my ability. Periodically I'll also see a post on the SocRef listserv about some really good referee (gets ref of the year multiple times, the golden whistle, etc., etc.), and that he's never given a red card in his life. Invariably I'll wonder two things:

First, what's this guy doing that gets him through his games so cleanly, without incident? And conversely, what am I doing wrong?

Second, what planet is that guy from?

I don't think any referee likes giving out red cards (at least not one that sticks around for the long haul). A red card pretty much is an admission that the game has gone beyond the bounds of civility. Speaking for myself, I like challenging games, I like games where I'm able to keep things in control enough to avoid giving out a red card. But at least in today's sporting world, you see coaches teaching 12-year-olds to pull shirts, parents acting like reprehensible role models (my single U-10 game last year?), and people generally acting childish. Unless you do real rec games all your career (real rec, not where rec just means a lower-skill level than the lowest affiliated league), I think some red card situations are inevitable - what's worse, if the referee still refuses to pull out the red, something even worse can happen:

In my second year of reffing, before I started this blog, I was runing a line for a high school playoff game; the center has previously swapped positions with other referees almost every time he was assigned as a center during the season because he was uncomfortable doing the middle at that level. That's a good decision, but apparently nobody ever told the assignor, and he decided to take this middle, because for some reason he thought they really really wanted him for that game. Less than a minute to half-time there was a foul and the defender was standing right on top of the ball - keep in mind this is NFHS, which means that it's the scoreboard, not the referee that's the timekeeper, which means that the referee either needs to get this player out out of the way pronto, or stop the clock. He did neither, there was some pushing, shoving, and the clock ran out. I told him at half time that he should have stopped the clock and cautioned the defender (he didn't), that it was a cynical tactic, and it really pissed off the other team in the process. He said he didn't like issuing cards. Let's just say things went down-hill from there, complete with large-scale brawl and a terminated game. All that without a single card being issued.

As a referee, I've made a stand that I won't take on-field abuse from players or coaches. I've seen too many little kids get abused by people thirty-years older than them, and I won't stand for it; I can't stop other refs from allowing it, but I won't, because shit travels downhill, and just because I'm dealing with adults, they will teach it to their kids. According to the Laws, I can't do anything about the fans, but as far as players and coaches go, this is still a game for civilized people, and if you abuse the referee, you're gone. No questions, no regrets. I can and do think about what I could do that brings things to that point, however.

For example, what could I have done in the last game to slow things down and calm people down? On the surface, it didn't look like I could. They both wanted to go all out, but only one team (two players, specifically) was able to going at the same pace as them. On second look, yes there were a few things I could have handled differently; I was caught up in the speed myself, but is that really wrong? As a referee I have to keep up with the pace of the game, and the higher the pace, the more bodies will fly. I definitely called fouls in both directions, carded in both, but only one team whined. When I tried to calm them, they were unwilling to listen. At some point, you have the let the players do their thing, and if they cross the line, then I have to deal with it appropriately. My calls may have frustrated them, but they did get explanations, they chose not to listen, because most of those calls were repeated. I may have influence on the game, but I cannot control them, I can only show them the path to finishing the game, be it by whistle, by voice, or by the yellow card, but only they can choose where to go and what to pay attention to.

08 March '06 - 12:21 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

There was more going on that day than my being a pissant

I figured my confession, and the game that required it deserved its own entry, but there were some other games going on, some of which were quite fun. Actually, this was about as much exercise I've had doing that field as I've had all winter. I had a 5-2 game that was closer than it looked; it had a team that always plays hard - which I think was a good thing, because it kept me from getting too caught up on the last one. To tell the truth, when I did think of the previous one, I usually smiled. But anyway...

The third game was 1-0, but realatively low-key, a nice break because the final game ramped up again, not quite to the level of the first game, but just as close (1-0). One team had a new goalkeeper; I really should say someone playing goalkeeper, because he wasn't crazy enough to be a goalkeeper. I ended up carding him once for handling the ball half-way between the top of the penalty area and the (mythical) center line. He had a second one which I didn't card him on, because it was much closer, and I believed he just misjudged it, rather than the blatant handling of the first one. I was able to let him know that however, he didn't want to commit a third offense. Apparently after the game some players asked the coordinator, thinking anything the keeper touched the ball outside of the penalty area it was a yellow card. This is a myth: outside of the penalty area, the goalkeeper is just another player, albiet in a funny shirt. I actually said, when explaining this, that carding for handling outside of the area is at the discression of the referee; however, if they wanted to argue a red card for Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity by handling, well, they had an argument for that. They wouldn't have won, of course, because I did consider it myself (given the distance from goal, and the velocity of the ball, I thought it pretty likely someone would have gotten there first), but if another referee gave it a red, I wouldn't disagree with that decision, either.

I think the best part of that disagreement was how it was handled: after the game, very nicely. I didn't even know they disagreed until after the game. Referees are never going to change their opinion during the game (the only exception would be if an assisitant gives them information they were unaware of), but this allowed me to question my own performance without getting defensive, certainly without the game getting nasty, and hopefully with a little more knowledge of the Laws these people are playing under.

Next week should be interesting: playoffs are starting. And if history is any measure to go by, I'll see games like the first one multiple times before we're finished. It's amazing what people will do for a t-shirt.

06 March '06 - 16:52 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Confession time

I have a confession to make, and I'm not particularly proud of it. It wasn't productive, it wasn't helpful, and if it was in an affiliated league, I'd have a new butt-hole ripped into me. I actually wondered if I was going to add this into the blog, but I decided that if I was going to have the be an honest account of the ups, downs, and realities of being a referee, it needs to be included: I insulted a fan today. Blatantly. "You're a filthy piece of distended rectum" kind of blatantly. OK, the guy specifically came up, after I worked my ass off on a very difficult game and proceeded to call me an asshole several times; but I also took the time to think about if I wanted to let it fly, and decided that, yes, because there would be no lasting consequences, that I would show that just because I'm wearing a ref's jersey does not make me fair game for his ignorance. I was not angry or lost my temper (I was more amused), it just seemed like an opportunity to do something I otherwise could not have done. Of course, I know full well that this won't change his behavior, so the only thing I can say is that it made me feel a little better, and if nothing else, I got it out of my system.

I've been told to only try new things in safe environments. It's done, it was a safe environment, it really didn't do anything (I find this far more therapeutic), so I think it's out of my system.

The game were the top two teams in the top bracket; and they started the game out in an all-out sprint, and kept it up for fifty minutes (the length of the game). Most of the time in this league, one team may go all-out like that, but it's rare that both do, and in small-sided soccer that run like this, every result from every contact is going to be magnified to double what you're used to. That does not mean that those contacts are twice as likely to be fouls (they're not), nor are they twice as likely to be given cards; as a referee you watch out for more of the reckless variety, but the reality is that you often see a higher level of regular fouls. What's even more likely is that one or both teams has trouble dealing with this intensity. To put it simply: both teams give it, but can they take it?

To answer for this game, one team could, one team could not. It shouldn't be too necessary to say that most of this missive will be focused on the team that could not. The team that could not also fell behind 2-0 very quickly, and started playing very physically. I knew at half-time that if the intensity level kept up, that we were going to have a very interesting second half, and when a referee says, "Very interesting," keep one eye on his back-pocket, and another on your cell phone, in case you have to dial security.

Actually, the game boiled down to pretty simple things: blue (the team that lost), were committing fouls much more blatantly than white; when you bowl someone over ass over tit, you're far more likely to be called on for a foul than someone who commits a touch foul. Saying, "She pushed me first", meaning someone not even involved with the play, really isn't going to earn a lot of pity when you just sent another player flying five feet before giving him a light meal of rubber pellets. Item number two was a tendency to exaggerate their contact (an obvious example was, right after issuing a yellow card to a white player, a blue player happens to fall down right in front of him, screaming for a card. Ahhhh.... no.)

This attitude, coupled with both teams jamming themselves very tightly right in front of the goal, means that sometimes things are going to be missed, and tempers will flare further. Blue becomes very upset with me, although I'm not terribly sympathetic with them, because they haven't shown any desire to calm down to work me with me, nor have they changed their antics. All-in-all, I think I did a pretty good job, and given that most of the referees in this league don't leave the center circle (I see a bunch on the opposite end on a regular basis), I think I handled it better than anyone else in this league, either.

Naturally the team that won was very happy with the officiating (it's amazing how keeping one's head lets you focus on your game), and the team that wasn't was not. However, it wasn't the referee that fell behind 2-0 in the first half, and played a strategy of drawing cheap fouls instead of trying to beat them on the field. If they're pissed because the referee saw through you, that's your problem in strategy (not to mention integrity), not mine.

The real question for me is did I do what I could to manage the game properly? There was one red card; really dumb, I delayed a whistle for a second for blue, because if the player stayed upright he had a clear shot on goal - but apparently that second was just too long for him, because he started yelling like I personally removed his arm. There was no question of a card, and apparently he just didn't card after the dissent card. After he was sent off they scored on the free kick (he was so emotional, I think they played better without him). This is what I do know:

• There were some things that happened behind my back; but since it's a one-referee system, there's little I can do about that, if nobody brings it to my attention (because apparently it was done quietly).
  
• When you jam 8-10 people inside the tiny penalty area of this field (go back a couple of days and look at the diagram), there's just no way to see everything, especially the ways people were moving, maybe if I was Brian Hall (who allegedly give the Portland Timbers' fan club the finger a few years ago) I could have, but I'm not and have to plans to be.
  
• I kept the physical play in check, and nobody got hurt.
  
• There were some calls blue took serious objection to (like some slides that were not tackles, one of which led to a goal), but they didn't have any basis in understanding the rules of the game, either with FIFA's Laws, or the house rules.

I did try a couple times to get the blue players to calm down, but I think they became far too focused on the game (or me as part of it). I'm very happy with the cards I issued, and the fouls I called. The question was, could I have calmed down the situation before the guy who got the send-off lost his temper? Call it self-validation (where you see what you do as correct to avoid criticism), but I think people have to willing to calm themselves down - I can give them the opportunity, which I did, but only they can take it.

05 March '06 - 22:31 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

When justice is razor thin

I really wanted to give the guy a red card, but it came just short. He just lost a challenge, he thought unfairly (I thought perfectly fair), got up and tackled a guy from behind. The only reason it wasn't was because, in my opinion, it was just shy of dangerous - he has little oomph in the tackle, so I left myself to expressing just how pissed off I was at him, with a card, and getting right up at him, telling him that he was lucky it wasn't a red. I think he expected one too, because he looked up at the card to double-check. At the next stoppage, I let a teammate of his know that I was going to keep him on a very short leash, and they might be better off if he didn't come back into the game. He said he couldn't do that, and I asked that he keep his player in check, because they'll end up playing short otherwise.

After the game, I did some thinking about the game I did last week where I did send someone off. In that game, I could have gone either way (let's forget that the comments were directed at me for a second), but went with my gut and pulled out the red. What was the difference? I think it's a mater of semantics versus judgement. In previous years, the Law said that tackles from behind that endanger the safety of an opponent was a red card offense. This caused two problems: the first was that tackles that endangered the safety of opponents from other directions weren't being sent off, which has now been corrected; the second was that players and coaches thought any tackle from behind was an automatic red card; I can't help it that some people read more into the Law than what is actually there... if they've bothered to read it at all.

In many ways, the decision on both games were pretty close: in one I could have gone with Unsporting Behavior, which would have fudging the call a bit, or with "offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures" - which of course I did. In this case, if I were to fudge the call, I would have fudged it toward the red card, instead of to the yellow. And if I'm going to bend the Law, I'm more likely to bend it toward caution. I don't think I bent in either case.

As it turned out, the guy was pretty close to angelic for the rest of the game. In his next shift, I pretty much followed him around on the entire pitch; and the one after that, I bellowed out at him before he started pulling someone's shirt. I think, if the message was communicated by his teammate (a practice I've found works much better than my warning the player themselves), my antics pretty much sealed the message that I was watching him.

04 March '06 - 18:58 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Why the ref just won't believe you

I took the high road, I asked the coordinator to just pick a field, any field, because I wanted to ref one particular team too much, the one where a guy was complaining two weeks after the game. I knew I could be fair, but I wanted to see if he'd still complain about it, four weeks after the actual event. Him being a coach, I suspected he would.

But I was good, and I got the games on the other side of the dome; the first one opened with a planned blow-out. Apparently each team in the "B" division gets one game against an "A" team, although because of the way the league structures their table (they lump both the A and B divisions in a single group), they may not know it; it turned out to be the shooting gallery that everyone who knew the match-up thought it would be. The good news is that the losing side didn't get overly frustrated. There was one guy who started crossing the line, but given the skill and speed gap, I wanted to see if he just needed to get a little bit out, and if the other team could easily avoid him, and it turned out yes on both counts; I was afraid that if I called a foul on a minor frustration move that was a foul, but still in the edges of being called trivial, that I might frustrate the guy further, the "Why the hell are they getting protection?" mentality that can just lead to worse things. It worked, they still managed a couple of goals, and everyone got though the game in reasonable shape, mentally and physically.

The second game was a top quarter-of-the-table team versus the cellar-dweller, and they had a good clean hard game that ended in a four-four tie. I had one card early in the game for a reckless challenge, not quite totally from behind, but enough where the guy who got the card didn't moan; I had a couple extra seconds, as they had an advantage situation, and I waited until the ball was out-of-play. The game went very smoothly from then on.

The third was great - two teams tied for first. The game was very fast, very well played, and featured a come-from-behind win with the final, go-ahead goal, coming in the final three minutes. Not too many fouls, certainly no complaints, aside from a couple (one for each side) of line calls that each team thought should have gone the other way. But here's the thing, after the goal, a player from the losing side gets all riled up about a guy putting his elbows up all game long; I do some yelling, his teammates get him out of the way, and because I have to turn around back toward the pack (I much prefer to exit the field immediately after the game rather than become an object for an easy cheap-shot), he says that I missed the aforementioned elbows all game long.

OK, here's a hint kiddies: if a guy is doing anything illegal "all game long", the wrong time to tell the referee is after the final whistle. I thought that this would be self-evident, but apparently it's not. It leads us referees to believe that, hmmmmm, you just lost a game that you were ahead of for 80% of, could you be trying to blame the referee instead of your own play?

Nyaaaaaa. Players would never do that. Would they?

Sarcasm aside, it is a pretty good assumption that if a referee is missing something repeatedly, he's going to continue to, and it is a good idea to let him or her know, so that you can see if the referee is actually seeing it, and if so, stress (nicely!) that you would prefer that it be stopped. Case-in-point: in the first game, one of the teams was subbing out on the goal-lines in their on-the-fly substitutions, but their replacements were coming in at center giving them an unfair advantage. I normally don't watch substitutions, if someone asks before the game, I usually say it's an honor system and there's usually very little time for me to keep track of subs, especially when they're allowed on-the-fly like in this league. So, after telling the player I would watch it (and reminding her that it would be difficult), lo and behold, I did notice the substitution pattern, and delayed the next restart to ask the bench to sub in-and-out from their bench area (and throwing them a bone saying that during a dead ball, they could exit the field wherever they liked). Problem solved, nobody is unhappy.

Oh, and after that final game, I watch the player from two (and four) weeks ago complaining to the referee again. Apparently she missed a hand or elbow to the face. When she said straight out that she missed it, that should be the end of the conversation; I mean, what else can you add to that? You can't rewind time, and even if you could, you can't backtrack to a call after the restart's been taken. It you want a last word, it should be, even if you want to be rude, something like, "Please be more observant of that next time." But no, he has to go on-and-on-and-on about it. Eventually the referee just said, OK I'm done, and just broke off that one-way "conversation." We talked afterwards, and we both agreed that, because of the way he plays, and how he tends to exaggerate contact to himself (while playing like a freight train when it comes to contact with others - he knocked a goalkeeper unconscious last year), that it might not have happened at all. His reputation has preceded him. I hope he doesn't teach that to the kids he coaches, but that would just involve me being cynical again.

03 March '06 - 08:31 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

A quick explanation of the two fields I work indoors

Indoor soccer in the US is a hodgepodge of different styles and rules. Futsal is a rarity in these parts, wall-ball ala Major Indoor Soccer League (think hockey with astroturf) is still quite prevalent, and then there's small sided games, which runs the gamut. Here are the two setups I have, and how each differs. Both are played over American Football (PointyBall) lines, and each facility has two fields to play on (click the popup link below to see the diagram - it's too big to keep in-line).

popup

On the left is the setup at the dome I work at. Goals are eight-yards long, and there are painted dashed-lines to mark the penalty area and the center line. In leu of offside, the goalkeeper cannot throw, punt, or drop-kick past the center line without it first touching the ground or a player first; same applies to goal-kicks, which are taken from the goal-line.

On the right is the other location, still a pointyball field, but there are no additional soccer lines painted (the ones picture are for reference only), so they work with the lines that are already there, making the penalty area only rise to the bottom of the yardage numbers, and the width extended a shorter distance. The goals are only five yards wide, and since there's no center line, goal kicks, keeper throws, punts, and drop-kicks must hit the ground or a player before crossing the second set of hash marks in the middle of the field (for example if a goal kick was taken at the bottom of the picture, and violated that rule, it would have gone past the "N" in "End" in the other half of the field).

When I played, I enjoyed playing in the field-house more. I think this is partially because I was a keeper, and could do a better job; games also seemed (and are) closer in score than at the dome. As a referee, I like the Dome better, because the play is much more free-flowing - because the field is wider, as well as the nets, the game is less likely to be limited to a small swatch of land right in the middle of the field, never extending beyond the already small width of the penalty area. When I keeped at the fieldhouse, I used to tell my defenders to let players shoot from outside the penalty area all they wanted, just don't let them inside - and 99 times out of 100, I was right; we could box in our defenders and keep the score pretty low. But from a referee standpoint it's boring boring boring.

The games at the dome are much more free-flowing, and tests people endurance and skills more, as a bunker defense just won't work as well. Shots are from anywhere in the attacking half, which makes both players and referee work much harder to stay in position and keep up with play.

02 March '06 - 14:50 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

High hopes, cold toes

I had high hopes that I'd have an active day on the field, but instead it started with our being locked out of the field house. The facilities people who were supposed to unlock it forgot (it happens from time-to-time, somtimes due to forgetfulness, sometimes when the pointy-ball players decide to override our contract), and the coordinator lost her cell phone, so four teams and myself waited around outside in sub-freezing temperatures for somone to come ot our rescue.

We did get in, of course, and only started about 15-minutes late, for some reasonably well-played soccer, and a singular yellow card for a player who came at a keeper cleats-up - totally not aware of what he was doing, which is common enough in these leagues, and pretty accepting that this was a no-no. I could have went red, but unlike last time, the gut wasn't yanking me towrad the back pocket, and he certainly didn't go in hard. Given his skill level (and the lack of hard feelings), it seemed a better way to go, a better way to have him remember it than getting all pissed-off over a red.

The only other game of note involved a team that I traditionall had trouble with. I always have a little apprehension, but I think that's more due to my reffing them in my first year - I have a lot more experience both in what I can and how I handle it, then I did at the time. Never anything ugly, but they have some players with tempers and very high expectations on refereeing (why they do it here, I have no idea, but at least with me they do). The game was fast, close, exciting, and pretty clean (maybe three fouls for the game), and everyone got out, including me, OK.

01 March '06 - 21:34 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶