# National Cup



## Lulu (Apr 22, 2018)

I just wanted to give kudos to one of the ref teams we had this weekend.  It was a gentleman and two young ladies, the center ref called a very tight game, he didn't let anything go especially the hits after the plays.  It was one of the cleanest games I have seen in a long time.  The center ref mentioned after the game, that he cares about the safety of the players, which we, as parents, appreciate.
But then we had a ref team of a gentleman and two young men that let everything fly and lost control of the game.  Girls were elbowing and literally pushing with both arms fully extended from behind. One even clocked a girl in the face with her elbow and no call. The AR ref mentioned to us, it doesn't matter how you win, just as long as you win, which tells me they didn't care about safety.  Yes, I know soccer is a contact sport and players will get hurt. I understand the tripping and the legit body contact. But hits after the play, elbows in faces (no reason for an elbow to come that high especially if you are going after the ball with your feet) and full arm extensions are not soccer plays.
It is very sad that some take reffing seriously while others take it as "it's just a job" and who could give a crap about what happens on the pitch.


----------



## Monkey (Apr 22, 2018)

Just one elbow to the face and pushes from behind?  Sounds like a pretty typical game to me.


----------



## Slammerdad (Apr 23, 2018)

I had a similar experience at Nationals yesterday.  DD's game was pretty clean and it was good soccer to watch.  Yes there was take downs(in fact two PK's were awarded appropriately) and the Center ref warned a couple of girls on both sides when he saw behavior that wasn't "typical" but all in all a good game which resulted in positive cheering from parents and no ref bashing or name calling. Conversely, the game before us I watched in the field next to us (so not the same crew) had 3 yellows and 1 red and parents were hurling insults both at the refs and each other.  What I witnessed was a passive, "I'm here to make my $20 a game", Center AR who let the game get out of hand early.   So yes, if the Center Ref controls the game early and is engaged and watches behavior, then everyone benefits.

There is no place for elbows in the face in GU15  soccer.  Sorry Monkey.


----------



## Monkey (Apr 23, 2018)

Slammerdad said:


> There is no place for elbows in the face in GU15  soccer.  Sorry Monkey.


The original post made it sound like the ref let the game get out of hand and said there was an elbow to the face.  While I agree that there is no place for an elbow to the face, the description of the game seemed pretty typical. Whether it was right or wrong is a different question.


----------



## Toch (Apr 23, 2018)

Slammerdad said:


> I had a similar experience at Nationals yesterday.  DD's game was pretty clean and it was good soccer to watch.  Yes there was take downs(in fact two PK's were awarded appropriately) and the Center ref warned a couple of girls on both sides when he saw behavior that wasn't "typical" but all in all a good game which resulted in positive cheering from parents and no ref bashing or name calling. Conversely, the game before us I watched in the field next to us (so not the same crew) had 3 yellows and 1 red and parents were hurling insults both at the refs and each other.  What I witnessed was a passive, "I'm here to make my $20 a game", Center AR who let the game get out of hand early.   So yes, if the Center Ref controls the game early and is engaged and watches behavior, then everyone benefits.
> 
> There is no place for elbows in the face in GU15  soccer.  Sorry Monkey.


the “CENTER AR”????


----------



## baldref (Apr 24, 2018)

there are good referees and not as good referees, just like coaches and players. but there are very few referees who are just out there to get their $20 and don't care about what they're doing or who might get hurt. i've still never in my long career, seen a referee hurt a player. only other players hurt players. now, as for parents, there are decent parents, and ignorant parents. but there are next to zero "unbiased parents" and just slightly above zero of parents who actually know what they're watching when it comes to making calls in a soccer game.


----------



## watfly (Apr 24, 2018)

There seems to be a lot of lip service about safety in club soccer but often very little action.  One example from a few weeks ago, the boys were playing futsal at a venue that was like a skating rink.  All the kids were slip sliding away, they could run in a straight line but couldn't cut or stop without going down.  The guy running the league refused to clean the court (even at half or between games) because he said he did his job by cleaning in the morning and that it was the kids' shoes fault.  Ironically, the boys had played earlier in the day at a different venue and their shoes worked great.  Sometimes ego gets in the way of common sense decisions about safety.


----------



## outside! (Apr 24, 2018)

watfly said:


> There seems to be a lot of lip service about safety in club soccer but often very little action.  One example from a few weeks ago, the boys were playing futsal at a venue that was like a skating rink.  All the kids were slip sliding away, they could run in a straight line but couldn't cut or stop without going down.  The guy running the league refused to clean the court (even at half or between games) because he said he did his job by cleaning in the morning and that it was the kids' shoes fault.  Ironically, the boys had played earlier in the day at a different venue and their shoes worked great.  Sometimes ego gets in the way of common sense decisions about safety.


Which facilities?


----------



## MWN (Apr 24, 2018)

baldref said:


> there are good referees and not as good referees, just like coaches and players. but there are very few referees who are just out there to get their $20 and don't care about what they're doing or who might get hurt. i've still never in my long career, seen a referee hurt a player. only other players hurt players. now, as for parents, there are decent parents, and ignorant parents. but there are next to zero "unbiased parents" and just slightly above zero of parents who actually know what they're watching when it comes to making calls in a soccer game.


Those "slightly above zero" parents are just Grade 8/7/6 Referees in civilian clothes watching their kid.


----------



## futboldad1 (Apr 25, 2018)

baldref said:


> there are good referees and not as good referees, just like coaches and players. but there are very few referees who are just out there to get their $20 and don't care about what they're doing or who might get hurt. i've still never in my long career, seen a referee hurt a player. only other players hurt players. now, as for parents, there are decent parents, and ignorant parents. but there are next to zero "unbiased parents" and just slightly above zero of parents who actually know what they're watching when it comes to making calls in a soccer game.


Really agree with this. I got qualified and refereed (Lower level) a few years ago when my daughters were tiny and found this to be true among my peers (both those in the center of the field trying to make the game possible and those fellow parents in the crowd watching).


----------



## MWN (Apr 25, 2018)

IMHO, there if parents/spectators understood a few basics, they would enjoy and understand the game much more:

1) The Laws of the Game require the referee to actually "see" the foul to call the foul.  If the referee's vision is blocked or their attention drawn to another area of play, that elbow 20 yards away from the ball and behind the referee will go completely unnoticed by all except the victims parents who's focus is always on their kid.  The referee is only permitted to rely on the ARs.  Parents and Coaches and Players are excluded from the "review committee."

2) A foul is "careless," "reckless," or "excessive force" play.  The corollary is that every player owes a duty of "care" to their opponents.  This means that a player can actually get to the ball first, but if that player did so in a careless manner, its a foul.  Shouting "she got to the ball first!!!" is evidence of a parent that is uneducated.

3) The Laws of the Game encourage a referee to not call fouls if "trifling" in order to not disrupt the flow of the game. In other words, yes it was careless, but had no impact on the game/play, therefore, we don't call them.  What is a trifling foul really depends on a number of factors, but the temperature of the game and skill level of the athletes all play into that consideration.  Most of the excitement I hear from the peanut gallery is parents losing their minds at a Referee who isn't calling trifling fouls.

4) The Laws of the Game allow a referee to not call a foul if the fouled team retains possession ... this is called "advantage."  A similar concept exists in football, in that a referee throws a flag and allows play to continue, after play is stopped a team can "decline" the penalty.  With reckless or excessive force plays, the referee is also empowered to "caution" or "send off" the player minutes after the foul once play stops.

5) "Handling" aka "handball" requires the referee to determine the player "deliberately" acted in a manner to handle the ball.  Just because a ball kicked from 10 yards away hits the opponent in the hand does not mean its handling.  We look at time to react, skill level, whether the hand was in a natural position, was the player deliberately making themselves bigger, etc.

6) Referees are human and make mistakes.  The Laws state "Decisions will be made to the best of the referee`s ability according to the Laws of the Game and the ‘spirit of the game’ and will be based on the opinion of the referee who has the discretion to take appropriate action within the framework of the Laws of the Game.  The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final. The decisions of the referee, and all other match officials, must always be respected."  The Laws of the Game recognize that the referee is operating with imperfect factual data which forms the Referees opinion.  Whatever that decision is/was, is final once play restarts.  Soccer is designed to be an imperfect game, its part of the Laws.​


----------



## watfly (Apr 25, 2018)

MWN said:


> 5) "Handling" aka "handball" requires the referee to determine the player "deliberately" acted in a manner to handle the ball.  Just because a ball kicked from 10 yards away hits the opponent in the hand does not mean its handling.  We look at time to react, skill level, whether the hand was in a natural position, was the player deliberately making themselves bigger, etc.​


No question that handling is the most misunderstood rule in soccer across the board by parents, players, coaches and refs.  One particular thing that adds to the confusion is the idea that if the ball hits a hand that is in an "unnatural position" that that's handling .  It isn't, there is no such rule and there never has been.  In fact the current LOTG specifically say "the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence."  There was some USSF guidance a decade ago (and I believe no authoritative guidance since...but I could be wrong) about determining whether it was "deliberate" and they mentioned "unnatural position" as just a factor in considering deliberateness and not as having a hand in an "unnatural position"as being a foul in and of itself.  A ball touching a hand in an "unnatural position" is not a foul unless the player deliberately placed it there.  (The concept works the same in reverse, you could have your hand in a perfectly "natural" position, but if you deliberately put it there to handle the ball, its a foul.  So "unnatural" vs. "natural" is really meaningless, it all about whether it was deliberate) Unfortunately, the "unnatural position" claim has been repeated so many times that it has become de facto law for many refs.  I've seen plenty of refs claim that just having your arms out to your side, and not tucked to your body, is not natural and called fouls as such.   But don't take my word for it, take the word of this USSF ref instructor that explains the false concept of the natural position of the hand the best:

http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/the-handball-violation/

_The notion has been around for a long time that an important factor might be where the hand is at the time of contact, often verbalized as a “natural” versus “unnatural” position.  Given a player in motion, pumping legs, driving forward, trying to maintain balance, pivoting quickly, trying to get the attention of a teammate, and so forth, we are hard-pressed to conclude that there really is any such thing as a “natural position” for the hands unless we picture such extreme examples as a player standing still with a hand up in the air waving to someone in the crowd at the moment the hand is struck by a ball played in the air.  Furthermore, it has been argued that players may protect their balance while in motion by using their arms differently due to gender-based differences in body structure and/or how weight is carried on those structures.  This has frequently confused officials and has resulted in their making mistakes through not understanding gender and age differences in players.  The IFAB emphasized this concern when they stated in Law 12 that “the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement.”

We have heard of and have ourselves seen players running with arms pumping back and forth being whistled for handling because the ball, struck from behind the player, has hit the hand while it was in motion extending behind the player!  We have seen players whistled who have fallen and are in the process of lifting themselves off the ground when the ball rolls into the weight-bearing arm!

The bottom line is that, while extremes in hand positioning might be a factor in deciding whether ball contact should be treated as deliberate based on that fact alone, it is far more important to focus on the totality of the player’s situation and what led to the contact. _


----------



## MWN (Apr 25, 2018)

watfly said:


> No question that handling is the most misunderstood rule in soccer across the board by parents, players, coaches and refs.  One particular thing that adds to the confusion is the idea that if the ball hits a hand that is in an "unnatural position" that that's handling.


Agree that there isn't 1 definitive piece of circumstantial evidence used to determine "deliberate."  I also agree that referees have different opinions as to how much weight they are going to place on various factors.  There is simply no bright line rule that is easily applied.  Because a referee can't know for sure whether the player "deliberately" handled the ball because the referee doesn't share the same brain as the player, the referee can only form an opinion based on circumstantial evidence to form a "deliberate" opinion.

It is also a personal pet peeve of mine when referees call handling when its clear the players hands were away from the body as part of a natural balancing motion. (e.g. this photo).  This is why the referee needs to take into account the "unnatural position" in the context of "making themselves bigger."

Another article: http://soccerrefereeusa.com/index.php/entry/64-understanding-and-judging-handling-offenses-in-soccer


----------



## watfly (Apr 25, 2018)

MWN said:


> Another article: http://soccerrefereeusa.com/index.php/entry/64-understanding-and-judging-handling-offenses-in-soccer


I've read that article before, one of my issues with it is that it kind of gives conflicting advice regarding "benefit".  The article refers to ATR which basically says benefiting from a handball doesn't matter and then it goes on to talk about the 2009 directive which says you should consider benefit in determining a handball.  I realize I'm paraphrasing, and its more nuanced that, but that's the impression the article leaves.

Any foul that requires intent is difficult to determine for the very reason you stated that you can't get inside someone's head.  However, I don't think that USSF does itself any favors by trying to micro-analyze factors that you might consider to define "deliberate".  What happens unfortunately is the focus becomes on the factors and not the totality of intent, which in turn has made the factors the deciding element in handling regardless of intent. Not unusual to hear a ref justify a handling call by saying the player benefited.  I'm probably in the minority, but I think a handling call should be relatively rare based on the LOTG.


----------



## MWN (Apr 25, 2018)

watfly said:


> I've read that article before, one of my issues with it is that it kind of gives conflicting advice regarding "benefit".  The article refers to ATR which basically says benefiting from a handball doesn't matter and then it goes on to talk about the 2009 directive which says you should consider benefit in determining a handball.  I realize I'm paraphrasing, and its more nuanced that, but that's the impression the article leaves.
> 
> Any foul that requires intent is difficult to determine for the very reason you stated that you can't get inside someone's head.  However, I don't think that USSF does itself any favors by trying to micro-analyze factors that you might consider to define "deliberate".  What happens unfortunately is the focus becomes on the factors and not the totality of intent, which in turn has made the factors the deciding element in handling regardless of intent. Not unusual to hear a ref justify a handling call by saying the player benefited.  I'm probably in the minority, but I think a handling call should be relatively rare based on the LOTG.


I'm with you, its should be rare, especially with the U-Littles.  The olders have less latitude.   Whether the player "benefited" can be circumstantial evidence of intent, but is not dispositive.  If referee's opinion was not deliberate, the benefiting is inconsequential.


----------



## coachrefparent (Apr 25, 2018)

MWN said:


> IMHO, there if parents/spectators understood a few basics, they would enjoy and understand the game much more:


Even better if coaches did. Referees receive constant updates as to interpretation, and had a big revision recently. I still run into coaches all the time that simply don't know the rules any better than many parents. But they sure think they do. 
(Yes I called the laws rules...)


----------



## Paul Spacey (Apr 25, 2018)

coachrefparent said:


> Even better if coaches did. Referees receive constant updates as to interpretation, and had a big revision recently. I still run into coaches all the time that simply don't know the rules any better than many parents. But they sure think they do.
> (Yes I called the laws rules...)


I can testify to this. I’ve been a coach here for 6 years and I’ve been a referee (here and in the UK) for almost 20. In my experience, more than 50% of youth soccer coaches do not know the laws of the game. Even less understand how they are applied. Take this percentage down to around 25% when referring to parents (sorry parents, I know some of you understand the laws and interpretation very well but you are in a minority).

Referees are not immune from this. Too many for my liking either don’t fully understand the LOTG or simply choose to apply them in a way which suits them, not the flow of the game and the quality of the players in front of them. Attitude and communication are the biggest problems; if referees showed a better attitude and communicated more effectively with players, coaches and parents, their job would be a lot easier. How do I know? I’ve experienced it personally for a long time. Be honest, communicate and relate to players and the game is easy to officiate. Yes, easy.

There are many good referees out there though and like anything, there will always be good and bad. I do feel we can do more to all work together (coaches, parents, refs) to make the game more smooth-running and hassle-free for the kids. They should be our priority of course.


----------



## watfly (Apr 26, 2018)

coachrefparent said:


> Referees receive constant updates as to interpretation, and had a big revision recently.


Would you mind providing a link to the big revision?  Also where do we find the updates to interpretations?


----------



## MWN (Apr 26, 2018)

watfly said:


> Would you mind providing a link to the big revision?  Also where to we find the updates to interpretations?


https://ussoccer.app.box.com/s/u7o23m7vxgt5gdq9adsxgw0o9wlqcddm

https://ussoccer.app.box.com/s/u7o23m7vxgt5gdq9adsxgw0o9wlqcddm/folder/22920123270


----------



## watfly (Apr 26, 2018)

MWN said:


> https://ussoccer.app.box.com/s/u7o23m7vxgt5gdq9adsxgw0o9wlqcddm
> 
> https://ussoccer.app.box.com/s/u7o23m7vxgt5gdq9adsxgw0o9wlqcddm/folder/22920123270


Thanks for providing, I was familiar with those. Besides IFAB Circular 11, I didn't see any updates to interpretations other than what is already included in the LOTG "Details of all Law Changes".  Are these LOTG changes what is being considered as the big revision?  Coachrefparent mentioned a big revision recently, maybe he is referring to the 2018-2019 changes?  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OGddOBkMp5Dd4_dNtfPdtiyvft6B1rsB/view.  Obviously these aren't applicable for a couple months.


----------



## Paul Spacey (Apr 26, 2018)

watfly said:


> Thanks for providing, I was familiar with those. Besides IFAB Circular 11, I didn't see any updates to interpretations other than what is already included in the LOTG "Details of all Law Changes".  Are these LOTG changes what is being considered as the big revision?  Coachrefparent mentioned a big revision recently, maybe he is referring to the 2018-2019 changes?  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OGddOBkMp5Dd4_dNtfPdtiyvft6B1rsB/view.  Obviously these aren't applicable for a couple months.


As with coaching (where the drills are not the most important thing, their understanding and application is, along with connecting/inspiring players), for referees the LOTG might seem the most important thing but they are not really (of course they are important but for me not top of the list).

Referee understanding and how to interpret/apply the laws is the most important thing, along with how to communicate and relate to players/coaches/parents (see the parallels with coaching?)

As a referee, if you get the communication and game management part right, the laws is the easy bit and your life will be an easier one as a match official.


----------



## MWN (Apr 26, 2018)

watfly said:


> Thanks for providing, I was familiar with those. Besides IFAB Circular 11, I didn't see any updates to interpretations other than what is already included in the LOTG "Details of all Law Changes".  Are these LOTG changes what is being considered as the big revision?  Coachrefparent mentioned a big revision recently, maybe he is referring to the 2018-2019 changes?  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OGddOBkMp5Dd4_dNtfPdtiyvft6B1rsB/view.  Obviously these aren't applicable for a couple months.


17/18 was the year of the major revisions, with substantial language changes, etc.  DOGSO and Offside were revised some of the biggies.


----------



## Upper-V (Apr 26, 2018)

MWN said:


> IMHO, there if parents/spectators understood a few basics, they would enjoy and understand the game much more:
> 
> 1) The Laws of the Game require the referee to actually "see" the foul to call the foul.  If the referee's vision is blocked or their attention drawn to another area of play, that elbow 20 yards away from the ball and behind the referee will go completely unnoticed by all except the victims parents who's focus is always on their kid.  The referee is only permitted to rely on the ARs.  Parents and Coaches and Players are excluded from the "review committee."
> 
> ...


VERY well said!!


----------



## coachrefparent (Apr 26, 2018)

watfly said:


> Thanks for providing, I was familiar with those. Besides IFAB Circular 11, I didn't see any updates to interpretations other than what is already included in the LOTG "Details of all Law Changes".  Are these LOTG changes what is being considered as the big revision?  Coachrefparent mentioned a big revision recently, maybe he is referring to the 2018-2019 changes?  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OGddOBkMp5Dd4_dNtfPdtiyvft6B1rsB/view.  Obviously these aren't applicable for a couple months.


"The 2016-17 revision of the Laws of the Game was probably the most far-reaching and comprehensive in The IFAB's history. The aim was to make the Laws clearer, more accessible and to ensure they reflect the needs of the modern game. 

As with any large-scale revision, there is always a second 'follow up' stage and many of the changes for 2017-18 are clarifications which make the text clearer and/or easier to translate – most are the result of requests from individuals, groups and national FAs from around the world."
Here's the best link I've found for the 2016 changes:
https://intheopinionofthereferee.com/downloads/


----------



## Toch (May 2, 2018)

watfly said:


> There seems to be a lot of lip service about safety in club soccer but often very little action.  One example from a few weeks ago, the boys were playing futsal at a venue that was like a skating rink.  All the kids were slip sliding away, they could run in a straight line but couldn't cut or stop without going down.  The guy running the league refused to clean the court (even at half or between games) because he said he did his job by cleaning in the morning and that it was the kids' shoes fault.  Ironically, the boys had played earlier in the day at a different venue and their shoes worked great.  Sometimes ego gets in the way of common sense decisions about safety.


Ultimately it’s the parents responsibility to look after their kids. If it's not safe for your kid why would you allow them to play?


----------



## wildcat66 (May 7, 2018)

As a bigger guy, (6' 200)  I hated the "call every little foul" refs.  Was the game safer?  Sure but was it funner?  Not for me.  i was not the fastest on the team, nor did I have the best skills, but when there was a 50/50 ball you or I were going to come off of our feet.   I didn't believe in cheap shots but I never backed away from contact and I hate watching a soccer game where refs call every little thing.  I firmly believe it is a contact sport.  I got my share of yellows over time and a couple reds, but figured that was just a part of the game.  I know that goes against the pure "beautiful" game concept, but I think it is one of the reasons it never really catches on here in USA.  We are a little more barbaric than European and Latin brethren and want to see some action.  If a ref grew up playing that more "blue collar"  type game i would imagine it would be difficult for them to understand why all the hubbub from parents and coaches that don't want their little Johnny or Sally hurt.  Also just a short look at the league standing seems to show that the teams at the top of their brackets generally have more cards than the teams at the bottom.  Aggressiveness, confidence, and risky play sometimes trumps skill.


----------



## baldref (May 7, 2018)

the players dictate what "has to be called" and what can be allowed. it varies of course with age and skill level, but if both teams are good with bumping and banging, than i'm sure not going to take their fun away. lower skill level games you need to keep an eye on more because sometimes when johnny/susie gets muscled off the ball a couple times, he/she wants to box. but higher skilled teams and players know a good strong shoulder charge is part of soccer.


----------



## Surfref (May 7, 2018)

coachrefparent said:


> Even better if coaches did. Referees receive constant updates as to interpretation, and had a big revision recently. I still run into coaches all the time that simply don't know the rules any better than many parents. But they sure think they do.
> (Yes I called the laws rules...)


I had a coach lose his mind yesterday because he thought my referee crew was screwing up the offside calls.  The AR's waited until there was active involvement or interference with play by the offside player before raising the flag.  The restart was were the infraction occurred and not at the point of the last defender.  The coach evidently had not read the LOTG in the past 10 years.  His face turned so red from yelling at me that I thought his head was going to explode.  I just ignored him and got the game going.


----------



## Surfref (May 7, 2018)

watfly said:


> Thanks for providing, I was familiar with those. Besides IFAB Circular 11, I didn't see any updates to interpretations other than what is already included in the LOTG "Details of all Law Changes".  Are these LOTG changes what is being considered as the big revision?  Coachrefparent mentioned a big revision recently, maybe he is referring to the 2018-2019 changes?  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OGddOBkMp5Dd4_dNtfPdtiyvft6B1rsB/view.  Obviously these aren't applicable for a couple months.


We also get US Soccer approved and sanctioned training which includes interpretation during our monthly association meeting and RPD (Referee Professional Development) training.  I am not sure if those Power Point presentations are available to the public.


----------



## Surfref (May 7, 2018)

Lulu said:


> I just wanted to give kudos to one of the ref teams we had this weekend.  It was a gentleman and two young ladies, the center ref called a very tight game, he didn't let anything go especially the hits after the plays.  It was one of the cleanest games I have seen in a long time.  The center ref mentioned after the game, that he cares about the safety of the players, which we, as parents, appreciate.....


Hopefully you thanked the referee crew for a job well done. Parents can be quick to tell referees that they suck, ruined the game, were horrible, etc., but rarely tell refs that they did a good job.  Some of the newer refs need that confidence boost.

The good refs didn't happen to be a crew on Saturday 21 April at Oceanside for National Cup games? I was working a set of three games with my daughter and another young female referee.  All three games went fairly close to flawless with no injuries, only a couple needed yellow cards, and happy coaches, players and spectators.  It was one of those days where "The Force was with us." My daughter commented to me on the way home that she had never heard so many positive comments toward the referees even from the losing team coaches and spectators.  I could tell the positive comments really boosted her confidence as a center referee.  It really was a lot of fun to referee games where 99 percent of the yelling was positive comments and cheering toward the players.


----------



## etc1217 (May 8, 2018)

Surfref said:


> Hopefully you thanked the referee crew for a job well done. Parents can be quick to tell referees that they suck, ruined the game, were horrible, etc., but rarely tell refs that they did a good job.  Some of the newer refs need that confidence boost.


Yes, I did!! Even joked with him about bringing the beer since one of the other refs at the booth joked if we were family since our parents were giving him much deserved praise after our game.  Maybe it was you?!

I always appreciate and thank a good ref team especially if *all the players* come off the pitch relatively unscathed, it also makes the game more enjoyable to watch.


----------



## Art (May 8, 2018)

Lulu said:


> I just wanted to give kudos to one of the ref teams we had this weekend.  It was a gentleman and two young ladies, the center ref called a very tight game, he didn't let anything go especially the hits after the plays.  It was one of the cleanest games I have seen in a long time.  The center ref mentioned after the game, that he cares about the safety of the players, which we, as parents, appreciate.
> But then we had a ref team of a gentleman and two young men that let everything fly and lost control of the game.  Girls were elbowing and literally pushing with both arms fully extended from behind. One even clocked a girl in the face with her elbow and no call. The AR ref mentioned to us, it doesn't matter how you win, just as long as you win, which tells me they didn't care about safety.  Yes, I know soccer is a contact sport and players will get hurt. I understand the tripping and the legit body contact. But hits after the play, elbows in faces (no reason for an elbow to come that high especially if you are going after the ball with your feet) and full arm extensions are not soccer plays.
> It is very sad that some take reffing seriously while others take it as "it's just a job" and who could give a crap about what happens on the pitch.


A little political talk to keep in mind is that the referees usually turning up to these games are not often the best ones as Calsouth desires.

Reasons being: travel, time to be there early, and the amount of games are capped.

Referees have lately veen complaining about calsouths lack of respect towards them especially with the coordinators at the tournaments. The constant nit-picking of little details. A black cap is not sufficient anymore because of commercial rights bla bla bla. 

Also if a referee shows up 30 mins early instead of 45 they get sent home...like what on earth is wrong with calsouth!!!

The 3 games is not worth it in a financial view especially with game fees we have to pay and the hours we're devoting on that day. Its just gross. Silverlakes is an hr away from me and having to do games there makes me have to get out of the house 2 hrs before kickoff!! And another hr on way back. No thanks.

All this is just a bit of why there has been a higher need for referees during the tournaments.


----------



## Surfref (May 9, 2018)

Art said:


> A little political talk to keep in mind is that the referees usually turning up to these games are not often the best ones as Calsouth desires.
> 
> Reasons being: travel, time to be there early, and the amount of games are capped.
> 
> ...


Unfortunately I have to agree with some of your comments especially the lack of respect because I saw similar things at Oceanside, Ryan, and Galloway.  Some, but definitely not all, of these older male referee coordinators need to use some common sense when talking to the referees especially the younger ones. Just about everything that comes out of their mouth is negative.  98-99 percent of the referees are on time, properly complete the paperwork and do a good job on the field, so there is no reason to talk down to them because of the actions of a very few referees.

You can throw in some sexism also.  This past State-National Cup season (youngers and olders) I saw the Cal South referee coordinators treat the younger female referees differently than the males of the same age.  I overhead (yes I did talk to the male referee) this comment to an 18-22 year old female referee from a 50-60 year old male referee, "Honey, if any of the coaches yell at you just let me know and I will talk to them for you." The female referee was the Center and the older male the AR.  Calling her "Honey" is sexist and inappropriate and assuming that she cannot deal with the coaches on her own is just disrespectful. I heard another older referee refer to a young female referee as "sweetie" and yes I did talk to him and reminded him that his use of "sweetie" is unprofessional.  I also got to witness my daughter and other female referees get told during check-in that they needed to take their earrings out before they stepped on the field.  The reminder is okay if you also tell the male referees that have earrings in, but the males were not told.  The second time the same coordinator told my daughter I had to guide her away before she told the grumpy old guy in the beret to F' off.  The next weekend it happened again at another field and she asked me to talk with the coordinator.  The coordinator did apologize to my daughter and the other female referee. 

I also have an hour drive to the fields, but really do not think the money ($200 for three 80-90 minute games) is that bad, especially when I am doing something I enjoy.  I just wish the ref coordinators at the sites would pull the sticks out of their butts and be a little more respectful and professional to the referees. If a referee is really screwing up then notify their assigner that the referee is not welcome back.


----------



## outside! (May 9, 2018)

Surfref said:


> The second time the same coordinator told my daughter I had to guide her away before she told the grumpy old guy in the beret to F' off.


On the other hand, it would have definitely made a lasting impression with him if she had spoken her mind.


----------



## Frank (May 9, 2018)

The Coordinators are always a bit grumpy as they are dealing with a lot of BS, however I really appreciate that they step in and help with the paperwork as the crews are running to try and get the next game going.  I had a great coordinator this past weekend that helped with handling a team that was trying to use illegal players.  Always had good experiences with the RC's.   I am a bit tired of the pre-day speech after now hearing 16 times so far this Spring, however that is part of the gig and I am there for it.


----------



## coachrefparent (May 9, 2018)

Surfref said:


> Unfortunately I have to agree with some of your comments especially the lack of respect because I saw similar things at Oceanside, Ryan, and Galloway.  Some, but definitely not all, of these older male referee coordinators need to use some common sense when talking to the referees especially the younger ones. Just about everything that comes out of their mouth is negative.  98-99 percent of the referees are on time, properly complete the paperwork and do a good job on the field, so there is no reason to talk down to them because of the actions of a very few referees.
> 
> You can throw in some sexism also.  This past State-National Cup season (youngers and olders) I saw the Cal South referee coordinators treat the younger female referees differently than the males of the same age.  I overhead (yes I did talk to the male referee) this comment to an 18-22 year old female referee from a 50-60 year old male referee, "Honey, if any of the coaches yell at you just let me know and I will talk to them for you." The female referee was the Center and the older male the AR.  Calling her "Honey" is sexist and inappropriate and assuming that she cannot deal with the coaches on her own is just disrespectful. I heard another older referee refer to a young female referee as "sweetie" and yes I did talk to him and reminded him that his use of "sweetie" is unprofessional.  I also got to witness my daughter and other female referees get told during check-in that they needed to take their earrings out before they stepped on the field.  The reminder is okay if you also tell the male referees that have earrings in, but the males were not told.  The second time the same coordinator told my daughter I had to guide her away before she told the grumpy old guy in the beret to F' off.  The next weekend it happened again at another field and she asked me to talk with the coordinator.  The coordinator did apologize to my daughter and the other female referee.
> 
> I also have an hour drive to the fields, but really do not think the money ($200 for three 80-90 minute games) is that bad, especially when I am doing something I enjoy.  I just wish the ref coordinators at the sites would pull the sticks out of their butts and be a little more respectful and professional to the referees. If a referee is really screwing up then notify their assigner that the referee is not welcome back.


In my experience, with only a trifling (see how I used that?) few exceptions, all things being equal, female soccer referees at all ages are overall better referees than their male counterparts. Most are current or ex-competitive players, are confident, and care about their craft.

Oh, and the refs and coordinators that do this are not stuck up, but just a bunch of old impotent geezers that can now only get off by "showing" how much better and experienced they are, bullying the "less experienced".  You see it in every field, but they sure seem concentrated in the soccer referee community. They must wake up and instantly start thinking about how they can correct other referees, catch someone in a little known nuance of interpretation, tell them that it's not a penalty box nor a sideline nor hand ball (terms that were universally used when they were in their 20's and 30's) while gently sipping their light brown Folgers.

People that treat women (or any one else) this way are losers that have nothing else going on in their lives, have a low social standing in general society (ie. no real friends or romantic relationships), and thrive on their specialized position to be on a power trip. A bit like a mall cop (or exactly like one). [My apologies to mall cops.]

Too bad you guided her away, he deserved a kick in his shriveled up nuts.  Any guy in a beret in  a referee uniform in SoCal is a complete douche bag.


----------



## Gimpyhip (May 16, 2018)

Surfref said:


> I had a coach lose his mind yesterday because he thought my referee crew was screwing up the offside calls.  The AR's waited until there was active involvement or interference with play by the offside player before raising the flag.  The restart was were the infraction occurred and not at the point of the last defender.  The coach evidently had not read the LOTG in the past 10 years.  His face turned so red from yelling at me that I thought his head was going to explode.  I just ignored him and got the game going.


No doubt this is one of the biggest sources of contention. There seem to be so many (not most but a significant minority) ARs who throw the flag up the moment the ball goes forward and anyone is in an offside position it is just maddening. On the other hand you have the constant screaming for offside when the AR is waiting for the involvement or interference. Right up there with playing advantage and "handball" for coach/parent yelling compounded by a bit of inconsistency by different refs. So much fun!


----------



## outside! (May 16, 2018)

Gimpyhip said:


> No doubt this is one of the biggest sources of contention. There seem to be so many (not most but a significant minority) ARs who throw the flag up the moment the ball goes forward and anyone is in an offside position it is just maddening. On the other hand you have the constant screaming for offside when the AR is waiting for the involvement or interference. Right up there with playing advantage and "handball" for coach/parent yelling compounded by a bit of inconsistency by different refs. So much fun!


My only issue with the new implementation of the offside rule is that it seems to result in a greater possibility of collisions between the goalkeeper and the offside player since the whistle is delayed.


----------



## Surfref (May 16, 2018)

outside! said:


> My only issue with the new implementation of the offside rule is that it seems to result in a greater possibility of collisions between the goalkeeper and the offside player since the whistle is delayed.


At all of the trainings I have had on offside in the past two years, we were told to blow the whistle early if we thought there was going to be a “hospital ball”.  It is tricky because the players are starting to understand the change to the offside call and stop on their own when teammates, spectators, coach or opponents yell for offside.  IMHO it is better to blow the whistle and stop play instead of taking a chance of a collision, but I definitely wait longer than I used too.  The other thing that players doing is if they know they are offside waiting until the ball is near the goal line before getting close enough to draw the call.  This put the other team with an indirect free kick from deep in their own defensive half.


----------



## wildcat66 (May 17, 2018)

collisions are a part of soccer, let them play.


----------



## watfly (May 17, 2018)

wildcat66 said:


> collisions are a part of soccer, let them play.


True, but unnecessary collisions are not.  That's what the refs are talking about here.  Personally, I haven't seen any issues with the rule change.  Most refs are using common sense and blowing the whistle when appropriate whether the player has touched the ball or are clearly going to touch the ball.  I think "interfering with play" can be used judiciously.


----------



## Fact (May 17, 2018)

Could someone point me to the "new" rule or explain it? Thanks.


----------



## watfly (May 17, 2018)

outside! said:


> My only issue with the new implementation of the offside rule is that it seems to result in a greater possibility of collisions between the goalkeeper and the offside player since the whistle is delayed.


That shouldn't be happening, (unless I'm missing something, which is entirely possible) because that would be in violation of IFAB guidance which states:

"If an opponent becomes involved in the play and if, in the opinion of the referee, there is potential for physical contact, the player in the offside position shall be penalised for interfering with an opponent."


----------



## outside! (May 17, 2018)

watfly said:


> That shouldn't be happening, (unless I'm missing something, which is entirely possible) because that would be in violation of IFAB guidance which states:
> 
> "If an opponent becomes involved in the play and if, in the opinion of the referee, there is potential for physical contact, the player in the offside position shall be penalised for interfering with an opponent."


Maybe it is due to the refs getting used to the new interpretation, but I have seen two close calls this season that in the past would have been whistled with the offensive player 20 yards from the keeper.


----------



## Surfref (May 17, 2018)

outside! said:


> Maybe it is due to the refs getting used to the new interpretation, but I have seen two close calls this season that in the past would have been whistled with the offensive player 20 yards from the keeper.


I have had several instances of players stopping or changing direction away from the ball when they are between 5-10 yards away and one of their teammates who was onside seemingly comes out of nowhere to get the ball and continue the attack or shoot. As soon as that initial player either stops or changes direction away from the ball there is no offside violation.  So, unfortunately referees have to wait a lot longer before blowing the whistle for offside.  Of course the skill level and age of the players needs to be taken into consideration.  A 16 year old DA or ECNL should know to stop her run after the ball once a teammate or coach yells "offside" so I am going to wait until that player is at least 5 yards from the ball before making the call.  A 16 year old low skill level Tier 3/Bronze/AA-B player will get a whistle much earlier because they would normally not have the soccer knowledge to know to stop.  My daughter and her teammates have a couple plays that involve an attacker being in an offside position.  The offside player runs after the ball but stops when they get about 10 yards away, the defense usually stops thinking offside is going to be called and an attacking teammate comes in from onside and continues the attack.


----------



## watfly (May 17, 2018)

Surfref said:


> The offside player runs after the ball but stops when they get about 10 yards away, the defense usually stops thinking offside is going to be called and an attacking teammate comes in from onside and continues the attack.


That is a text book definition of offside according to IFAB:

_"A player in an offside position shall also be penalised if he:

• makes an *obvious action* which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

• ‘impact’ applies to an opponent’s ability (or potential) to play the ball and will include situations where an opponent’s movement to play the ball is *delayed*, hindered or prevented by the offside player."
_
Obvious action (offside player runs after the ball) + opponent delayed (defense stops) = offside


----------



## coachrefparent (May 17, 2018)

watfly said:


> That is a text book definition of offside according to IFAB:
> 
> _"A player in an offside position shall also be penalised if he:
> 
> ...


If I'm reading what you posted correctly ("defense stops"=an impact by player in offside position), I disagree. The mental decision by the defender to stop (and lamely put up his hand and stare at the AR, and then his teammates, and then his coach as the other team scores) is not what is meant by "opponent is delayed". The defender must be prevented from playing the ball by the player in an offside position.


----------



## baldref (May 18, 2018)

there is no offside until the whistle blows. if your player is stopping or hesitating before they hear a whistle, that's their problem, whether or not there's a player in offside position.


----------



## watfly (May 18, 2018)

coachrefparent said:


> If I'm reading what you posted correctly ("defense stops"=an impact by player in offside position), I disagree. The mental decision by the defender to stop (and lamely put up his hand and stare at the AR, and then his teammates, and then his coach as the other team scores) is not what is meant by "opponent is delayed". The defender must be prevented from playing the ball by the player in an offside position.


No question that there are two manners in which fouls are called either on a subjective interpretation or an objective application of the LOTG.


----------



## watfly (May 18, 2018)

coachrefparent said:


> If I'm reading what you posted correctly ("defense stops"=an impact by player in offside position), I disagree. The mental decision by the defender to stop (and lamely put up his hand and stare at the AR, and then his teammates, and then his coach as the other team scores) is not what is meant by "opponent is delayed". The defender must be prevented from playing the ball by the player in an offside position.


It's not just the defense stopping but the player in the offside position chasing the ball which draws the defense towards the offside player and away from the player who shoots the ball which is clear interference by the player in the offside position.  That being said, a player should never stop before the whistle blows and should never assume a ref will blow a whistle even if its a foul. The fault goes to the defense for stopping not to the ref for not calling a foul.  Its well within the ref's discretion not to call a foul.


----------



## Surfref (May 18, 2018)

watfly said:


> That is a text book definition of offside according to IFAB:
> 
> _"A player in an offside position shall also be penalised if he:
> 
> ...



You are incorrect and I am not sure what old version of the Laws of the Game you are referencing, but it is not the current LOTG.  I copied and pasted the text below right off of the IFAB website. Just because a player runs after a ball that is not within playing distance of them does not mean they have impacted, interfered or delayed the opponents ability to play the ball.  The issue you raise was true several years ago but the LOTG have been modified several times since then and this topic is discussed at all trainings on Offside. Just because a player is running after the ball does not make it "an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball." 

2017-2018 LOTG Law 11
2. Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

• interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
• interfering with an opponent by:
  •• preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
  ••challenging an opponent for the ball or
  •• clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or
  •• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball or

• gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
  •• rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar, match official or an opponent
  ••been deliberately saved by any opponent

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.

A ‘save’ is when a player stops, or attempts to stop, a ball which is going into or very close to the goal with any part of the body except the hands/arms (unless the goalkeeper within the penalty area).


In situations where:

• a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent) the offence should be penalised under Law 12.
• a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence.
• an offence is committed against a player in an offside position who is already playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the offside offence is penalised as it has occurred before the foul challenge.


----------



## Surfref (May 18, 2018)

watfly said:


> It's not just the defense stopping but the player in the offside position chasing the ball which draws the defense towards the offside player and away from the player who shoots the ball which is clear interference by the player in the offside position.  That being said, a player should never stop before the whistle blows and should never assume a ref will blow a whistle even if its a foul. The fault goes to the defense for stopping not to the ref for not calling a foul.  Its well within the ref's discretion not to call a foul.


Offside is not a foul but a violation of the Laws of the Game, Law 11.  Fouls are covered in Law 12.  Since you will not believe anything a couple of highly trained referees tell you, you need to contact George or Randy.  They will set you straight.

*George Noujaim*
Chairman, State Referee Administrator 
*gnoujaim@calsouth.com*
951.505.8348 - ph. 

Randall Reyes
State Director of Instruction 
*lawfive01@yahoo.com*
623.363.7374 - ph.


----------



## watfly (May 18, 2018)

Surfref said:


> You are incorrect and I am not sure what old version of the Laws of the Game you are referencing, but it is not the current LOTG.


I used the following:

_• makes an _*obvious action*_ which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball  - _*Verbatim from the 2017-2018 LOTG (also used in IFAB circular noted below)*

_• ‘impact’ applies to an opponent’s ability (or potential) to play the ball and will include situations where an opponent’s movement to play the ball is _*delayed*_, hindered or prevented by the offside player." - _*Verbatim from the IFAB Circular from 2015.  *Maybe there is some published authority that has since changed the IFAB's definition of "impact", but the guidance it is defining is still in the current LOTG.


----------



## watfly (May 18, 2018)

Surfref said:


> Offside is not a foul but a violation of the Laws of the Game, Law 11.  Fouls are covered in Law 12.  Since you will not believe anything a couple of highly trained referees tell you, you need to contact George or Randy.  They will set you straight.
> 
> *George Noujaim*
> Chairman, State Referee Administrator
> ...


I sent the question to someone on a National level, I will post the response when I receive it.  Fair enough?


----------



## Surfref (May 18, 2018)

watfly said:


> I sent the question to someone on a National level, I will post the response when I receive it.  Fair enough?


While you wait for an answer, you might benefit from the videos on the Pro Referee (US Soccer and MLS Pro Referee website).

http://proreferees.com/2017/04/05/play-of-the-week-2017-week-5/      (Offside – Interfering with an Opponent dialogue)

http://proreferees.com/features/education/          (Main site that lists all weekly training)


----------



## Surfref (May 18, 2018)

baldref said:


> there is no offside until the whistle blows. if your player is stopping or hesitating before they hear a whistle, that's their problem, whether or not there's a player in offside position.


How many times have we had to sit through referee training and hear another referee ask, "Isn't it interfering if the offside player runs after the ball and the defender runs to catch the offside player even if the offside player does not play the ball?"  Only to have one of many instructors spend 5 minutes explaining why it is not interfering and a violation of Law 11 just to be in an offside position and run after the ball but stop or not play it and have a teammate play it.  It happens every time we have Offside training sometimes twice in one training session.


----------



## watfly (May 18, 2018)

Surfref said:


> http://proreferees.com/2017/04/05/play-of-the-week-2017-week-5/


When I saw the first video, my initial impression was that it was interference.  Looking at it closer though the shot had already been taken and the goalie had already committed before the offside attacker enters into a closer field of vision and then drops down.  So I don't think the offside player hindered or influenced (I know that's not a technical term) the goalie's actions, so no offside, but that is with the benefit of slow mo.  I wouldn't fault a referee with either call because its a bang bang play, but technically its no offside.  So credit to the ref in this case.

To me the 2nd video is clearly not offside, I don't see anything close that could be deemed interference.


----------



## GunninGopher (May 18, 2018)

Here is AYSO's referee newsletter that was sent out today. The topic is offside:

https://us11.campaign-archive.com/?u=d7f863552213883464a553f0e&id=a32c3878b2&e=51f9e42f51


----------



## coachrefparent (May 19, 2018)

watfly said:


> It's not just the defense stopping but the player in the offside position chasing the ball which draws the defense towards the offside player and away from the player who shoots the ball which is clear interference by the player in the offside position.  That being said, a player should never stop before the whistle blows and should never assume a ref will blow a whistle even if its a foul. The fault goes to the defense for stopping not to the ref for not calling a foul.  Its well within the ref's discretion not to call a foul.


It's up to the defender to decide what to do. If he wrongly chases a player who was in an offside position when his teammate played the ball (OPWTPB), that is his own risk.  He should have gone to the player who will not be called offside (and shoots in your example). 

A  player that is in OPWTPB that "draws the defense" is not "clear interference" as you assert. Just a mental error by the defense. No offside.  This has nothing to do with discretion, as it would be an abuse of the official's discretion to call an offside offense when none exists.


----------



## watfly (May 20, 2018)

As promised, here is the response from a national ref trainer.  I was WRONG!  Pretty much verbatim what verbatim what Surfref said (I probably owe a few of you lunch).  I fully understand that offside position is not offside but I obviously read more into "intefere" and "active in play" than was there.

_"No.  It is a tactic and would be acceptable.  Any defending team which “bought” this would have to have their minds stuck in the muck of the bad old (long ago old) days when officials signaled for offside based solely on the position.  For more than the last 14 years (since 2005), referee training has emphasized (a) that an offside offense has not occurred unless and until the player touches the ball or interferes with an opponent (*“interfere” does not include “confuse”*) and (b) that when two attackers are running for the ball, one from an onside position and one from an offside position, the referee must wait to see which player gets to the ball first."_
_
_


----------



## baldref (May 20, 2018)

watfly said:


> As promised, here is the response from a national ref trainer.  I was WRONG!  Pretty much verbatim what verbatim what Surfref said (I probably owe a few of you lunch).  I fully understand that offside position is not offside but I obviously read more into "intefere" and "active in play" than was there.
> 
> _"No.  It is a tactic and would be acceptable.  Any defending team which “bought” this would have to have their minds stuck in the muck of the bad old (long ago old) days when officials signaled for offside based solely on the position.  For more than the last 14 years (since 2005), referee training has emphasized (a) that an offside offense has not occurred unless and until the player touches the ball or interferes with an opponent (*“interfere” does not include “confuse”*) and (b) that when two attackers are running for the ball, one from an onside position and one from an offside position, the referee must wait to see which player gets to the ball first."
> _


It was a little bit tough getting used to this, but I like it


----------



## Surfref (May 21, 2018)

watfly said:


> As promised, here is the response from a national ref trainer.  I was WRONG!  Pretty much verbatim what verbatim what Surfref said (I probably owe a few of you lunch).  I fully understand that offside position is not offside but I obviously read more into "intefere" and "active in play" than was there.
> 
> _"No.  It is a tactic and would be acceptable.  Any defending team which “bought” this would have to have their minds stuck in the muck of the bad old (long ago old) days when officials signaled for offside based solely on the position.  For more than the last 14 years (since 2005), referee training has emphasized (a) that an offside offense has not occurred unless and until the player touches the ball or interferes with an opponent (*“interfere” does not include “confuse”*) and (b) that when two attackers are running for the ball, one from an onside position and one from an offside position, the referee must wait to see which player gets to the ball first."_


No worries.  It sort of points out why referees get yelled at on the field and why referees are required to attend a minimum amount of training each year.  The LOTG and interpretation change and referees are the only ones tasked with staying current on those changes.  Refs also need refresher training just to keep fresh on what we have already been taught.


----------

