Referees - what can we all do to improve the situation?

[Eagle33]

In comparison to old coast league days, i am pretty satisfied with the DA refs and their level of knowledge. I am just curious, this is question for Surfref and Baldref, i noticed last season at u12 DA and now with U13 we are getting mostly younger refs, literally in their mid 20's and a few times we had older gentlemen, are those refs more ambitious or better rated, whats the process for someone to become DA ref? Thanks

Sorry to jump in and I'm sure Surfref and Baldref will give you a better answer.
US Soccer is trying really hard and very successfully to bring young and promising referees through the ranks. Just like they are doing with making DA players age younger and younger.
Those refs being put on the fast track and developed what they called in a "meaningful" games. They get constant training and assessment. Physical abilities play the major factor why you see younger referees and of course the fact that what better to get experience for them then doing 12-13 yo games?
To become DA referee you need to apply through US Soccer (that's who assign and pay for DA games). Any certified referee can apply and then go through the paperwork and clearance process, and passing the DA Rules test, which is a little different than USSF test.
For example I was surprised when I got excepted to referee DA Showcase last Summer since I'm Emeritus, which technically considers to be inactive or retired referee. I was even more surprised when I found out that I was The only Emeritus in the tournament.

 

[younothat]

/Philosophy side bar

Expectations......when those don't jive with reality some people have a hard time accepting and become unhappy

The expectations are that everybody will get highly qualified experienced officials for every game, they will be 100% fit, running up & down all game and be close by for every call, all judgement calls, 50/50, tackle, foul, etc should go their way, all the rules should be called perfectly, everything should be equal and fair, no mistakes are allowed, and the untrained spectator knows better than the trained personnel. Doesn't matter if its the first game of the day or the last one where the officials could have been working all day, we still demand all these things are done to our satisfaction or we will become vocal or angry if we don't get them.

The "golden" league or tournament Expectation; Hey we play in XYZ league so the coaches, fields, and refs are better than ABC league where we used to play never mind the coaches, fields, and refs are mostly the same but they have that "golden" patch that servers as a reminder that the expectations are greater.

You hear spectators, coaches, tell each other or the players that the officials will be this way or that way, don't expect any calls in your favor or whatever before hand but still some people are quick to forget that and become unhappy at the first judgement call or thing that doesn't go there way.

Normally a good way of sustaining high happiness levels is to maintain low expectations but we can't seem to do that with youth sports. Happiness is normally inversely proportional to one’s expectations.

Setting low expectations seems like a easy concept, but in reality nearly impossible to practice. Subconscious doesn't allow it, thus we revert to being unhappy or vocal. Our past experiences generate expectations, we can't start from scratch or have a clean slate or open mind so the slightest things can bother some people and they act out.

So what can you do? Rather than trying to manage expectations before something occurs, you have to mange your self better after the "expectations" don't meet your standard.

/ Philosophy end

So what can Referees and associations do to improve relations: First thing I can think of is better communications, feedback, and open visibility to what's going on, 2nd thing is more accountability

Feedback not enough of this is done is this area IMO, maybe due to language barriers, people not speaking up, or feeling like they can. Feedback should be given to a team and they should be able to give some of that back. Let the players and coach give some feedback after each game, written & documented so there are no miss understandings. Same with the officials how about publishing some of feedback that was given to a team?

There are game reports, notes, ratings, etc all of which are not normally available so most have have no way of knowing whats going on for example.

Accountability is like a black box, what, how, or when are referees and associations being held accountable? Coaches, spectators, players can be disciplines but how about the officials? we don't see their yellow cards, ratings, or whatever so people tend to think the can do whatever job they want and they won't be held accountable, Not that "so and so Ref again, he or she is this or that." and noting seems to change.

 

[Grace T.]

The concept of "trifling" ... yes it was a foul, but it was not enough to blow the whistle, stop play and then restart. With trifling fouls we have to quickly ascertain whether the infraction is enough to disrupt the flow of the game. The thing about trifling fouls are that 94.475% of all parents fundamentally don't understand that referees are NOT SUPPOSED TO CALL many fouls, but see the lack of a call on their sweet, darling player as evidence the "fix is in" the Referee is on the take or just incompetent. In fact, its not the referee that is incompetent its ... well 94.475% of the parents. Note, the roughly 5% that are not incompetent are referees with kids that play.

.

Agree with you on advantage but disagree with you on "trifling". As I've said before, the problem isn't with the refs or spectators here, but with the Laws and the guidance for how the game is to be interpreted. IIRC, the word "trifling" doesn't appear in the Laws. To be a foul it has to be careless, reckless or use excess force. Law 12.1. A careless foul is either "when a player shows lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge" or "acts without precaution". Law 12.1 That's a VERY expansive definition. Trifling used to be included as a clarifying decision to Law 5 as advice to FIFA to referees. The clarification provided that referees should stop the game as with "as little interference of possible" and to penalize "deliberate breaches of the law". FIFA Board Decision Law 5, Decision 8, 2009. It was removed by FIFA. It may still or not appear in the USSF Advice to Referees but I haven't been able to find a copy easily downloadable. In any case, the two pieces seem to be in conflict because "deliberate" (in advice) may override the word "careless" (which is in the Law which is a superior governing document). There's also a wide range of dispute out there over what the word "trifling" means from having any impact on the match to anything which is not deliberate.

So I don't really blame parents here and reading the Laws is not going to be particularly helpful with this concept. The Laws are vague and ambiguous and sometimes are in direct conflict with the way the game is being refereed (such as the usage of the word "MUST" for throwins which unlike trifling does not allow a broad scope for interpretation). Now we can argue that the Laws are "living document" filled with "penumbras" and "evolving concepts" and shouldn't be "strictly interpreted" but that's part of the problem....parents shouldn't have to hire constitutional lawyers to interpret the Laws, and referees shouldn't have such a broad discretion where one ref is calling everything and another ref is basically letting the players have at and willfully take each other down "letting them play". This isn't just a parent problem....this isn't just a referee problem....this is a Laws problem and the soccer orgs are partially responsible.

I'll go further and venture this is even a [minor] reason why soccer doesn't catch on in the US, particularly in red states....Americans have a strong sense of "fairness" in sport and don't like it when their sports are subject to the whims of officials.

 

[Surfref]

......For my 2 cents, let's elevate Surfref and have him develop guidance for the orgs.

No way, not me. There are excellent trained referee instructors out there to teach this stuff. They taught me and continue to teach me. The education already exists, but not all referees utilize it. Go to a couple of the RPD sessions and you will get some very good and advanced training. Instead of going to the minimum 5 referee association training sessions, go to 10-12 sessions. As questions and ask for feedback after games and at halftime. I always ask for feedback after a game even from new referees, because they may notice something basic I can improve on.

I think part of the problem is that a lot of referees just do the bare minimum when it comes to training and learning their craft. I would guess by the number of referees that I see at the monthly referee meetings/training and RPD training that at best 50 percent of referees only attend the minimal number of meetings, never open a LOTG book except at a meeting, do not attend RPD and as quickly as possible click their way through the once a year online training. This group of referees are the one's that Cal South and US Soccer need to find a way to motivate and train.

 

[jpeter]

Agree with you on advantage but disagree with you on "trifling". As I've said before, the problem isn't with the refs or spectators here, but with the Laws and the guidance for how the game is to be interpreted. IIRC, the word "trifling" doesn't appear in the Laws. To be a foul it has to be careless, reckless or use excess force. Law 12.1. A careless foul is either "when a player shows lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge" or "acts without precaution". Law 12.1 That's a VERY expansive definition. Trifling used to be included as a clarifying decision to Law 5 as advice to FIFA to referees. The clarification provided that referees should stop the game as with "as little interference of possible" and to penalize "deliberate breaches of the law". FIFA Board Decision Law 5, Decision 8, 2009. It was removed by FIFA. It may still or not appear in the USSF Advice to Referees but I haven't been able to find a copy easily downloadable. In any case, the two pieces seem to be in conflict because "deliberate" (in advice) may override the word "careless" (which is in the Law which is a superior governing document). There's also a wide range of dispute out there over what the word "trifling" means from having any impact on the match to anything which is not deliberate.

So I don't really blame parents here and reading the Laws is not going to be particularly helpful with this concept. The Laws are vague and ambiguous and sometimes are in direct conflict with the way the game is being refereed (such as the usage of the word "MUST" for throwins which unlike trifling does not allow a broad scope for interpretation). Now we can argue that the Laws are "living document" filled with "penumbras" and "evolving concepts" and shouldn't be "strictly interpreted" but that's part of the problem....parents shouldn't have to hire constitutional lawyers to interpret the Laws, and referees shouldn't have such a broad discretion where one ref is calling everything and another ref is basically letting the players have at and willfully take each other down "letting them play". This isn't just a parent problem....this isn't just a referee problem....this is a Laws problem and the soccer orgs are partially responsible.

I'll go further and venture this is even a [minor] reason why soccer doesn't catch on in the US, particularly in red states....Americans have a strong sense of "fairness" in sport and don't like it when their sports are subject to the whims of officials.

I volunteered refereeing until my kids started playing club at U9 and I found the rules to be difficult to interpret and apply in practice some of the time. Youth soccer is difficult but basketball I think we ever harder for me to keep up although the rules where easier to apply for me.

After seeing my kids play in all these different leagues and HS I precieve there is a difference in the way the games are called depending on age and league.

For example, high school seems to "let them play" more so vs regular club. Ussda doesn't let them play as much, more fouls called but not necessary more cards as compared to HS. Regular Club seems like a mix with some cards that come out quicker so i dunno hard to see a Rhyme or Reason why I perceived there's a difference?

 

[futboldad1]

/

The "golden" league or tournament Expectation; Hey we play in XYZ league so the coaches, fields, and refs are better than ABC league where we used to play never mind the coaches, fields, and refs are mostly the same but they have that "golden" patch that servers as a reminder that the expectations are greater.

You absolutely nailed it with the above. And the same two or three posters pipe up in this exact way on every thread!

Great contributions, as usual, from @Surfref

I also think the thread starter P Spacey has made some really good points, and I especially agree with the sentiment regarding trifling matters.

But fellow parents, PLEASE stop shouting at refs. In fact, just sit there and enjoy watching your kids compete with no "advice" or questioning whatsoever. My kids told me they hated hearing me say anything other than "well done" during games and I've been mostly mute on the sideline ever since.

 

[Eagle33]

6 magic words explain why referees are inconsistent:
"In the opinion of the referee"
Since opinions are always differ you will not see consistency in refereeing. Why would anyone need to have Advise to Referees or Interpretations of the Laws if they would be clearly written?
Some referees go even further and Interpret LOTG in their own personal way, which in turn leads to misapplication of the Law. Some just don't understand it clearly enough to apply.

 

[Paul Spacey]

Some of the posts have been informative. Some of them have been insightful. Some of them have been funny. Some have been all three!

It’s clear to me that most of us seem to be on the same page about a number of issues:

1. Parents/coaches need to moan/complain way less than they do (because many don’t have the requisite understanding to justify complaining it seems).

2. Referees (some, not all) must do a better job at communicating with everyone and be prepared to show humility and admit errors when they make them (as we all make them, no doubt about that).

3. Referees (again, some not all) need to make sure they are aware of the LOTG and apply them based on the level of play and environment they are in (u-littles clearly different application compared to older DA kids).

4. All of us need to consider having lower expectations and be more realistic about the fact we will not have Mark Geiger officiating our kids’ games.

For sure some of the LOTG could be clarified or made easier to interpret but as that is done by the IFAB, none of us can influence that issue in any way unfortunately.

We all have to keep trying to do better individually and collectively. Our kids are relying on us for that.

 

[Grace T.]

6 magic words explain why referees are inconsistent:
"In the opinion of the referee"
Since opinions are always differ you will not see consistency in refereeing. Why would anyone need to have Advise to Referees or Interpretations of the Laws if they would be clearly written?
Some referees go even further and Interpret LOTG in their own personal way, which in turn leads to misapplication of the Law. Some just don't understand it clearly enough to apply.

The Laws is some places do use the words "in the opinion of the referee". They don't when it comes to fouls. It's "considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excess force". It then goes on to list what the standards are. In other words, the referee has the duty to apply the standards set out in the Laws (which are as I previously argued VERY broad), the referee gets to judge whether the particularly circumstances meet that standard, but the referee doesn't get to make the standard. That's even more clear when you drift into language others than English because the word "consider" implies a duty to adhere to the standard, as opposed to "decide" which is more arbitrary. I agree, however, one of the things that US Soccer can do to help is to install a more comprehensive Advice to Referees and make the document publicly available to parents and spectators as well. Referee training should then look to those standards, which should address things like goalkeeper knees up, how to call throwns in or 6 second violations, the goalkeeper smother, trifling, impeding, and shirt pulling.

For sure some of the LOTG could be clarified or made easier to interpret but as that is done by the IFAB, none of us can influence that issue in any way unfortunately.

We all have to keep trying to do better individually and collectively. Our kids are relying on us for that.

I like your post and agree. It's not necessarily a FIFA thing as in the face of inaction US Soccer can also step in and clarify the Advice to Referees. But I think it's helpful to bear in mind that the parents, referees, and referee trainers are doing their best with a game system [dare I say?] that is broken. So it shouldn't surprise us that this situation exists, but we should also bear in mind that it sets up a standard that is pretty much impossible for both parents and referees, and therefore we should have a little bit of empathy for each other.

 

[Definitelynotanotherref]

I think most refs know the LOTG well. However, what parents need to understand is that individual interpretations of the LOTG are highly subjective. Spend anytime in the "C'mon Ref" forum and you will realize how true that is. There is a video of a play in the forum right now that the Refs' opinions range from no call to a penalty and a red card. What is one refs "careless" is another refs "excessive force". Refs may also not make "by the book" calls based on a number of factors including age, ability and in the name of game management. How is this subjectivity different from most other professions? It's not (see doctors, mechanics, attorneys...). We all carry bias as to how things should be done. That's normal human behavior. Refs make mistakes like anyone else and most do their best to get the call correct in real time without the benefit of replay and slo mo which we have the luxury of using to second guess ref decisions. However, I'm not condoning those refs that come physically or mentally unprepared to officiate game, those refs should be weeded out.

If refs are human, they would be best served to show a little humility when warranted. I'm going to echo what others have said about communication. Refs don't need to become Facebook friends with the spectators, but a simple icebreaker like "How's it going today parents?" or "I hope your kids have a great game today". Little gestures like that go a long way to building rapport and disarming parents. It also helps to dispel that "us vs them" impression. Will this always work, of course not, but I've seen it be effective in quite a few situations. I know some refs say they're instructed not to talk with the parents, which is particularly good advice when things are contentious. But seriously, this is youth soccer, I don't think their should be any prohibition on refs exchanging pleasantries with parents. It should be noted that included in USSF's last published Referee Administrative Handbook was the following number one listed item in the "The Referee Commitment":

1) Officiating matches in a fair and safe manner that ensures player and spectator enjoyment.

Unfortunately, some refs believe they have no obligation to the spectator, and instead categorize all parents as stupid and don't understand the LOTG. Here is a little article about refs leaving their ego at home. http://nisoa.com/instruction/interc...2011/04/08/attitude-and-ego-leave-it-at-home/

My favorite line right now to parents on the sideline when I am the AR2 is, "There is enough leeway in the laws for both you and the referee to be correct."

Not everyone should talk to parents though. Not everyone is a people person, and the people that aren't usually know who they are, and it would be a prudent decision for them to just not interact with the parents at all, which is fine too.

 

[Paul Spacey]

I like your post and agree. It's not necessarily a FIFA thing as in the face of inaction US Soccer can also step in and clarify the Advice to Referees. But I think it's helpful to bear in mind that the parents, referees, and referee trainers are doing their best with a game system [dare I say?] that is broken. So it shouldn't surprise us that this situation exists, but we should also bear in mind that it sets up a standard that is pretty much impossible for both parents and referees, and therefore we should have a little bit of empathy for each other.

‘Interpretation’ of the LOTG has been an issue since their inception in the late 1800s. What’s funny is that some laws have become clearer but some have actually become more ambiguous and difficult to interpret over time! You’d think we would be able to make things clearer for everyone involved in the game but alas, it seems not.

I personally never had a problem applying the laws and my own interpretations were based largely on my experiences as a player. Thus, I applied the laws in a way that I felt would best serve the players and allow the games to flow. Blowing my own trumpet, perhaps that is why I rose up the ranks quickly, generally had high ratings/feedback from club officials and assessors and got to officiate both professional level and international teams.

I do think it’s very helpful to have had a background in the game but it’s certainly not essential and we can’t expect all referees to have played or watched the game for 20 years of course.

I always go back to communication, attitude and humility. If you get those things right as a match official, your life will be much easier and everyone will be more forgiving of any errors or misinterpretations of the LOTG. Those things don’t require any special skills, learning or background. They are traits of a solid human.

 

[Definitelynotanotherref]

This thread is the biggest waste of time. End of the day we have a shortage of referees in this country because of the verbal abuse they take every Saturday and Sunday. Number one rule for coaches to remember is THERE IS NO UPSIDE IN YELLING AT A REFEREE during a game. ALL referees will miss calls and make mistakes, but they will do it for both teams. When you yell at a referee it will always be the coaches word vs. the referees and the REFEREE will always win that battle no matter what youth league you are playing.

Coaches, focus on your players and coaching your teams. The coach is ultimately in charge of the sideline and if the parents see you getting worked up and animated they will follow suit. If your players see you complaining and getting animated they will follow suit. Coaches are the role models and set the standards, the only time you should talk to a referee in game is if your players are not in a safe environment. Your job as a coach is to protect you players and make sure they are safe, yelling at a referee will not help in that regard.

Coaches you will get bad calls, you will also get calls in your favor, its the nature of the game. Yelling at the referee for EVERY call will get you nowhere. Its ok to plant seeds as a coach but you can do it in tactful manner where you don't disrespect the referee in front of everyone, end of the day these men and women all make mistakes. I would be hard pressed to ever blame an outcome or a result on a referee and it happens to often in youth sports. You didn't win because you didn't score more goals than the other team, you didn't defend well, you didn't finish your chances. The list goes on and on. Focus on what you can do better vs. putting blame on the referee.

Treating a referee like HUMAN being goes a long way them, lets be thankful of the job they do for our youth. Talking to them with respect before, after and in game makes them feel appreciated and might even help earn you some calls!!

I once made a thread about the 5 reasons to not yell at the referee even if he is blowing it,
But there IS 1 Reason to yell at a referee. And that reason is gamesmanship.

I have seen referees be influenced by coaches subtly. I have even heard one referee say to me at halftime, "that coach is yelling a lot so I will call a few for him to calm him down". I did not agree with that choice, but, that is what he decided to do. Incidentally, the other teams coach was the one who was way more mad at him at the end of the game because he called a few soft fouls to "appease the other coach"

I have seen a referee give a yellow card when he should have given a red card on an obvious DOGSO outside the box just because there was no reaction from the parents, coaches, or players. I most certainly believe the correct call would have been made if he thought the right call was the expected one. (This was not a uLittles game, it was a U17 DA Girls game, the assessor who was watching ripped into him after the game).

The key to gamesmanship yelling is to not get emotionally invested in what your are asking for. You can act emotionally invested, but don't actually care.
The big difference in my first example was that the 1st yelling coach was, well, yelling. Not complaining. His cries were not emotionally charged, but they were loud meanwhile the other coach was as quiet as a church mouse. The first coach even told his parent to calm down 1 time. The referee was subconsciously more inclined to throw this coach a bone.

When the other coach started complaining, he was emotional, and whiny. And frankly, he was right. However, his complaints were not mere facts (c'mon ref, that wasn't a foul, that's never a foul), they were personal attacks to the referees authority because the 2nd coach was emotional (call it both ways, what about that one over there, how is that the same? That call was terrible) The referee was subconsciously biased against that coach so the bias continued till the end of the game. All because 1 coach was unemotionally employing gamesmanship, while the other coach was rattled and started emotionally complaining.

 

[zebrafish]

I've been an AYSO ref and I fully understand the difficulty of the job. From the sideline, I've been convinced a ref has been wrong on a call many times and only after watching video do I realize they were correct. But I understand this and I don't have a problem with a missed call. We're all human.

What I really take issue with in our referee population is some philosophical difference in what is considered acceptable physical play. There are a small subset of refs (~5%) who are outliers on what is considered a foul. At best, you have a lot of shoving/fouling that isn't getting called. At worst, games get out of hand and serious injuries can occur.

There have been a small handful of refs (we're talking a couple) I've seen over the past few years that don't understand that their primary objective is player safety. And there is no useful mechanism to identify and remove these referees -- because I see them back each year. Whenever I see them at my kid's game, I just pray that they are accompanied by a full crew (and they are an AR) and that we're not playing a team that will abuse their lack of competence. My kid just had a game last week with the worst ref I've ever seen-- he doesn't run out of the center circle as a center ref, I don't think he can see well, he is overly belligerent, and he clearly doesn't know how to manage a game properly. Thank goodness he was AR.

I'm fine if the SCDSL comes down hard on ref abuse-- but they also have an obligation to remove bad refs. They do exist.

 

[Definitelynotanotherref]

One of the biggest issues I have is that referees who don't know the LOTG correctly become so ignorant and dismissive if you mention, even in a friendly way, a point of law which they are clearly getting wrong. Two examples below; the first one being the most common type of response I get when talking about points of law with officials.

1. Player with small part of the front of his foot on the field and most of it on the touchline. AR flags for foul throw.
"Assistant, he is allowed to be on the field providing part of his feet are on the touchline."
"No sir, you're wrong."
"Sorry ref, I'm not trying to be a dick but that's how the throw-in law works. The foot on the field thing is a myth among referees. Don't take this the wrong way but check it out later, no big deal." (those are exactly the words I used).
"No, you are wrong coach now shut up."
I gave up.

2. Opposition pass a firm ball through to a player clearly 10 yards offside and it takes the slightest deflection off one of our players' jerseys who wasn't even looking at the ball. AR signals offside but referee waves play on and does the two hands 'friction' motion that all refs seem to do now, signaling a deflection. The player didn't score but when play stopped, I told the referee a very minor deflection like that does not invalidate the offside call. He told me that any deflection means it is no longer offside. Again, it was pointless trying to argue the issue and help him. He was a young guy and seemed very confident (he told me he was mentoring his younger brother who was AR) but again this is an example of a referee being too arrogant to consider that they might be incorrect and that will not serve him well moving forward.

Yes, referees may find it uncomfortable or patronizing that someone is trying to teach them (I see it as 'helping' not teaching) about the LOTG they don't fully understand so I do appreciate why they usually just say, "no sir, you don't know the laws, that's not correct."

If you go to see a paid lawyer and they don't know the law, you are going to shake your head and ask what's up. Sure, lawyers get paid more than referees but if you get paid for something, you should know the rules/laws or procedures relating to what you are being paid for IMO.

I might admit to myself that I made a mistake. Very rarely do I admit to the players and coaches around me that I made a mistake. I think it hurts more than helps in the long run for the future decisions being called into question. I don't get defensive though like the above examples. "My understanding is..." "What I saw was...". "Maybe, but we are going with my original decision." Then I will double check on my own with a 3rd party.

For me, the best way to correct a referee if they got the law wrong is to use the WORDS from the laws to give yourself credibility. "Those are the laws" or "check it out later" sound passive aggressive, and weak appeals to an unverifiable authority (The referee is not going to run and grab his book to double check).

Use phrases like: "The laws require whole foot over the whole line". He is at least more likely to remember this adage and is more likely to look it up later. and for situation 2: "The law says it needs to be a DELIBERATE PLAY instead of just a deflection. Kind of like in handling". Your argument missed the key "deliberate play" vocabulary which should ring a bell in most referees heads when used.

This just makes it more likely, not a perfect solution; there are refs that I have tried to talk to in private and they just won't listen, even with the LOTG book in front of their eyes opened to the correct page, he flat out refused to look at it.

There is currently a surplus of lawyers. I remember when I took a pre-law class, the professor showed me the statistic that only 50% of students that graduate from law school get a job that is actually in law. The same can't be said about referees. There is no one to push them to go out of their ways to learn the laws. And I think the new offside law is difficult to grasp for the average ref that doesn't look for it, and the throw in law you mention is an obscure one that no one bothers to educate or test on.

 

[Definitelynotanotherref]

No, that's a bunch of baloney. Yes, there are mistakes but there's also bad referees that take sides. They can be intimidated by a coach, or they can "punish" a yelling coach by having all of his "mistakes" on that coach's team.

Two weeks ago, opposing coach was yelling at the ref all the first half in a bully way. The ref got intimidated and did nothing. By the second half, the ball is out of bounds by 2 inches and the ref didn't see it. Our coach just yelled "Hey! at least make an effort to run so you can see it!!"; well, that was enough for that ref to call an nonexistent penalty against our team. That single yell by our non-bully coach.

Refs like that should not be officiating matches, the fact that "there's a shortage" doesn't mean that we must take the bad ones and be "thankful" for them. No.

This sounds like mostly an error on your coach's part. Read my post about "gamesmanship". You have to know how to yell, otherwise you make it more likely that you will consistently be on the referee's subconscious bad side.

Don't blame a human for reacting to abuse like a human. Even I have to notice and fight that unconscious bias that creeps up. And it creeps up all the time. Noticing and defending yourself against that bias is an EXTREMELY advanced mindset for a referee that took me years to develop and it is still not perfect.

 

[Paul Spacey]

I might admit to myself that I made a mistake. Very rarely do I admit to the players and coaches around me that I made a mistake. I think it hurts more than helps in the long run for the future decisions being called into question. I don't get defensive though like the above examples. "My understanding is..." "What I saw was...". "Maybe, but we are going with my original decision." Then I will double check on my own with a 3rd party.

For me, the best way to correct a referee if they got the law wrong is to use the WORDS from the laws to give yourself credibility. "Those are the laws" or "check it out later" sound passive aggressive, and weak appeals to an unverifiable authority (The referee is not going to run and grab his book to double check).

Use phrases like: "The laws require whole foot over the whole line". He is at least more likely to remember this adage and is more likely to look it up later. and for situation 2: "The law says it needs to be a DELIBERATE PLAY instead of just a deflection. Kind of like in handling". Your argument missed the key "deliberate play" vocabulary which should ring a bell in most referees heads when used.

This just makes it more likely, not a perfect solution; there are refs that I have tried to talk to in private and they just won't listen, even with the LOTG book in front of their eyes opened to the correct page, he flat out refused to look at it.

There is currently a surplus of lawyers. I remember when I took a pre-law class, the professor showed me the statistic that only 50% of students that graduate from law school get a job that is actually in law. The same can't be said about referees. There is no one to push them to go out of their ways to learn the laws. And I think the new offside law is difficult to grasp for the average ref that doesn't look for it, and the throw in law you mention is an obscure one that no one bothers to educate or test on.

Some excellent points, thank you!

The wording is important for some referees but I didn’t use points of law wording in my post because the point I was making is that most refs are not willing to listen, regardless of whether you spell it out word for word (IMO many would potentially find that even more patronizing).

As you pointed out (and of course I am aware) it has to be a deliberate attempt to play the ball by the defender for a deflection to invalidate a potential offside but again, I didn’t go into this detail with the referee because he immediately moved into his corner pretending he knew the law. I know from experience that it’s next to impossible to speak a referee after that point.

I guess in terms of admitting a mistake, we all see and do things differently. I would almost always admit my error (if the play hadn’t restarted, I would change my decision) openly and apologize. I would occasionally use your wording and just say, “yes you might be right but that’s how I saw it from my angle” if I was unsure whether I’d actually made a mistake. The admission of an error was always (not sometimes, but always) well received and if anything positively impacted the rest of the game (this is for games involving kids, amateurs, semi-pro’s and professionals). There’s probably no ‘right’ way of doing it; my suggestion of error admission is just largely based on my positive experiences using the tactic.

You’re absolutely right about refs not having anything or anyone to push them to learn the laws. More accountability might help (whether that be an open grading system or something else). Coaches are accountable, at least in the sense if they are doing a poor job, they may find themselves out of it shortly (especially if parents are knowledgeable enough to see they are really not a good coach and push the club for change). Referees are not really accountable at all. Back to your point of a shortage of refs; number one reason why they get work regardless of their performance.

 

[SoccerFan4Life]

IMO, standards need to be created on when a ref gives a yellow or red card

Standards on when a coach or parent gets booted from the field.

Standards on player safety.

Even If we had VAR technology, you will still find parents complaining.

 

[baldref]

IMO, standards need to be created on when a ref gives a yellow or red card

Standards on when a coach or parent gets booted from the field.

Standards on player safety.

Even If we had VAR technology, you will still find parents complaining.

There are standards

 

[Definitelynotanotherref]

Okay, let me take a stab at answering the original posters question: "What can we do?" Here is my prototype.
I agree we need some sort of survey or rating system, but there are several important components I think the rating system should have. A simple Uber score would be too generic.
Potential issues of a rating system: Bias, the fact that people are always more likely to go out of their way to complain than compliment, lack of knowledge and experience of the armchair referees, validity of the surveyed, and accountability.

So to solve some of those problems, the survey should be quick and mandatory to complete to fill out the score. Mandatory will help solve the problem of only the aggrieved speaking up. It should only be filled out by the team manager and they should get 1 survey per game. I think 1-10 is better than 1-5, but that is subjective.

Categories:
1) Fitness: This is an important factor that can be judged by the untrained eye to a degree
2)Presence: This is also a good measurement that I would trust the untrained parent to grade me on. It is also such a wonderfully vague word so parents don't realize that this is actually the most important grade they are giving.
3) Knowledge of the LOTG: This scoring area is actually a trap to help identify the bad reports. Any real complaints about missed LOTG will go in the comments section and will include the specific laws misapplied. All the people that just didn't like the refs foul calls/no-call will just put a 1 or 2 in this area and will say something vague and unsubstantiated in the comments.
4) Professionalism: key gauge for weeding out the egos and don't cares. Both for preventative and punitive purposes.
5)Other team's conduct: This is a check on the other teams report. It helps give a "grain of salt" factor to the other report. If both teams end up giving a 1 to each other, I think that says a lot in itself lol.

Furthermore, the survey should be viewable by the referee and the other team. The referee should also be able to comment and say something in response to any accusations. It would also help in constructive criticism for referees that want it.
Also, too many "wild reports" and your credibility score should be affected.

Of course, this rating system will have only a small impact on decision making, but I think it will separate the weed from the chaff. All the reviewed items on Amazon balance out even after the crazy 1 STAR reviews because 1 guy thought his headphones should vibrate. It should be weighted, or at least categorized, based on age level.

 

[baldref]

Okay, let me take a stab at answering the original posters question: "What can we do?" Here is my prototype.
I agree we need some sort of survey or rating system, but there are several important components I think the rating system should have. A simple Uber score would be too generic.
Potential issues of a rating system: Bias, the fact that people are always more likely to go out of their way to complain than compliment, lack of knowledge and experience of the armchair referees, validity of the surveyed, and accountability.

So to solve some of those problems, the survey should be quick and mandatory to complete to fill out the score. Mandatory will help solve the problem of only the aggrieved speaking up. It should only be filled out by the team manager and they should get 1 survey per game. I think 1-10 is better than 1-5, but that is subjective.

Categories:
1) Fitness: This is an important factor that can be judged by the untrained eye to a degree
2)Presence: This is also a good measurement that I would trust the untrained parent to grade me on. It is also such a wonderfully vague word so parents don't realize that this is actually the most important grade they are giving.
3) Knowledge of the LOTG: This scoring area is actually a trap to help identify the bad reports. Any real complaints about missed LOTG will go in the comments section and will include the specific laws misapplied. All the people that just didn't like the refs foul calls/no-call will just put a 1 or 2 in this area and will say something vague and unsubstantiated in the comments.
4) Professionalism: key gauge for weeding out the egos and don't cares. Both for preventative and punitive purposes.
5)Other team's conduct: This is a check on the other teams report. It helps give a "grain of salt" factor to the other report. If both teams end up giving a 1 to each other, I think that says a lot in itself lol.

Furthermore, the survey should be viewable by the referee and the other team. The referee should also be able to comment and say something in response to any accusations. It would also help in constructive criticism for referees that want it.
Also, too many "wild reports" and your credibility score should be affected.

Of course, this rating system will have only a small impact on decision making, but I think it will separate the weed from the chaff. All the reviewed items on Amazon balance out even after the crazy 1 STAR reviews because 1 guy thought his headphones should vibrate. It should be weighted, or at least categorized, based on age level.

any rating system given by someone who is not qualified, and/or biased, is nothing more than a popularity poll. team managers and coaches are biased for sure, and many are not qualified to asses a referee performance.

if, team managers/coaches wouldn't waste their time complaining about the referee who made the wrong call on a throw in, or who missed the offside that cost them the game, and concentrated on reporting/complaining about the arrogant, belligerent referees who make the others look bad, or the "highly" overweight referees who can't move at all doing the U19 boys.... etc., then it's possible the league and referee associations could supply some eyes to target these particular offenders. But, it's like the boy who cried wolf with all the insane bitching about non-factors. there's not the resources to go check out every complaint when there are so many ridiculous unfounded ones.