RefBlog

Hold your tongue

Several years ago, I used an often used joke from the USA Cup at a high school match during half-time. The joke is always told with the tongue firmly pressed against the cheek, and it's something like this: A good referee never lets the game go into extra time. The implication of the phrase is that the "good referee", if the game is tied and near the end of regulation, would call a penalty a few minutes before the end of the game, thus relieving his crew of the unpaid burden of an extra period of three. It's a joke, all the referees know it's a joke, and anyone who actually did it would be run out on a rail. So, at this high school game, where I was in the middle, I used the joke, based on the type of game we had; the trouble was, I ended up calling a penalty with a few minutes left to play, which broke the tie. The PK was totally justified, and I don't think I heard anything about it, but at that point I decided to never tell that story again, except in cases like this when the point of the story is to say, "don't do this."

The comment for this game wasn't anything so dramatic, or even wrong; it was simply a comment about the game so far, and how I expected it to go in the second half. It was a third division women's match; one of the teams just moved up from Division Four and was on top of the table. The fourth division in the womens' league is considered more recreational, and the third up is more competitive. I've reffed the team a few times before, and their moving up to the third was a good thing. According to my wife, they've had several complaints about their style of play - which is not in any shape or form dirty (even my wife says that, even after dislocating her elbow against them last year).

The game itself was very clear, no issues, and the comment I made was that, given the type of game we had so far, that I didn't expect to see anything cynical in the second half. Fortunately for me, I added the words, "But you never know" after that - because you never do. Sure enough, I had a pair of small incidents that required me to bark at a few players, to remind everyone to play nice. Both cases involved goalkeepers and attackers bumping into them after the keep had collected the ball; the first one was pretty close to innocent, but the keeper gave a shove as well - so I yelled at both. As soon as the ball hit the other end, an attacker did the same time - not as hard - I think more symbolic, so I had a quick word, and let them keep playing. Nothing worthy of a card - just enough to say, I'm here, I'm watching, and this is the limit. I'd been out-running everyone all game, so I think that was probably enough. There were no further incidents and everyone went back to smiles and playing the game.

Incidentally, the team I mentioned earlier, the one who just went up a level, won handily, 4-1.

30 June '07 - 23:35 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

"Parents amuse me, beacuse they know utter crap about the game."

Interesting set of games today; the later I think may be of more help to Regionals than I originally thought. I had a 14-boys line and a 16-boys center. The game where I ran the line should have been a blowout, even though the team was second-division, they played in the State Cup (I remembered the coach from a State Cup game I fourthed - I'm not sure if it's the same team, but quite top teams play up a year in the regular season), and they just dominated the game. They had something like a dozen shots in the first 20 minutes, but couldn't put it in.

Like the game where I was the fourth official, the coach seemed to love to critique referees, always in the negative. OK, I'll give that the center was probably a little too strict on substitutions, and didn't move enough, but we're out of the State Cup, and you're going to get regular referees again - and while maybe he wasn't top notch, many adult referees (hell, most referees period) have to "wing it" when it comes to how to run a game. I was fortunate to get noticed a few years back, and have been able to take advantage or learning from National and aspiring National Referees in improving my own game. Where at the State Cup, he said the referees were only in it for the money (of which it's easy to call "bullshit" on - because we're paid very little for State Cup games), now he said the referee was in it just for his ego. I'm afraid I'm going to have to downgrade him from "grossly uninformed" to something "slightly delusional".

The teams I had for the center, also 2nd division teams were, and I don't think there's a good way to say it, really unskilled. I just looked at the standings, and one of them is at the top of their division - eek! Apparently they had an incident the last time I played, and there was indeed some tension, but mostly it was whining and just stupid play. I ended up carding three players from one team, only one of which was for a hard foul (one was a player who just came off the bench and started playing, and there wasn't a substitution; and the other was for the removal of a shirt, after the winning goal was scored in stoppage time), and giving the same team a PK (would you trade three cards for an easy goal? I think I might). But the parents were horrendous - I ended up including a supplemental report with the game cards. It really didn't bother me, when one player came up to me to tell me about their comments, I replied, "I know, and honestly, I don't care. Parents amuse me, because they know utter crap about the game." In reply, I got a knowing smile.

The report's in there, because the behavior can't be allowed to continue. I don't let it get in the way of my game, but maybe the league or the club can clamp down on it. First of all, I'm appalled, although sadly unsurprised, that parents of fifteen-year-old children behave that way, and if I can shame them into behaving like decent human beings (because I know trying to reason with them won't work), then so be it.

Skill level aside, I think this game will be helpful at Regionals. It was good to have some teams with tension between them; I was able to practice my plate spinning, and keep tempers in check without having to resort to getting overly nasty or flashing tons of plastic.

29 June '07 - 15:15 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

"He's gotta go."

It's never a good thing when a player has to be sent off, probably even worse when it's the AR (in this case, me) that does it. Not that it came as much of a surprise, mind you. I had the bench-side line in a first division men's match; one of the teams had just been promoted from the second division, to the top tier. They started off really well, but gave up a weak goal after about 20 minutes, and then really slid downhill.

Part of their problem is that their attack is limited - they have two really good players up top, but after their identified by the defense, there's no attack left; their defense doesn't have the touch on the ball necessary to build up a good attack, and the result is a pretty one-sided game.

I may have to take that back - I just looked at the standings, out of eight teams, they're number three, and were playing a team just one point ahead of them in the table. Nonetheless, they were seriously outclassed. The referee didn't help their cause, either; he was definitely a believer in "let them play" and one of their attackers wasn't happy about not getting the calls he wanted. The referee wasn't unfair, just not on the same page with that one player - it happens; it's when he's not on the same page with the entire team (or worse, both teams) that problems happen. He actually seemed to adjust in the second half, coming into the defense with the same physicality he received in the first half, and lo-and-behold, he wasn't called for fouls on those, either. Still not terribly happy (it wasn't his style of game), but he was able to make more happen offensively than in the first forty-five minutes.

But then his team was called for a few fouls, and a non-call against him, and he started getting audibly ticked again; his own teammates were telling him to shut up; then with about 15 minutes left in the game, the defense made a nice tackle against him - he actually came in late on his own challenge and ended up hurting the guy. As the referee halted play to check on the players, you could tell that the defender was actually hurt, albeit not seriously, but that the attacker was sitting in that, "I'm waiting for you to come over so I can complain". Personally speaking, I think he had an argument on several challenges in the first half - but this wasn't one of them; but he went off and followed the referee, earning a dissent card. His own teammates were asking him to bend the rules to allow (no, wait, they wanted to force him) to sub off - something I didn't do a few years ago, but know now to allow in those circumstances, and the referee did too.

Problem was, he was off the field, but he wasn't done talking - he started going off on the other bench. I couldn't hear what he was saying,but it was strident, and I ordered him several times to knock if off, telling him that I could, and would, order his send-off if he persisted. Well, he persisted, after I yelled loud enough that nobody had any doubt, on this field or several others next to it, that he had to stop. So bang, up pops the flag, and as the center came over, I simply said, "He's gotta go," and nobody had to ask which number.

The only real mistake I found with the referee was restarting the game when he refused to leave. I think we should have suspended it, rather than let him stay and continue to yell, scream, and berate. It's an adult league, so he can wait in the parking lot, even if he has to ride with someone else from his team. It's pedantic, I know, but all it does is inflame the situation. I'd rather use Herbert Fandel as an example: if things aren't done appropriately, leave - I'm not saying abandon the game, but suspend it, and give the team five minutes to remove the player, and if they can't, then abandon it. Otherwise it just rewards bad behavior. (more)

28 June '07 - 04:42 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Division one line, probably good practice

Not much to report: I had a line on a first-division men's game, and the center referee, who's also going to Regionals, did a good job. I know I'll be doing mostly lines at Regionals, so this gave me some good practice at a decent pace before heading off.

Only two decisions with any serious controversy; one was a possible pass-back to the keeper; it could be seen as a pass-back, or the keeper picking up a loose ball after a defensive tackle. I initially thought it was, but it was well out of my quadrant, and the center referee was closer, so I left it to her to make the decision. It was close enough that I wouldn't have questioned either call, and yet I can understand why the offensive team wanted it. But grey areas are what make reffing soccer interesting. The second issue is actually pretty clear cut, and almost had disastrous consequences for the team that didn't understand the call: break away in progress along the right-side of the field, the attacker crosses it back-and-center to another attacker who is also ahead of all the defenders. The defenders scream for an offside call, and when they don't get it, take out the attacker in the area. Much more screaming after, with the referees both trying to explain, "He's still behind the ball." I think (it was at the opposite end of me), that cooler heads prevailed, and the PK (which I'm not sure was ever in doubt) was taken, saved very nicely by the keeper, who jumped up and made an even more spectacular stop off the rebounded shot. (more)

27 June '07 - 22:15 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

On vacation for a week

I'm going to be away for a week (and what a lovely entry to leave at the top of the page for a week - oh well, it's a blogging referee's life, I suppose) and won't have access to a computer during that time. If you enjoy reading this, I thank you, and invite you to read some of the older entries on the site (I have 763 articles published on this site so far), or some of the other referee bloggers and sites from the Links section (look at the middle column). (more)

21 June '07 - 14:15 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

What a mess

The hearing took about an hour, and good grief was it a mess: everyone had plenty to be reamed about, except for the team that had their player get hurt.

First, I was the only referee to show up for the hearing (ick), and I probably had the least to contribute out of the three (because I didn't see the stomp that set it all off). Fortunately, I didn't get any heat from the lack of paperwork from the center referee, although he got plenty in absentia. So, here's the quick summary of just what went wrong in this, and who's getting ripped for what:

• The referees are ripped because of an inadequate game report. This is the crux of the whole thing, because if it was done properly, we (no wait, I - I'm was the only referee to bother) wouldn't be there. As I mentioned in my last entry about this whole fiasco: the center only recorded the red cards as "Violent Conduct", which is a category, not an explanation. Even a couple words, "Stomped opponents knee" or "struck player with a closed fist" would be enough. I had some questions about who I sent off (a player off the bench who struck someone else), how many people were in the melé, and why I only suggested the one send off (because there were lots of people pushing or shoving, but only one I saw from my angle striking with a closed fist).

• The league was ripped because of the timing (or lack thereof) of their work. Players were only informed of their suspensions at the beginning of this season (nine months later); referees were never contacted when the aforementioned paperwork proved to be utter crap (BTW - he didn't even include all the yellow cards - arrrrrrgh!!!). They also gave the impression that, when the player that got hurt sent an email about the incident, they took it at face value and didn't ask the other team (or the referees) for their side.

• Even the team who made the appeal got it's share of ripping. Statements supposedly written by the player claiming mistaken identity wasn't actually written by him. Even worse, it contained several obvious inaccuracies, and even claimed that it was another person who was fouled (because it was apparently agreed by both sides, before the topic came up, that it was the player who was fouled that stomped on the guy's knee). When asked why that player wasn't in, the team backtracked and said that it may not have been that player. This only caused the panel to consider throwing out his statement (and several others from the team).

So, what we have here is a game report with inadequate information, a league that didn't perform its own due diligence, and a team that's probably going to have all of it's statements thrown out. I feel for the board who have the rule on this: how the hell do you make a decision with this pile of poo? (more)

21 June '07 - 10:41 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Short entry, quiet game

First division women's game on the line. I think I had the same two teams last year in the middle last year, and like last year the green team started the game short but still ended up winning. Unlike last year, the heat was still at 90°, so after taking a 4-0, they ran out of gas, and only ended up winning by the skin of their teeth. The final goal, which brought the score to 4-3, was scored with just over a minute left. I think five more minutes and we'd have a tied game.

First division women's games are interesting because so many of them play on college teams now (which is the best you can get in women's soccer - hopefully that'll change with WUSA II, aka the Women's Soccer Initiative - but my guess is that the WSI plans on taking things a little slower than WUSA did.

I enjoy women's soccer quite a bit, but you have to look at it through a different lens from the men's game. The women's game, speaking in very general terms, is played much wider and much more technical than the men's game. As a center referee, I run just as much, and often more, with women's games than men's, because there is much more shifting from side-to-side on the play than the typical men's game, where up-and-down is the modus operandi, at least around here. I enjoyed watching WUSA on TV, and always hoped for an expansion team - we're not getting a team in WUSA II, but I suppose I can always hope.

20 June '07 - 11:30 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Whose job is the paperwork?

God, I hoped that game was behind me. Last August, I had a men's playoff game where I felt the center was out of his depth; myself and the other assistant tried, unsuccessfully, to carry the game and failed. One of the lines I wrote has become depressingly prophetic: "... [He] hasn't shown me a good eye for detail (he messed up a roster during check-ins for me twice)."

Here's the quick recap: early in the game, the teams both get nasty and the center referee appears to be borderline clueless on what's going on. Myself on the line, and a State Referee on the other line, start calling far more fouls than the center, but we're unable to keep control of the match. A fight breaks out in the first half, which includes a stomp on another player's leg (which resulted in permanent damage, I found out). Three red cards were issued, all three tagged by the assistants (two by the other AR, who saw the stomp and fighting, one by me, who was between the melee and players from the bench, who were leaving it to enter the fray). At half-time, the center referee seemed pretty blasé about the whole thing.

Yikes.

That was ten months ago, and I hadn't heard a thing about it since; I was rather glad to, because you're not really supposed to rat out other referees, except maybe to the assignor to say that he really shouldn't do that level game. Here's where his lack of attention to detail is biting me in the ass: he apparently wrote NO details in the match report about the incident. Just the players and the cards, but not who did what. So now a player, who was given a one-year ban for the stomp, is appealing the suspension, and because the center referee didn't include any information, the governing body of the amateur soccer in the state has decided there's grounds for a hearing. And they're right.

The sad thing is that I can't contribute much. The exact order of events was there: bad foul in front of me and one team's bench with several other players nearby, they congeal together, the stomp allegedly happens (at this point, the number of players had screened me from any possibility of seeing the stomp, but apparently the other assistant saw it clearly), and all hell breaks loose. The fight breaks out because of the stomp, players leave the bench, referees leave other fields, standby referee lies (and I'm thankful for this) about being an assessor to help calm things down, and I wonder just what I did to get this center three times in short order.

Now my question for the day - who's job is the paperwork? Normally, the assistants verify the score, verify the correct players for the cards, tack on their name on the report, and go. If there are any details to fill in, it's done by the center. Both of us stuck to this format - partially because we had little choice in the matter, due to circumstance. All the playoff games were grouped together, and the center had another game to go to, so he took the paperwork and went to his next game. Should we have done more, given my misgivings about his attention to detail? Probably. No, not probably - yes. I have to admit, since I was done, and he was leaving, my loudest thoughts were how to get to the parking lot, which was between the teams and myself, without risking an incident.

The league mishandled some of this, too. Because it was a playoff game (done tournament style, with all games being held at one complex), the paperwork was to be turned in that day. So if the paperwork was incomplete (if the red card section is has three lines written on it - it should grab your attention), why not ask the officials for more information right away? Why wait ten months? I'm not going to have my paperwork (from backing up the game, although it's little more than player numbers) still around, and my memory certainly isn't fresh at this point. I don't apologize for thinking about my safety first, and I'm not sure how much I could have helped with the paperwork, since it wasn't even there long. The referee also has our numbers and email addresses to get more information from us as well.

What a disaster. (more)

19 June '07 - 09:25 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Feeling odd, but apparently I did well anyway

I'd been looking forward to this as soon as I got the game: a first-division men's center, normally reserved for State Referees. I'd been doing lines on them for years, but asked by assignor to allow me to center some if she felt I could handle it (as I'd need to referee one of those games for my own State Badge, if I can get enough centers).

There were a few butterflies, but apparently I did well. When the losing team says you did good, and actually responds to "be sure to tell my boss" when they say good game, that's a good thing. Especially when I called a PK against them, too. I have to admit, though, that it felt kind of odd doing the game. I think part of it was there was little flow in the match (something that the senior assistant, himself a State, agreed with); although it was also the hottest day of the summer so far at 90°, and I don't thrive on the heat that well.

No cards in the game, although I reached into my pocket briefly, before thinking otherwise, with a hard but ultimately accidental foul. The PK I called could have been a caution, could have been a red card, but I thought better; I know the team that got the PK wanted a send-off, but it really didn't seem to fit the crime; the goalkeeper tripped up the attacker on a break away, but the attacker didn't have a good foot on the ball and it was more bungling than anything on the trip up. It didn't and still doesn't, feel right to issue a send-off for that. Maybe a caution.

But, despite the lack of feeling running about, and also with communicating with the players, I think I did OK. I think the more games I have working the middle in the first division, the better I'll do, just like the kid from yesterday's 3rd division match. So I'm feeling pretty good about it. (more)

18 June '07 - 10:38 - - default| two comments, already - § ¶

Of Logos and Uniforms, and Money to OSI

Sometimes you wonder when you read (and when I write) this blog, but I really enjoy being a referee. I'm particularly happy with the referee program with the USSF - it has its issues, but I think their model is pretty good: almost every game from U-little to adult gets three referees, there's a consistent and improving training program, and we're made to feel as part of the USSF, rather than just tolerated out of necessity (can you say "NFHS", boys and girls?)

So I take pride in my work, and I'm proud to wear the USSF logo on my uniform. And if I wear everything with a USSF logo on it, I'd have it on seven parts of my body (shirt sleeve, shirt front, on the shorts, and two on either sock). OK, that might be getting a little ridiculous.

Of one thing that is consistently moaned about by USSF referees is the relationship the USSF has with Official Sports International (OSI). OSI is the official sponsor of the USSF, to be worn at all USSF functions, and are the only company allowed to use the USSF logo on their referee equipment. I take a sanguine approach to the whole thing. The USSF does not ban other companies from selling referee-appropriate apparel; but the higher level of games you do, the more you're representing the USSF in a visible position, and the more you're expected to wear official (meaning OSI) uniforms. This is not necessarily a bad thing: it shows the level of commitment you have to the program, and some of the money OSI makes does trickle down to the USSF's referee program. On top of that, OSI does make some good stuff (I like their socks and their new shorts in particular), they're a good quality of product, and their customer service is good as well.

Much of the griping comes down from the number of jerseys we have to buy. A complete set of USSF jerseys, eight in total (gold, black, red and blue; short and long sleeve each), in the Pro Line (which is far far better than the Economy) is $380 + taxes and shipping. I don't know the exact evolution of the USSF referee jersey, having started one year before the current pinstripe set became the only ones you could wear; but I think it goes from the traditional black, to some gridded pattern, fuchsia (perhaps they were grouped together, to the set we have now. The problem is that over the last few years, OSI's been adding items: logo socks (which, despite wearing quite nicely, look stupid if you have any kind of visible calf muscle), the new shorts, and additional jerseys. The blue jersey in particular will set some referees on edge; several years after its introduction, I still run into referees who spit whenever they hear about it. And now green is coming.

Well, I should say that I think green is coming. I've heard people who went to National Camp say they were told green is coming. And now the rumors are, what else does it mean. Will it stay with the same pinstripe look as we have, or is it to be a new style and the vanguard of the next major referee uniform shift? To me, it's not a major change in the referee jerseys that will bother me, it's the little ones. If the green jersey fixes the two major flaws in OSI jerseys (weight and lack of ventilation), I'd be happy to change kits. But we may be asked to change jerseys based on minor changes:

As I said before, the higher level games you do, the more you're expected to toe the line and wear the most current uniform; that starts at Regionals, where the referees don't get paid (although most, but not all, states offer stipends to cover some expenses). The tournament is run like a professional event, and so the referees are expected to behave and act like they were running professional games. So all the uniforms are current USSF, and when you're off duty, you're wearing USSF gear, such as the polos or a uniform from your state referee program. When I was informed I would be going back to Regionals, I ordered a new USSF polo from OSI, partially as a reward for myself, partially because I wanted to look nice and spiffy for it (my haircut is next). Imagine my surprise when the referee logo I'd seen for years had been replaced with a new model, a mixture of the traditional logo, and the crest used by our National Teams.

The thing that worries me about the new logo is how are things going to be done with it? If we're phasing in all new jerseys, will the old logo remain on the old pinstripe ones, and the new logos on the new jersey (and those that follow it)? Or will all the jerseys be updated, which means those of us who want to do the level of games that require it, need to shell out another $380? Let me be straight-forward about this, I know the USSF will say you do not have to get the new jerseys with the new logos; but I also know that I was told the first year I did Regionals that I didn't have to cut my hair, but they didn't have to give me games.

I've bought a lot of jerseys in my time. Over the winter, I bought four new OSI jerseys because I went down a size; over the last several years I'd replaced all the Olympus jerseys I owned with OSI, because I wanted to do the higher level games and wanted to look the part (and there's nothing wrong with how Olympus jerseys fit, look or last, at about half the price). Because of the use the yellow jersey gets, I've gone through three yellow short-sleve jerseys (including one I just bought this winter). I think the biggest surprise about this, and what worries me, is the short-notice and minor change in the jerseys. Green has been expected for ages, a change in the general referee kit has been debated for quite some time, the logo came out of the blue. I try not to be cynical when it comes to the USSF and OSI, but you have to wonder who really benefits from all these little changes, that end up being big charges for those who try to toe the line (more)

17 June '07 - 09:23 - - default| three comments, already - § ¶

The other side of the short crew

Every time I've been in an officiating crew that's had a man short, I've either been the center because of schedule, or because I was the senior (and one time, the only) official that was there. This was a little different, because I was scheduled as an assistant, the center showed up, but the third official never did.

It turned out to be an interesting learning experience for the both of us, because I had never been in that position, and this was only his second men's league game in the middle. When it became apparent that we were going to have to start the game short, I asked if he had ever run a dual or been in this situation before, he hadn't, so I sketched out a quick diagram based on how I had run it before, to give him an idea of what added responsibilities he had (since in this country Club Lines can only call balls out of play), and where I would be looking.

That reminds me, if you're a referee and read this blog, please look over this document and tell me if it's helpful or full of crap - I'd like to put it in my bag for these types of situations, but I really want some feedback on it.

For the most part, the game went as you might expect with a green referee - he was young and nervous, and the some of the players really tried to take advantage of it, but he ran his positioning well, and the first half was pretty well under control. The second half, things started to unravel, and I found a decisive flaw in my plan for running line in a Club Line situation:

In the first half, the defense I was tracking moved up and over the center line on a regular basis, and since I was staying with the second-to-last defender, who frequently was at center or further, I was able to extend my range down the touchline well to help in calling fouls and balls out-of-play. However, in the second half the defenders I had tended to stay well back in their half; even if the ball was in their offensive third, the second-to-last defender was frequently no further than 25 yards past his own goal-line. This means, if I stuck with that defender, I'm really too far back to be effective in calling fouls further up the line (and even if I could see them, it's difficult to get the center's attention when he's in the far corner 80 yards down-field, and 65 across). So my question to you referees is, do I ditch my positioning, if it's safe to do so, to help the center, or do I stay by the book? This is one of those situations were the ideal and reality may vary.

As it turned out, where things really boiled over was in the far corner where it wouldn't matter where I was, because I couldn't help there anyway. Apparently a guy picked up and threw an opponent down (red card), and 45 seconds later, as the team manager is trying to push away the offended person, he lays out with some abusive language that included calling the guy a "bitch", and he ends up getting tossed too. The first guy I know from reffing him for years doing indoor, and he owned up to it, and was pretty good about the whole thing, but it made for an interesting game.

I think the kid will be good. He wants to be a good referee (he's working on an upgrade to seven), he's just inexperienced at this level; and sometimes at this level (men's third division) in particular, you get a lot of wild cards thrown in, with regards to how they act and play. He tried hard, actually did pretty good in positioning for this thing, and kept his composure. I'm pleased.

I get mine tomorrow: a first division center (where you normally have to be a State Referee). (more)

16 June '07 - 08:25 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

They didn't play like top flight

A pair of really odd games the other day: The first was the youngest I'd done all season, a 14-girls game in the third division where I ran the senior line. A game where the top speed, save for one run, was a light jog. The national weather service had been warning about "explosive" storms all day, and the game was played in very high winds, that gusted enough that on seveal occasions I had to steady myself from tipping over because of it. Because of the weather, it turned what might have been a relatively unskilled, but interesting game into a feast of throw-ins; almost any ball in the air caught wind and sent it toward my side. Throw-ins frequently entered the field of play then immediately exited.

Before the first half was over, you could see the storm on the horizon, and even though it wasn't even 6:30, we decided to turn the lights on, because we might need them in the second half. Problem was, the lights wouldn't turn on - apparently even with the manual on-off switch (safely tucked away in a lock-box), the lights are on a timer - since the lights were inthe on-position when I opened their box, it's probably for the best, although it caused a bit of a panic as we wondering what might happen with the next game. Even though I could smell the rain, we missed the worst of it (it apparently was quite nasty in areas south of where I was), getting only a few moments of showers. Enough to send all the little kids on the adjacent fields warming up to run for cover screaming. The rain was short, and we played through it, and we finished the game without any incidents.

The next game, where I was the center, was a top-flight U15 boys match, but they really didn't play like it: boom-ball all the way. There was very little dribbling or short passes in the entire eighty minutes. One team I coulnd't blame, it was consistently working for them, giving them very good shots on goal (even though they didn't score until late in the half). The home team seemed to play much more reactive, sending the ball because they couldn't find many other places to go. I've always found that type of game difficult to referee - I'm a much better runner than I was, and am doing long distances much better as well - but I'm no speed demon, so I found it difficult to get as deep as I wanted to go, because any second the ball could be on its way at the 18 on the far end of the pitch.

A referee much better than I (and one with obvious ambitions for a National badge) suggested to me two years ago to position yourself for what's likely to happen, not for what might happen. At the time it was beacuse I had a team in the State Cup that would occasionally blow a defensive pass, giving up the ball deep in their own end, ever after most everyone else had migrated to the other half of the field. What happened in that game was that I was staying deep in the defensive half, waiting for the flub, then had to haul ass back to the offensive half when they move the ball upfield; my thoughts at the time was I didn't want to be out-of-position in case it happened again, but in reality I was putting myself out-of-position for the more likely scenario, that the defense, who already had clear possession of the ball, would clear it OK. I was told that if the defense screwed up, then it's the ARs job to cover the field for infractions while I got in position. It was a similar situation in this game, knowing the ball would more likely be sent long, I had to hedge my bets to be able to get into the position I most likely needed to be - there were exceptions, of course, like balls down the flank where an attacker was able to turn the corner, but my reading the game was more of reading the teams' inability to sustain an attack, rather than to where to play it.

A bit before midway of the first half, a player went down on a challenge right in front of his bench - no real issue on it, but because I went over to check on the player, I did get a word from the coach asking me to watch stuff after the play. I thought I'd been doing that OK, but said I'd try, but I couldn't guarantee anything. At halftime I asked my ARs, who didn't see anything all that late either; but in the first minute of the second half I sure did. The visiting team had a player who was a good 4-6 inches talled than anyone else on the field, he took a ball on the far side of his opponents' penalty area, and then crossed it into the mixer; a defender coming into to cover, took two additional steps after the cross and just leveled the guy - nothing came of the cross, so I whistled for the PK. I mean c'mon, this is supposed to be the premiere division of youth soccer, and you can't stop or even slow down in two long strides? I don't think so. It's a tough call to sell, because it happened so late (I got "that look" from the coach of the team who gave up the penalty); I might have missed it, had I not been watching the player after the cross.

Yes, coaches, if you ask nice and be reasonable, we can and will listen to you.

The same team who was awarded the penalty also took a booking for a shout just as an opponent was about to shoot. I hadn't seen that in a few years - it wasn't all that loud, but he was right behind the shooter, and it doesn't need to be loud, just an unfair distraction. I blew the restart, though - it's a misconduct, and I gave the direct kick instead of indirect. They didn't score on it, and I didn't realize until after the game. Opps.

15 June '07 - 12:50 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Kudos to them

I centered a U19 girls third-division game, and went into it thinking, yes they may not be top-flight soccer players, but kudos for them for still playing when most have quit by that age. For the most part, it was a pretty tame game - a few calls here and there for late fouls - one really hard and really late challenge earning a caution, but otherwise it was pretty trouble-free.

The game was on the same small field where I had my first U19 boys game of the year, but with the different style of play, it wasn't nearly so cramped. Still, the wide play allowed me to get wide and deep as needed for the entire 90 minutes. Overall a pleasant game. The next game are younger (but top-flight) boys - I'm looking forward to it.

14 June '07 - 08:57 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

That bad, or a bad day?

I was able to pick-up a last minute center, a men's second-division game. When I got there, the field was marked with signs saying it was closed due to either new turf (it wasn't) or wet weather (it was). So I called my assignor to see if the field had been switched without my noticing it, which it hadn't. Fortunately, I had this happen to me last year on the same pitch, so I knew there were three fields around the corner - they're smaller, but workable.

No real problems with the game, except it was a blowout. The first goal was scored a minute into the game, and was quickly followed by two more. The home side, which was being beaten, tried to turn their frustration out from themselves, to their opponents, which almost worked. A player nearly decked another after being fouled along the touch in the offensive third and then held; yes, that type of thing is really frustrating, but when you're up 4-0 you really need to keep your head. I spent quite a bit of time working the emotional leader of the team to keep his team's head in the game: "If I don't have to worry about you guys retaliating, then I can focus completely on them."

Did it work? I don't know; I think the real saving grace was a goal by the home team near the end of the half, to make the score 5-1 - but they had one last thing to try, which was running into the goal after the game to snatch the ball away from the goalkeeper. Goalkeepers don't like this - pretty much universally. I think it's a territorial, maybe a control thing. Nonetheless, this pisses them off, and everybody knows it, so pop came the second caution of the game. But now the goal was scored, they focused on playing, rather than doing stupid stuff.

The second half was actually pretty even, a goal was scored by both sides with no real issues. For my first second-division game of the season, I'm pretty happy. I have a first-division game next week - technically it's supposed to be centered by a State Referee, but I asked my assignor, if she was comfortable with it, to put me on some first-division games so whenever I get my game count up enough to apply for my State badge, I'd be comfortable myself with the level. Yes, this makes those teams guinea pigs (although I did one first division game a couple of years ago, inadvertently, when a scheduling brouhaha sent officials and teams to the wrong fields - I centered a first division side with a club line), but that's the only way we can move up the ladder. I'm a little nervous, but I'm looking forward to it.

12 June '07 - 13:40 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

I can't believe it happened again

Last year, the same two guys and I were together for a double-header, and three out of the four teams never showed - what really sucked was that one of those games was to be the assessment for one guy to go from Grade 8 to 7, and we was never able to get another one in that year (so he's still an eight).

Well, it happened again - almost the same as before. Except this time I was the center (another precious U19 center I missed out on, the second this season) for the first game, and the second game actually happened. The home team was there, but the visitors didn't show up until 30 minutes after the scheduled start-time. The league gives 15 minutes, and even if we stretched it, we had a second game scheduled, and it would take at least a good fifteen minutes to get everyone checked in and ready to go. Not going to happen.

What really sucks is that the team doesn't pay for games like this. I'll tell you this, I may not have been working on the field, but my time was wasted, and I ended up spending 30 minutes explaining to coaches and administrators, both in person and on the phone, why we couldn't play. Yes, it sucks - but it's league rules and it really should end at that.

And I'm dying for a center, too. This really really sucks. (more)

11 June '07 - 22:48 - - default| Only one comment - § ¶

Who wasn't apologized to? More Sweden-Denmark commentary from a different view.

By now you've probably seen the end of the recent match between Denmark and Sweden, if not, you can find it all over YouTube. The facts of the incident are pretty clear: In the 88th minute, the AR in Denmark's defensive end calls over the center referee to ask him to issue a penalty and send-off for Denmark's Christian Poulsen, who slugged Markus Rosenberg well away from the play. Immediately after the red card was shown and the spot pointed to, a fan ran onto the field and attempted to attack German referee Herbert Fandel, getting an arm around the neck before Denmark's players corralled him.

Post-game consequences include a three match ban for Poulsen, an $81,000 fine for Denmark's soccer federation, and the next four Denmark Euro 2008 qualifiers must be played at least 155 miles from Copenhagen with the next match in an empty stadium.

Here's what the press doesn't tell you: the AR deserves big time kudos on catching the punch. I've seen similar situations missed, but these guys were spot on, and deserve that white triangular badge they were wearing.

Here's what I don't get: Poulsen, after the send-off, has the cojones to protest his innocence after the send off - twice. First right after the red card, then as the officials are discussing the situation before ultimately terminating the game. While the supporter has rightly apologized to the referee and everyone else he can think of (and considering the financial and legal repercussions he's facing, he's going to be busy camper), and Poulsen has made his own general apology, I think everyone has missed something important here:

As much of a bad role model Poulsen is (and he is) for his incident, nobody seems to give a rat's ass about the blatant lying he did to the referees after the incident. Nobody's said a word. This is just the latest in a long string of athletes, professional or amateur, who think trying to pull one over on the referee is part of the game. It shouldn't be - soccer used to be a gentleman's sport: you knock someone down, you get called for the foul, you help them back up; instead it's become no different than cut-throat business - yes, these guys are professionals, and this is their business, but is it too much to ask for better? When did the definition of acting like a professional become the same as acting like a five-year-old? Maybe I'm being over-sensitive, but I'm seeing this as a character issue - not just of the people involved (Poulsen and the fan), but of the major media: we have a great moment to really reflect on what it means to be a good sport and how to take responsibility for your own actions, and it's being lost.

You know what? People do stupid things - I've done plenty off and on the pitch as well. The slug by Poulsen doesn't particularly bother me - stupid things happen. The last send off I received (not dealt) involved the taking out of my frustrations verbally with some very crass (and frankly, offensive) words that more than deserved an ejection; and when I was, as expected, ordered off the pitch, I didn't say a word to the referee (maybe, "OK"), I just marched off - because I knew that whatever had been done to me to build the frustration, I knew I crossed the line and deserved the red card. I'm no angel, but I know when I've been an asshole. I'm not asking for players to be angels, just to own up when they're caught, as they're caught. The true test of being an upright person's character is not saying the right thing in the press conference after you've been coached on what to say; its doing the right thing immediately, even after doing a wrong thing, and not trying to wriggle out of your comeuppance. To pardon my phraseology, show the rest of the world, "How to take it like man." (more)

09 June '07 - 00:37 - - default| Only one comment - § ¶

Hot cold dry wet energetic flop

I'm not sure if the two lines I just did helped with the concern I had with running it earlier, or if the pace of the teams I had were just sufficient enough to avoid the trotting pace I had in my previous games. In any case, it didn't happen, which makes me feel quite a bit better.

The lines were on first and second division girls games. The weather for these games was rather chaotic. For the first game, it was hot and still, then the wind picked up; it started raining in the second game (complete with a lightning delay), stopped during the delay, restarted soon after we resumed playing, and then the temperature dropped significantly. By the time I got home, I was dead tired from weather whiplash, let alone the games.

Someone that bothers me about girls games: coaches. OK, I know that's a normal thing for me, but coaches in girls games have a tendency to think aggressiveness is a foul in and of itself. Now, aggressiveness and lack of control can get you into trouble, but so can inaggressive stupidity. The center in this game called a lot of fouls for elbows coming out and hip-checks - from my standpoint he was calling it much tighter than I would - but he also said they were trying to shield them (I've worked with this guy long enough to trust him, even if we have differing styles of doing a middle), so I don't have a problem with it. In the final two minutes of the first half, he calls two penalties against one team: the first one, according to him, was an elbow that sent the attacker flying - from my angle it looked like a good challenge, but I couldn't see the elbow so I believe him. The next one was an obvious keeper missing the ball on a break-away but catching the attacker. In the space of 90 seconds, the score went from 1-0 to the home team, to 1-2.

One of the reasons I believe the center is because he let hard clean challenges through without problem - he had found some problem areas early on, and was catching them. But after the game, oh did we hear it from the coach; he even used the argument of "how can you call two penalties on us when they were playing so aggressive?" Easy: because aggressive does not equal dirty play, even in girls games.

I had fun on the line, though. The visiting team ran a very aggressive defensive line, and it kept me one my toes and running for the entire 45 minutes I had them on my side. It hit me, I didn't have a single defense playing the trap all through the State Cup, and he was this second-division squad pulling it off quite nicely.

That's also aggressiveness. Cheers for them for pulling it off.

08 June '07 - 12:16 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Calmest D1 game I've seen

Now that the State Cup is over, it's back to regular league play. I've had a few of them already, but until Regionals (yea!!), I'm back to regular day-to-day leagues. I had a line for a first division men's team, with a very quiet and unassuming man in the center - but one I've worked with several times, and he always does a great job of keeping things in control. It made for the quietest division 1 games I'd ever participated in - and that's with two PKs for one side.

Only one real incident of note - late in the second half, a defender howled for offside, until I pointed out a teammate five yards behind him, "Oh, sorry ref." This guy had manners, which is always nice - but it does reinforce why we're there, and why we tend not to listen to complaints about our calls - because we're usually right; had the guy not paid attention and looked at his teammate - I could have had an earful for the remainder of the game.

06 June '07 - 15:45 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

220 Minutes

Last year I centered the boys 16 final, and it got cut short - this year's final (which I was also assigned to care for) made up for it, almost to the minute, as it went to extra time. This is the reason I asked to be a fourth on the companion game for any knock-out round I centered. Actually, it was the same thing the center for the next game asked for two - I just did it ahead of time.

When I came in, the assignor was ready for the obvious question when she handed out my game, yes it's the same team I had yesterday, but she wanted me on it anyway. Apparently, almost every game (our of five or six) had one team from the same club on it, some with two teams with the same club. Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have our states first Super Club.

So there we were, in 42° weather - a stark change from the day before's 85 and humid, and this game was no one-sided affair. I ran a lot, and had a really good time. However, in games like this, when there's so much on the line*, you're going to be scrutinized, going to be criticized by players, fans and coaches alike, probably going to be hated by some of the more zealous of the bunch. You learn to ignore, or the game will just go to hell.

So that was what I did - I ignored the coaches (that's what the fourth official is for), worked with the players when they were willing, cautioned when they weren't, and came out of the game exhausted but very satisfied with my performance. That's not to say it was perfect, I glanced at my AR on a breakaway to check for an offside flag, and in that 1/8th of a second missed a possible push off the ball (the AR, who saved my ass, saw it and indicated that it was bogus); tensions were high and I issued a caution for some choice words from a player that I may have been able to deal with without going to plastic (that's more 20-20 hindsight; the caution, while worthy, also did what I wanted it to, and kept the temper-baiting down for the remained of the game).

My junior assistant asked at half-time that some fans be monitored by the field marshall, who was also a tournament staff member (and conceded that neither team was up for the sportsmanship award). Fans normally amuse me, and it's pretty easy for me to tune them out - some officials can't stand them, so I can't say how good or bad the reasons were - but apparently they were already "known" by the tournament, so you can probably make some safe assumptions.

But you know what? I felt good about the game - I worked my ass off, and think I did well for the game.

If I could happily ignore the coaches in the first game, then the second game, where I was the fourth, I was forced to listen. One team had two coaches, that were mostly amusing, because you had the emotional coach that yelled and screamed, and the reasonable one that would tell him softly, "Yes, it hit her foot before it went out." However, he'd only apologize to her, not to the official he'd been screaming at. The other side had a coach that was a real piece of work - he'd say just enough to keep from my bringing in the center, but not so much I really felt like I'd been slimed by the guy.

If there was any doubt, you could tell because he was such a poor winner - that's what really irks me. He goes off all game about the referee (who was very qualified and did a fine job), then after the game, he goes up to him and goes off some more. "This is why we yell at referees" he says during the course of the match; I had to bite my tongue to keep from calling bullshit. Frankly, he's the reason referees quit; because when the facts didn't agree with his view, he'd resort to lying: "That's the worst challenge of the game, and yet he didn't issue a caution - and I'm not going to say anything because I don't want that girl sent home, even if she's not on my team."

Oh, god, where's my puke bucket?

In a society where we place more emphasis on sports that educating our children, I point out people like this guy (who sadly, is not unique - I just had the unfortunate privilege to be stuck with him for another 110 minutes) as to what's wrong with our society: the win at all costs methodology, who cares what impact it has on the future (like the kids you're supposed to be a role model to). When I see people like that lauded, I despair.

---

*What's on the line? More than regionals, there are college scholarships, college coaches (15 year-old being scouted? That's scary - but it's definitely becoming a trend in the MLS, so why not college? A player I reffed a few games for in the last couple of years was picked up at 17 for a MLS development contract), and lots and lots of money. According to one parent I know, her daughters former club had a travel budget of over $100,000 - tell me there's not some sort of expectation when parents shell out that kind of cash? (more)

04 June '07 - 09:18 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Differing perspectives

Wouldn't you know it - the assignor for the state cup took my suggestion (for me, anyway), and when I had a center in a knock-out round, the other game in the two game set was a fourth officials; in the past it was because I had the center in the second game after doing a 17 or 18 year-old game, and this time it was the first game of the set. But you know the saying, you get what you ask for - and it probably still is a good idea.

I started the day with a 16-boys semi-final; and for the most part, it was very one-sided. You hate to say it, but the result looked pretty obvious from the get-go. But, I asked for the fourth in my second game so I could get it my all in the one I had in the middle, so I did, and the game came out pretty good.

The fourth, for the 16-girls semi, was similarly one-sided. The only issue in the game was one I had to deal with as the fourth official, and that was one of the coaches being overly persnickety about technical areas. The fields for the state cup, unlike just about anything else I deal with, has a rough technical area painted in - I say painted in, but there's just two lines painted that roughly divide the two teams. One one side - or I should say just outside of one of the areas, is a set of bleachers, and on the other there isn't one. All tournament long, whoever had that one side, used the bleachers to sit on, and it's never been a big deal - frankly, I'm not sure if anyone ever thought about it; but this one coach apparently did, and decided to make a big deal out of it, after the game had started of course.

I ended up moving them at half-time, but during the first half, they all behaved, and, at least my thought at the time, was that it would be unfair to make everyone pack up at that stage and be disrupted. Obviously, if I had been more stringent about it in the first place, there would be no situation - but I have a feeling that the only reason it really cropped up was because the coach had a referee there next to him to complain at. But it does speak to avoiding conflict by removing the potential for it first - which is a nice way of saying I blew it.

I ended up picking up a third game, another fourth, because the tournament was short referees, and when the person who's in charge of sending people to Regionals asks you to do it (especially after telling you that you're on the list to go - score!), you don't turn him down unless you have something urgent to go to. Actually, there are any number of reasons - because the assignor gives you good games and taking a bit of the load for them is a nice way to say "thank you" in more than just words. And it's just a helpful thing to do... besides, it was that or clean a really nasty pool.

The third game was the 13-boys semi. In my book, the thirteen and fourteen boys are the hardest bunch to referee, as far as sheer running goes; unlike the older kids, these guys still have unlimited subs and just seem to skip midfield play entirely. It's just a full-tilt run back-and-forth from each other's attacking third. The center referee was young but experienced, a fantastic runner, and more than competent for this match. Oh, god... did I just say young? He's in his twenties. Where's a beer to cry in? Damn it, I'm out.

Anyway, he had another experienced official on his senior line, and a green, but surprisingly competent official on his junior side (I think the rule is that you have to have reffed for two years, in which case, this was her first year at the cup - and she was good enough that she deserved this semi-final). The center waived down a flag for a hand-ball from the junior assistant early on, which started one of the coaches at me for a good portion of the game. To me, having been to Regionals once, I know that his waive-down was good - that they don't want us to call those types of fouls in the game, and to the AR's credit, this seemed good, and she performed solidly for the remainder of the game. But to the coach, this was the sign of incompetence from the center; and how his players were so good (and they were quite good), but the reffing hadn't caught up.

"Why are there so few good referees?"

"It might be because 80% quit after two years." Do I have to spell it out? Can a fourth official carry a foam cluebat with his clipboard? It might be nice, because then I got this:

"It's because most of these people are here for the $40 and don't care about the game."

This is not the first time I've heard this argument, and it's flawed: At the most basic level (meaning money), nobody gets $40 for any game at the state cup - if you were in it for the money, you could get easier games, at younger ages, do more of them, nd still make more money than at the cup per game. A lot more. So, beyond the insult (and it is insulting), we can go beyond that into the idea that referee development is lagging behind player development. My argument is that you can't compare the two: one of the things I've learned, when I started taking reffing more seriously than playing, is that referees look at the game differently than players and coaches (and fans): referees look at more of the minutia than the others - this is not to say that coaches/players/fans don't look close enough, but just look differently.

Think of it this way: while referees who can read the play and anticipate where play is about to go is a good thing (assuming you're on a game with enough skilled players where you can do that), ultimately we don't care about the tactics of scoring goals - only of fairness. So, a non-referee can look at two challenges, one whistled a foul and one not, and see the "same exact thing", because it kept the ball from going one direction or another and removed an opportunity from one team. On the other hand, the referee will look beyond the direction of the players in the challenge, but also where they're looking (or some other detail) - at the ball or the player or somewhere else entirely, and it can change our decision. Or not. But it's those types of things we look at; it's what makes, for better or for worse, reffing soccer a personality-driven avocation.

There are some other things you can look at as well - what's a bigger seller in the US: players making the World Cup, or US referees? The driving force behind the USSF is clearly player development - it's players and player registration that pays the bills. And although the USSF still has a very strong referee development program, there has been criticism for years that it's geared more toward moving referees that have the potential to make the National grade than the regular sandlot crews (although I can use myself, who has no aspirations, let alone potential, to go anywhere beyond a State badge, as a counter-argument). And the USSF has recently removed the position of referee representative from their board of directors (a real shame, if you ask me).

Players/coaches/fans just don't understand referees. It's easy not to, and I certainly didn't until I picked up the whistle myself and used it for several years. Understanding the referee thinks is the secondary purpose of this blog (the first was to vent because of my interactions with those other three types). You don't have to agree - I'm still a fan of my local professional team, and I don't always agree with the referee on their games - but it helps to understand their perspective, and I think, because I'm not to preoccupied with blaming the officiating for "bad calls", has allowed me to enjoy the game far more than when I was strictly a fan or player. (more)

02 June '07 - 17:23 - - default| No comments yet - § ¶