RefBlog

My penultimate outdoor game of the year

It would have been nice to center, but it was probably good practice, as it's been a while since I had a line. It was the same college club team I had worked with earlier in a double-header (or, more correctly, since they have two teams for this one school, one of them), and one from a neighboring state.

I felt pretty comfortable and confident about the game - although I'm getting a bit blue about my full-field games drawing to a close. A player from the visiting side tested me a bit in the patience department; he was one of those, "everything is a travesty" type of players. If he was called for a foul (which I did from the line several times), it was a travesty, and obviously the referees suck (this included the foul where he gave the guy a bear hug from behind to pull him off the ball - and you wonder why I juuuust might not believe the things he says); and if he recieved a slight nudge in the middle of a mixer, and didn't get a penalty called, it was likewise a travesty and clearly the officials were bought off.

If you've been following my woes with the indoor league so far this winter, you'll understand when I say I enjoyed it a whole lot more because of him: the comedy of it!

Frankly, I did my job in the second half, when the home team didn't like some of the offside calls I made (athough none of them were close from my, correct, position). The center did call a penalty in the half - I didn't get a good look at it (which as the trail AR I shouldn't), but he was confident about it, and I did see a player drop like a sack of bricks in the corner of my eye. This led to much diving and whineing in the last five minutes as the visitors tried to tie up the game, but if it's difficult to dive effectively, it's really difficult to dive effectively when you're desperate. First, it's the number; second, it's the over-eager appeals for obvious non-fouls; it sets the stage for the referee to believe your tactics have shifted to relying on us, rather than yourselves, for the goal - and while it's still possible, in the process you've pushed the bar up just that much higher.

26 October '06 - 13:08 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

No flow, no pace, no interest

I feel bad about being bored in these games, but something has changed. It's not just that the amount of misconduct has dropped (I've had two yellow cards in eight games - one because of a slide tackle after I made a very big deal about them after a first call, one because of an honest-to-god reckless challenge), but it also seems like the pace and intensity has dropped.

No, I take that back; the pace and intensity have dropped. I'm noticing because before I would alternate between a usual light jog, and occasional sprint, and an occasional walk. The pace has dropped so much that if I jog, I go out-of-position. In seven out of those eight games, I had nowhere near the intensity that the previous six years with that league offered - and that seventh game only had it for a half (it was a blowout and the winning team took to just passing the ball around).

I have no reason to link this lack of... omph with the new carding rule, but given the amount of indoor games I've handled for this league, it's pretty suspicious; if this keeps up over the session, it'll still only be a correlation, but it'll be a pretty good one in my book. The big philosophical question is, is this good for the league? I can't say - I know one team was openly grousing about it (but I've tossed a few on their team in years past, and I know others have as well) - but are the teams are bored as I am? Are they holding back because of the policy? Is that a good thing? I don't know.

I'm getting the impression of the kind of referee I am, though. Actually, I've known it for a while - I like the games where I'm spinning plates, not just calling balls out-of-play. Many could rightly say that the game shouldn't be about trying to manage potential misconduct, and in many ways I could agree with that - but I think if that was the case, I wouldn't be reffing, because the challenge would be gone. If the game in general went that way, maybe it wouldn't have room for referees like me - and maybe that's not a bad thing, but then again, it might also kill it.

25 October '06 - 00:21 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Underwhelmed

I had my first indoor games of the winter. And it's hard to put it any other way, I was underwhelmed, and even a bit bored by the end of it. As bad as that sounds, it's hard to come in, the day after yesterday's games, to do adult rec soccer where the kids are being treated like children, having to sit out an entire half if they get a card. I work this league for the challenge, and if the new card policy actually does what it's supposed to do, despite it being good for the league, it's not good for my own development and what I want as a referee.

The problem with indoor around here, is unlike the summer, there is a surplus of referees; and unlike my summer assignors - they're not concerned with developing officials. If they get what they like, and their schedule is full, they have no reason to try to break in new referees. Unlike some local indoor places, I work hard and don't eat popcorn while games are going on (yes, I've seen them do that on one of my wife's games), it doesn't matter squat. One place fucked around with me for two years, promising me games and then never calling back or even returning calls (my breaking point was when I canceled a vacation to work a tournament for them where they promised me games, only to be omitted and ignored when I called to inquire). Considering how many ex-professionals own and run these places (referees don't make that much), I think they do it to try to gain some sort of revenge on the rest of us peons - even if we never make it to their level.

The only other indoor possibilities are a good 45 minutes to an hour away; and most of them run to 11pm or midnight, putting it well out of a reasonable hour if I plan to work the next day. Heck, even in the league I work now, games still run to 10:30 - and I still have to get home and clean up before bed, then wake up for work; if I'm lucky, I'll get six hours of sleep.

The short of it is, it looks like I may be stuck with the kiddie leagues (by treatment, even if not by age) for the winter. Perhaps if I get too bored of it, I'll stop and focus more on training for the summer.

24 October '06 - 07:31 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Feeling tingly

You know a game pushed you when you start feeling tingly at the end of it. I had two lines - downright warm this time, with temperatures in the low 40s; girls first, and the defending state boys' champions in the 2nd. The home school in both games, both from the same school, were ranked 1st in their section. Sections in this state are rather odd - each team plays in a conference, much like college pointy-ball, but when it comes to playing in the state tournament, it's the section - of which they also belong to - that determines who they play and how they're ranking in the brackets. Why there are conferences, aside from knowing a group of teams you'll play every year, is a bit beyond me, since there are also teams that don't play in a conference yet are still in the high school league.

I remember the school from my first year reffing, when nobody told me I shouldn't be reffing high school in my first year with the whistle - it was another bad game. It was another sectional game, I can't remember what round, but I was the center in a game I really didn't want to be; the coaches for the home school (who still coached the same team this year) doubled as assistant coaches for the local professional team and I was intimidated by them - not only because of who they were (and I'd been a fan of that team, complete with season tickets, for several years before donning pinstripes, but because they were also designated attack dogs for said professional team. I don't remember if I was assigned to center, but it became apparent that I was the only person able to, and even though very reluctant, willing to. I recall one of my assistants out-and-out refused, and the other - who stayed from the previous boys game, was also unwilling, and also didn't want to take center.

Among the things I had going against me was a lack of support I don't remember how the first AR did, but I worked with him before, and he was a football referee transplanted to soccer, and watched the game much differently than myself (and probably the players);' the later couldn't keep up with play and was visibly winded after only a few minutes (something I can better understand after lining the boys this time around) - he was on the team side, and his inability to keep up causing a lot of tension between the coaches of both teams and us. Most of all, however, if I shouldn't have been reffing high school, I really shouldn't have been reffing that game - even if I was the best choice at the time to take the middle, and despite my trying my best, I was just way too inexperienced for that position at that time, and under the watchful eyes of coaches used to National Referees during the summer, I'm sure it was very very apparent, and I didn't handle some things like I would today.

The make-or-break plays of the day had to do with goalkeepers; of my thoughts on goalkeepers, not much has changed. I've been one (using the past-tense now, due to recent events), and while I may not be terribly skilled, I know what they can do, what they can't, and more importantly what is reasonable amout of protection versus the inherent insanity of playing keep. In more than one instance, the goalkeeper was involved in collisions going after loose balls and in the process getting smacked and getting hurt. It was my opinion then, and for what it matters (because frankly, it doesn't) now, that the keeper was being what good keepers are: brain-damaged enough to throw themselves in front of other people who are about to kick where their bodies are going to land. The coach didn't think so, and told me that they would have their revenge - not in as many words or that direct, but the intent was clear, I tossed the guy. Here's a shock, it's high school, a coach, and in the playoffs: he spazzed.

Experience and an excellent book has taught me to, when bringing in a coach to tend an injured player, to get the fuck out of the way of him, to keep myself from being a target; then I don't have to interpret what he says, and if he comes at me before his injured player, then there's no doubt about his intent (and about how much he cares for his kids). It's an early mistake, shows of inexperience - and something easily avoided. Perhaps if I centered the game now I would have been able to avoid the second one, too - if the first was 65-45 in favor of a non-call, I could have had a quiet word with the attacker. Who knows. I can tell you I'm more confident of my ability, those guys wouldn't intimidate me now (mostly because my opinion of coaches in general have dropped to incredibly low levels), and I think I'd better be able to compensate - or at least project better.

The aftermath of the game in question wasn't too bad, all things considered. Perhaps the assignor realized the position we were in. Then again, perhaps the assignor was just that strapped for referees, because I was working that team again the next game - although I was told not to center (even in my first year I would have said, "Duh!"); they brought in a former NASL referee; I gave him the brief circumstances of the previous game (mostly that I tossed a coach and they'd probably remember) and said I should be placed on Junior line, far away from the teams, which I was. He was a very good referee to work with - probably the first center that really used his assistants, at least while I was one of them, and by doing so increased my own confidence level. I worked hard, although I was still a rookie ref, but he seemed to not hold that against me. Probably the most important thing I learned from him was to use this phrase when I coach, fan, or player issues you praise (and not platitude): "Be sure to tell my boss." He said, and rightly so, it's because they always hear it when they don't like you - you need to prompt them to tell it when they do, because those same people need to know.

These games were not so interesting. The boys game had a referee who moved to the state a year ago, and I quite enjoyed working with. In some ways he refs a lot like me - he's loud. When a player came in late twice (of which I flagged both, since they were right in front of me), he let into the guy loud enough that nobody wondered what the card was for, when he had a plain-old foul ten minutes later (although apparently the player never heard of "Persistent Infringement" before - he still knew it was coming, and said as much). Mostly, though, it was a heck of a lot of running. As it turned out, we had an upset, the fourth-seeded team beat the top ranked and defending state champions by 1-0, scoring with less than six minutes left.

23 October '06 - 08:17 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

So that's where all the jerks went

I was wondering what happened to all the foulness and general ugliness went in this year's high school season - I found it still around, at a girls section-playoff game. The coaches were obnoxious (I very nearly stopped the match to toss one - I full expected to have an incident at half-time), the fans even more so (after they were done insulting the officials, they started insulting the other team's players). And like much of years past, the players were fine.

What gets me is that the coaches are my problem, but the fans are the schools'. They had an announcement about how poor sports would be removed from the field - I've yet to see that happen. I certainly didn't hear any difference from minute 1 to minute 80. And, for the most part, I could care less what the fans say to or about me - we had a chuckle at a guy who confronted us at half-time saying a player knocked another "ten feet into the air". Neat - too bad it didn't happen. And you wonder why I don't take fans seriously.

The game, well - I did feel pretty iffy about the game. I had to make some controversial decisions, and it took a while to get comfortable with my positioning. The later was because the field was short-and-narrow - there could have been another ten yards of width added to the field, but the goal-posts were attached by concrete, which limited them to a very narrow width (the penalty area came to about seven yards from the touchline); I found myself having a difficult time transitioning from one side of my diagonal to the other, and going to an extreme position (like when the ball's in the corner) could easily find myself out-of-position, as it didn't take a lot to send the ball to the other side of the goal-mouth.

One thing I didn't have a positional problem with was an early penalty kick, in the 16th minute. I don't calls penalty kicks easy; this was only my second of the high school season (and the last one I can think of in summer play was during a pre-season tournament), and this one lacked the clarity a good take-down gives, but it was one, nonetheless. The situation was a ball chipped in from the goal-line toward a waiting player right in front of the net; a defender makes a wild attempt at the ball and ends up taking down the attacker just before the ball would have landed at her feet for a simple tap-in goal. What did the coach of the team that gave up the PK not like about the call: that the ball was out-of-play. Ummm, no way, dude; the ball was very much in play, and very much coming right at the attacker - it landed within a foot of where she crumpled. Further, the defender, because of the arc of the ball, had no chance on it whatsoever - I can't say there was any malicious intent, or even intent to foul, but it still was there, and I felt no compunction about not calling it.

A few minutes later a second goal came in, a very pretty shot that sailed past a diving keeper, it was very picturesque, making it 2-0.

The second half didn't present any of the problems, other than people just not liking me from the first half. The visiting team came out far more aggressive, and I ended up whistling several quick fouls early in the half, which seemed to settle things down. I did have three injuries in the second half, a combination of the hard, but pretty clean play by the visitors, and the cold-and-widy conditions - it was below freezing, very windy (maybe a 20-degree windchill), with a bit of snow showing up from time-to-time.

There were several things I would have liked to get a better angle on - but a lot of it was it also being a very ambiguous game, leaving me to pick out which side of the black/white divide things belonged to. (more)

19 October '06 - 22:29 - - default| Only one comment - § ¶

Explain to me this

I just finished writing a pretty conciliatory entry about the NFHS, and truth-be-told, this has by far been the best year I've ever had working high school, but they still very much treat referees as second-class, rather than being part of the game. Yes, the USSF and even we know the game is for the players, but the USSF and FIFA (except for maybe, Sepp Blatter), understand that referees are integral for keeping not only discipline, but honor on the field - the best I've heard is said is that, "Referees are the Guardians of the Game" (it works even better than "Knights of Whistle").

I could go on-and-on about the stupidity and innate inaccuracy about coaches rating referees (in fact, I've done so here, here, here, here, and my favorite here.), but putting all that aside, answer me this:

Coaches in USSF, from those getting an entry-level license all to the way to an A-License do not need to know the Laws of the Game - no tests - nothing to require reading the rules by which they play and coach by. High School doesn't require any reading of the rules as well - they have to attend a three hour "rules meeting" which doesn't actually go over the rules - and they wouldn't (and too often don't) pay attention anyway. So how, in the name of god, do these coaches get to rate me on my knowledge of the game???

They split things up a bit this year, and some of the rating categories are fine: Positioning, communication and attitude. But I have problems with two: knowledge and judgement. I'm sorry, but I actually have to have tests to see what my knowledge level is, but the untested (and all too often woefully ignorant) coaches get to rate me on it? All that rating is, is to see if I agree with that I think their interpretation, even if it's totally wrong, is. Judgement? That's the reason I'm there - because coaches can't judge themselves - I've seen coaches yell at the referee for opposite positions; how easy is it to have the coach drop a referee because he makes the hard, but correct call?

It's more that bogus, it's bullshit. But I'm going back to those older articles again. It is worth saying again, though: the only people who can honestly rate a referee is another referee - and even those need to be training in what to look for - but at least there's no "my team" bias involved.

For those involved in statistics, here are mine:

• In the four games I was an Assistant Referee, I had three ratings entered; only one had both coaches enter a rating from the same game.
  
• In the four games I was in a dual, I had three ratings entered; only one had both coaches enter a rating from the same game.
  
• In the remaining eight games, where I was the center, I had 10 ratings entered; in only three games did both coaches enter a rating.

In Girls soccer I rated four B's and one C. In knowledge I averaged a 5 (out of seven), judgement a 5.4, positioning at 5.4, communication a 4.2 and attitude a 4.2.

In Boys soccer I rated one A, seven B's, and 3 C's. In knowledge I averaged a 5.18, judgement 4.64, positioning 5, communication 4.64, and attitude 5.2.

An A is seven points, a B is 5, a C is three, a D is one, and an E is -1. In years past they've released the average scores for those going to the state tournament. They're not available yet, but maybe we'll see.

18 October '06 - 09:56 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

They don't look like girls

This season continues to amaze in how well behaved everyone has been - I actually had a coach yell at me in the middle of a game for the first time this season, and it's likely that this was my final regular-season game.

One thing I won't miss during the season is running duals, which I had for my fourth game in a row, but before I could start worrying about that, I had something else to worry about. When I arrived at the field, a junior-varsity game was underway, and a couple of teams were warming up behind the stadium. But they didn't look like girls.

I put my bag down and checked my calendar... girls. I tried to remember the on-line schedule, which I looked at that morning... that said girls. Could it be that I mis-read the home team several times over the last week? I started to get a bit paranoid as the JV game ended and the boys took the field. With about 20 minutes left to game-time, the other official shows up, and I'm able to ask him about it, and yeah, they don't look like girls.

So we ended up doing a dual with the boys - so much for checking the standings and trying to do my pre-game homework. And god help us, one team trapped, and another tried to push the line and get breakaways. Here's the thing with a dual, for those who aren't familiar with it: there is a ton of uncovered area, and because you're playing the role of both referee and AR, when a team tries to push the line (offensively or defensively) and you're the trail referee, you have to hang back near the center line, leaving even more space open.

This picture displays a best possible scenario with two referees - one where you can come deep into the other half to try to cut down the angle and give the lead referee (who usually has to go closer to touch as he gets deeper. Now keep in mind that most referees who run the dual don't leave the touchline at all, because there's no training on how to run a dual properly (and the reason for that? It's because the dual is not an acceptable system for a competitive game). The lead referee can try to venture into the penalty area (and I did several times in that game), but he runs the risk of getting tangled up in play should there be a quick shift - and regardless, he needs to be closer to touch than the furthermost player, to accurately judge offside.

Honestly, nothing serious happened in our game, but because the game was tight, and because we each had to hang back one half, it leaves a whole lot area where calls are difficult to make at the best of times. What the NFHS needs to do is get more referees rather than use kludges like this - granted, the behavior changes I've seen this season are an incredible step forward - I never would have thought it possible in that short a timeframe (then again, I might be incredibly lucky) but that attitude is going to have to continue in order to keep new referees who will screw up, making many if not all the same mistakes as the rest of us (which means yes, blowing games). It might also help to make referees more invested in the NFHS, like the USSF, rather than being seen as the ugly stepchild. But that's a whole different topic.

So what of the game? I pulled out a card about mid-way through the first half for a pretty cynical kick after an attacker had made it past him, and his shirt pull - what else was left? Well, subbing out because of the card, but yeah. I also had about half-a-dozen offside calls, and a couple where the attackers snuck through - I could tell how things were going to turn out by watching the back four. Early in the game, they all ran in sync, and did a good job keeping the attackers from breaking their trap, but by the end of the half, their line had become a scribble as they became tired.

The second half was when I got my, "No way!" from a coach - but honestly it was a very easy call. Player had no chance on a tackle (ball a yard ahead of his foot at its closest) and took down an opponent. Easy easy call, except that it was in front of the coach. My guess is that he didn't see the ball, which was in front of the players. Should he have made the fuss? No. Did my partner agree with me? Yes. Did the coach have a spazz? Yes.

Opps, I'm going to go into coach rating again, but that's for later. (more)

16 October '06 - 20:58 - - default| two comments, already - § ¶

Rather surprised

Just before I left for the weekend with my wife (now of one year - the reason we were leaving town), I checked the pile of mail sitting in our mail slot, and found a letter from the state's governing body of high school sports. Curious, I opened it up and took a quick peek, and there was, not the "Sorry but we found better candidates" letter, but a request to work a line on a boys' quarterfinal game.

I'm not shocked I didn't get a center; they try to have all female crews on the girls' games in the high school tournament, and only National or soon-to-be National referees get middles for the boys games. I don't mind working with National referees - heck, I love working with officials who take the game more seriously than anyone else. The cynical side of me says that while yes, they should have the best referees avaialble for the tournament, how many high school games do these people work? Not many. Take your pick between high school and college or professional - assuming you felt comfortable at all three, what would you choose?

But I have to say, that in this case, my cynicism hat is very very small. The only thing I'm really bummed about is the quarter-finals are at high schools, which means no locker rooms for the officials (something that would be nice since in the past it's been below freezing when we've played).

13 October '06 - 10:54 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Not a bad dual

Duals are not my favorite - but I've been scheduled for two in-a-row as the regular high school season wears down, at the same school. Apparently this school won't pay for three referees - they also put "Soccer Official" as the Pay To on their checks, which my bank won't cash - at least they're willing to cut a new check unlike the last school that did that two years ago where it took nearly six months.

The game wasn't too bad, as it turned out - the visiting team pounded away on goal and eventually scored in overtime for a 1-0 win. I had a chance to get a little more comfortable with running a dual again (I was able to do a lot more backpedaling, at greater speeds - it helped that the field was relatively intact). Still not my favorite, but I might as well do it well.

11 October '06 - 18:20 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Going overboard

Both USSF and High School referee meetings are pretty much student-teacher oriented. There's a person (or several) who make presentations to those of us at the clinics; there may be some interaction, but it's highly structured. Depending on the clinic, there may be a box-lunch available.

At the referee meeting for the unaffiliated league I work at, there's beer.

OK, the league doesn't buy the beer, but they did purchase the food, which was at a sports bar & grill type chain, and it didn't matter when you started drinking (for the record, I had a hard cider and a shot of whiskey). But before you get too down on it, we started with a toast to Sal, our fellow referee who passed away two years ago. The meeting is also a whole lot more unstructured (as you might imagine when booze is consumed before the meeting begins) - but it's a different environment. The coordinator is still on a big safety kick, and like a few years ago, when a team that had a red card had to play short in their second game as well (that didn't last long), I think she's going a bit overboard again. I understand that this is supposed to be a "recreational" league, but that's not going to stop people from playing hard - it's more a refuge for those of us who are under-skilled to play in any affiliated system. I can understand her wanting to tighten things up some more (apparently the police were called out to one game), but I think she has a tendency to do things that change the game in ways that players won't like.

She's implementing three new policies, and I think the first two would suffice. The first really isn't a policy, it's a restating of something the Laws already provide - partially to have the referees call things tighter, but partially because, and I hate to say it guys but it is true, players don't understand the laws of the game: the Laws call it being "reckless", but the league is now going to call it being "overly aggressive." I've mentioned it before, just because you have every technical part of a challenge correct doesn't mean it's clean, if you're going in too hard for that challenge and risk injuring someone. Honestly, there's no change here, except that they want to make the line lower than it already is.

The second change is one I suggested to her previously: penalize teams for cautions or red cards accumulated. I suggested this because it doesn't get in the way of the actual game being played, but it does give the teams incentives to keep their own players under control. I didn't give the coordinator suggestions on what to set things, so she chose to dock a team one point in the standings for each straight red, half-a-point for three yellows, and a full point for the fourth. She's also keeping track of players who receive all yellow cards, and three yellow cards in one session (seven games, or one yellow card in almost every-other-game), will earn the player a suspension for the rest of the session.

The third change has to do with cards as they're issued - and this is one that's going to cause some problems. If a player gets a yellow card, they have to sit out the rest of the half (indoor halves are 25 minutes). What happens if a player gets a yellow card in the diminishing seconds of the first half? I'm glad you asked. In those situations, or any card issued in the final four minutes of the first half, means they have to sit out the entire second half. I honestly don't think the teams or players are going to like this one bit. The most controlled season I ever had with that league was the one session we kept track of yellow and red cards - and if a player had three yellows in a session (the same seven games), they would be suspended a game. It's the only session in six years with them where I didn't issue a red card - it was great leverage. It's why I think the third option isn't necessary, and actually a bit inflammatory. I also have a feeling, if teams protest this they way I would, that it might not make it past the first session.

10 October '06 - 08:35 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Two Duals

I hadn't done a full game with a dual in - maybe since my second year reffing. I've had USSF games with a club line that might as well been a dual - but there's still a different feeling when you have two referees on the field. For one, my partner and I definitely had different styles, he was much quicker on the whistle and was more likely to find any particular incident a foul than I - fortunately for us, and for the teams neither game was difficult enough to render that, as well as the large openings of uncovered space, problems.

One of the oddest things I heard was that the parents from the visiting team thought it was our fault that we only had two referees. Gosh, if this keeps up, it'll be your local referee's fault that your particular political candidate didn't win.

The boys game a blowout from the first minute - even when not scoring, the home team's touch on the ball was miles away superior. So for the first half, I wasn't much further out than 25 yards from the goal-line, and in the second half, I wasn't much further in than 35 yards from the same goal-line. In the girls game, which was by far more interesting, I did two things I'm not particular happy with: the first was contact between players that I didn't get a good look at - I was in the dual (again), along the near touchline, when two players collided, hard enough that one player, the bigger of the two, started crying. I'm probably safe in assuming there wasn't a foul, it was right in front of the hurt player's bench, but that doesn't mean I didn't screw up - I was hindered to a point because of my angle, which was dictated by the dual, but it's still something I wish to avoid. My second mistake had to do with invisible lines (gee - the pointy-ball lines were fresh and new, but the yellow soccer lines were barely, and in this case, not even, visible); I made a foul call that was just inside the penalty area, and wussed out and brought the ball outside the penalty area - this was another case of, "I really wouldn't have called it, had I properly seen the area" but with a bonus that the lines were so faded, that nobody but me knew. Not the coaches, not the players, not the fans - everyone just lined up like it was a regular free kick, and I brought the ball back a couple of feet. I feel a bit conflicted, especially given what I did just a few months before, but in both cases, you had inadequately marked lines, and then I'm stuck making a decision regarding which end of unfairness I have to lean to? The 80% chance of a goal that's 60% unwarranted? Or the bending the Rules/Laws? I bent it, saying, if I was to be interrogated, which I wasn't, that the contact for the foul was on the line, even though the bodies were inside. Apparently I sold it, but it was only because the team that was fouled didn't know they could have the penalty - I have a feeling that, like last time, if they all lined up for the penalty, I would have tried to sell it that way.

It's not a decision I'd like to make either way, and I wish the lines were properly pained so, if I made the mistake again, I couldn't use it as a crutch or excuse. If I have an argument in saying that it's not an excuse, it's that I've never had that sort of mistake when the field was properly and clearly marked.

09 October '06 - 10:54 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

On a game like this, someone is going to be unhappy

Lateness has its privileges. As usual, I can't work 5pm games; 5:15pm or 5:30pm would be great, but nada at five and 12. As the high school season wraps up, the shortage of referees becomes increasingly apparent, as I was given a 7pm game - the 5pm had two referees.

And it looked like it could be a real humdinger of a game, too. It was the top two teams in the conference, and the home team was also ranked #2 in the state. I was scheduled to line, but during a lightning delay for the first game I was asked to center. After the usual things, is this going to be OK with the assignor, is it because of the dual in this game, etc., I was suitable convinced that he wanted me to take the game... OK!

As I watched the remainder of the first game, I realized that I was back in the high school atmosphere that I knew and... well... the reason I took a year off. Both coaches complaining about calls, usually the same call, obnoxious fans, but a relatively good game. If nothing else, in addition to the small case of nerves that I had prior to the game (because this is likely the best game I'd center for high school this season), which passed as soon as we walked onto the field, it readied me for what I might get on and off the pitch. For at a game of this importance, played with the intensity I expected (and received), it's all too likely that someone is going to be unhappy. If you're lucky, it's something that's not serious and you're just there to be a steam target - but sometimes the job of a referee is to make the unpopular, but correct call.

I had three difficult ones to make early on. The visiting team was a scoring powerhouse: in fourteen games they had scored 54 goals letting in only 14, and they attacked inside the penalty area early. A striker drops - and it just screamed to me that he went down too easy, no foul. A second time in the area, and again I could see no reason for him falling, and so no foul. The third time was the one that pissed off the visiting coach, because the defense did something stupid - one of them put his arms over the top of the shoulder of the attacker, and he dropped like a ton of bricks... except that I didn't see the arm go around and pull him down - just go on top. It would have been so easy to call it, but again it just didn't pass the smell test and I held back my whistle and indicated that he needed to get up (I know several referees who frown on the "get up" motion, but I think in this case I thought it was necessary, as I needed to indicate in a stronger way, in addition to my vocalizing that there was no foul, that I wasn't buying it). This did not make the visiting team happy with me, a theme that would stay for the entire half, as their challenges were frequently a fraction of a second late, getting ankles before balls and thereby getting more whistles from me than the home side. It also didn't help that the PA announcer jumped the gun and called for a goal before my AR and I had made a determination - the ball had barely cleared the cross bar and hit the pointy-ball goal-post square, dropped the ball straight down making it look like the ball was shot into the net (but was in fact behind it) - I ended up having to tell a few players that we hadn't signaled a goal, that in fact I was waiting to see where the ball was before making a signal (for a goal kick).

As soon as the half ended, I made sure to talk to the lead AR - I looked at him before making a decision on the third potential PK call, saw nothing (since he might have had a better angle if the defender actually had gone over the should and grabbed), then went my own way. He said he saw nothing that could have caused him to go down - I've worked with the guy a while and know he's honest. As soon as we hit the track that surrounded the field, an assistant coach asked us what we saw, and was pretty nice about my explanation. My guess is that he was sent by the head coach, told the head coach, when then came storming at us about it: "This is the state's leading scorer and he does not go for PKs!" On of my ARs and I had a nice round of good-cop/bad-cop going on, he went into, "coach you're trying to influence us, you need to head back," and I followed with, "that's ok, that's ok. Thank you coach, but that's what I thought at the time - I'm definitely watching the defender's arms but there was just nothing there to hook him downward." The coach also went on a bit about my handling calls (there were several instances where the ball was kicked into another person's arm - totally non-deliberate); I explained my call, and he agreed with them, except that he said my interpretation of it was "totally rec league" and stormed off. I hate to say it, but the rec leagues I work want a call if the ball brushes an arm hair, and I've seen the professional leagues call it like I do on a regular basis.

The other coach was just fine and happily went on with his own halftime duties.

About 20 minutes into the first half, the moment shifted and both teams were playing pretty evenly, with good scoring changes and goalkeeper heroics at both ends, and that same thing kept into the second half. The visiting team had a great header off a corner kick that the keeper was able to keep ahold of, and a home team break-away was salvaged when the keeper got the attacked to switch angles and shoot wide by about a foot. The timing issues by the visiting team seem to have cleared up, and with the exception of one call that I apparently blew (a defender said that the home-team attacker said it wasn't a foul - I owned up and said, I'm sorry, I apologize, I blew it), things had evened out. But after 20 minutes, you could start seeing the defense for the home team start to slowly retreat toward their own goal-line. This was not an emotional shift, but one of the visiting team wearing down their opponent and looking for the kill. With less than eight minutes left in the game, they got it on a shot from left-to-right, inside the penalty area and went inside of the keeper and dribbled past him into the first yard of the side-netting.

At this point, desperation restarts the adrenal glands, and the home team had a renewed, if disorganized, offense. As the minutes went by, the pace picked up and reached a fever pitch. And as desperation rises, time seems to slow down; so as a visiting player went down (he was inadvertently stepped on his ankle following a slide tackle - no foul, and no complaints about it), I ran over and immediately stopped the clock. My guess is that no more than 2-3 seconds passed by between the time he was down (he was already in my quadrant and I was maybe 10 yards away) and the time I ordered the clock stopped; but players from the home team said he wasted 30 seconds off the clock. I reiterated to several players that it took two seconds, and they'd get the time back between the throw-in and when the timekeeper actually started the clock (which turned out to be true). But later, with 30 seconds remaining, a visiting team player was fouled hard and went down - again I ran over, but he started getting up. The home team is protesting that I should stop the clock, but the visiting team wasn't delaying the restart, they took the normal time it takes for someone to get up and retake the kick (about 10-12 seconds - I've seen it take much longer during the middle of a game, too), but it was enough to piss them off and earn a quick rebuke from the home team coach after the game, as I discussed the game with the other officials.

I was pretty darn pleased with myself for the game. One AR said I could have tossed a card or two out, one being that last foul, and one for a foul that he thought was much more cynical than I thought it was (as I said, I love they guy's opinion), but those were details. He said we had a game with a great amount of flow, I didn't get in the way of the game, called what I needed to without ticky-tacky stuff, and let the game be decided on a good goal without it being the call of the referee. I think we were all pretty happy with it, except for the team that lost, of course - it's not the hard foul in the last 30 seconds that caused the time to waste away, it was me.

But the visiting coach, the one that fumed at me at half-time and wanted the PK call (if not all three), was very happy. He thanked me for letting the kids play and said I did a great job. Go figure.

06 October '06 - 08:24 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

My position on high school signals

My "evaluation" came in from my recently high school center. It came back well - not as detailed as USSF assessments, but beggars can't be choosers. Most of the dings I was already familiar with:

• We didn't meet with the coaches and captains until five minutes before kickoff (mostly because of the scheduling questions that came up)
  
• I didn't sub out the injured goalkeeper (no argument there)
  
• I missed a time when the timekeeper failed to start the clock (sigh... do high school pointy-ball officials have the same problem?)
  
• He thought I was a little slow of offside (in my defense, I made a couple conscious decisions to wait to check, although I did miss one completely, until alerted, because of the speed and upcoming collisions of players).
  
• My NFHS signals were poor

It's the last one I'm feeling compelled to write about. I am doing NFHS signals, but I've taken a different approach this year. OK, I do omit dangerous play, which always escapes me, and offside, because in the past I was told the flag was sufficient in a three-man system, but I am doing it. It's just a question of when.

I've always done the signals since the NFHS re-instituted them (again, sigh), but this year, I decided that my personal order of emphasis would be to keep control of the game first, be in good position second, and signal third. If I did it by the book, I'd signal direction, then the foul, then move on; the problem is that there are situations where you need to follow either the perpetrator or the victim after a foul to keep them in line and the game underway; should I stop the clock or order them back? Oh, god no - let's not be heavy-handed and just make the situation worse - sometimes a short jog with the player with a word or two like, "Please don't do that," or, "is everything OK?" works a lot better for game control, and listen to me NFHS Rules Committee, and the educational purpose of the game, than running things in such a strict order. If I have to have a serious talking to (again, to either the perp or victim), I usually toss the signal out completely - sorry high school snobs, I do. The perp, if he doesn't know what his foul was for, will find out from me personally, and the coach is more than welcome to ask... after I deal with my situation on the field.

Because high school soccer, boys in particular, likes to play long-and-fast with the ball, I make a point of trying to be in position as soon as possible, which is why that's a higher priority to me than the signals as well. Sometimes, you can run and signals at the same time (holding, pushing, etc.), but others... well, let's just say holding your arms straight out for dangerous play (I looked it up) while running.... "Is he playing 'airplane' or trying to make a call?" Likewise, trying to signal tripping while moving will make you look like a very poor ballerina. If I get to where I want to me, and the ball hasn't gone back into play, then I will signal, but to do so before invites issues, and that doesn't server me, the fans, or the players well. Again, if the team with the ball really wants to know, they can hold-up their kick; if the defense wants to know and the offense decided to have a quick restart, they can ask me when there's a moment. Don't we have a more fair (and, for NFHS snobs, better educational experience?) game when I can do my job properly without being hampered by strict procedure? Considering that soccer is a game of creativity and flow by design, shouldn't the referees work with that same flow?

Besides, all the referees they select for the high school tournament (and when it's boys, it's the USSF National and National-candidates who work very few high school matches (they instead do college) that get them year-after-year never do any but the directional signals. I think that's my biggest problem - not that they get the best referees available for the tournament, but that they conveniently ignore the same thing they go all over the rest of us for.

It's called hypocrisy, and in addition to useless bureaucracy and slavery to lawyers, is another thing the kids learn when they play NFHS rules.

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

The affiliated, unaffiliated crew

This was kind of interesting: all three referees for this game all particiapte as referees in the unaffiliated league I work in during the winter. One, like me, has worked there for quite some time, the other just started reffing this summer, and like me, has found it a good test of man management. I was lining the game, which was a girls varsity match between two private schools.

This was also the first game I've had this winter where it rained through the entire game, and the first working a high school I had actually attended. Accoring to the policies of this state, as long as I graduated at least four years (or so, I'm not exactly sure about the number, but considering I graduated high school in 1991, it was nothing I was close to), it's OK. Not to mention I didn't graduate from there - I went to the school for one year, then moved to Tennessee, where I learned the horror that comes when rednecks have money*.

The first half was very one-sided for the home team, who picked up a goal and held a 1-0 lead through a steady rain. The second half's rain didn't let up, but there was a definate shift in momentum as the visitors took total control and pounded away at goal. A good goalkeeper, a bunker defense, and slippery conditions held them through. It appeared the home team expended all their energy in the first half, as they controlled nothing in the second - they coulnd't even shield the ball in the corner well. It was interesting, but it was also over, and the home team barely held on for the win.

---

* - I would like to take the time to reiterate something I learned from a woman in Tennessee, that there is a great deal of difference between being "Country" and being a "Redneck". Redneck is a derogatory term, and rightly so, Country is a state of being. She put it thusly: A Country person will look at something new or different, and will simply explain why he or she doesn't want to use it: maybe they're happy with the way thing are now and they don't see how it'll help, the training will cause issues, or whatever - a reasonable explanation, if you look below the surface. The Redneck, however, will look at the same thing, and say, "Fuck that."

02 October '06 - 08:29 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶