Interesting letter from SoCal League, re referee issues

[sigmabody]

Related: We had one of "those refs" today. He gave out around 7 yellows to players, most for questioning calls (and none particularly vocally, as far as I could tell; just the standard "common..." type of comment). He double yellow ejected a coach also; the first for coming onto the field to check on a head injury before he was signaled on, and the second for pointing out that they are supposed to check on head injuries, and it was absurd to not allow him to do so. He warned both coaches early for allowing subs to step onto the field before the other players were fully off the field (and he had signaled for players to come on), moved players back less than 5 yards on throw-ins, stopped the game for every free kick, made some pretty obviously bad calls, etc.

I didn't get the sense he was corrupt or anything, to be clear, but he was the type of official that was much more interested in being the most important person on the pitch, than he was allowing the kids to just have a safe and fair game. Based on what I saw of the game before, though (where both coaches were carded for arguing calls and told to not say anything else), this is just how the season is going to go now.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

Almost everybody in our household holds a current ref cert, and continues to use it from time to time when needed when they're not busy doing a million other things. I certainly hope that experience described above is an anomaly rather than the norm. I was just noticing that for the past few weekends as a spectator, we've seen mainly decent referee crews (across both ECNL and lower leagues), and it's been refreshing to watch the games (win or lose), as well as a generally good experience for the players. It's never fun getting beat - but if it feels like you're playing 11v14, it makes for a long afternoon. That said, there was one crew a few weekends ago that was comically incompetent - having a very significant effect on the game. I don't think it was corruption, bias, related to these new rules, or anything other than the fact that they were unquestionably/verifiably terrible.

 

[sigmabody]

I would say from previous years, and tournaments to present, the number of "bad" referees we've had is under 5%, so certainly an anomaly in the past. However, of the games I've observed so far in the fall, it feels more like around 50%.

I'd speculate that in at least some cases, there were bad refs who would make bad calls, get yelled at, and pay more attention (ie: move to get into position better). Now I see more refs walking far away from the play, "flexing their power" on stoppages of play, and just carding anyone who says anything about their incompetence. It's probably the same people; it's just that the new one-sided policies have given them license to ignore complains about their poor performance on the field.

The alternative perspective, though, is that I just notice more of the incompetence which was always there, now that the bad refs are carding people for calling out their bad officiating, whereas before it didn't escalate as much. Parents certainly yelled about calls from the sidelines before, but after the game they usually shrugged it off (as "part of the game"). Now it's more "that terrible power-tripping ref ruined the game".

It's the new policy, though; it's just something people are going to need to get used to, while their kids are playing in SoCal League.

 

[TopesWin]

I would say from previous years, and tournaments to present, the number of "bad" referees we've had is under 5%, so certainly an anomaly in the past. However, of the games I've observed so far in the fall, it feels more like around 50%.

I'd speculate that in at least some cases, there were bad refs who would make bad calls, get yelled at, and pay more attention (ie: move to get into position better). Now I see more refs walking far away from the play, "flexing their power" on stoppages of play, and just carding anyone who says anything about their incompetence. It's probably the same people; it's just that the new one-sided policies have given them license to ignore complains about their poor performance on the field.

The alternative perspective, though, is that I just notice more of the incompetence which was always there, now that the bad refs are carding people for calling out their bad officiating, whereas before it didn't escalate as much. Parents certainly yelled about calls from the sidelines before, but after the game they usually shrugged it off (as "part of the game"). Now it's more "that terrible power-tripping ref ruined the game".

It's the new policy, though; it's just something people are going to need to get used to, while their kids are playing in SoCal League.

another dismal start to a season and you need a scapegoat

 

[SoccerSanDiego]

just an anecdote but I just went on the website to check out ref assignment for ayso opening weekend. Lots of slots open and my kid who is doing his community service hours as a ref got promoted to center (they are desperate for crs that know what they are doing). It will at least for the first games take me off the board too since I have to mentor then. This in a region that is still pretty robust participation wise and has an ayso united club they can force volunteer hours out of. Apparently the big hold up is a lot of background checks and mandatory trainings have yet to be completed. Also lost quite a bit of olders parents who moved onto club so they have to rinse repeat with the inexperienced.

Where are they desperate for refs? We can never get enough games. Dont know if AYSO is a different assignor vs the club leagues.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

They are frantic for refs here in the bay area. There are dozens and dozens of matches for each weekend that still aren't fully populated by every Friday night, and assignors are scrambling each weekend to make sure all the matches that need them have 3 refs, while those with less need (younger/lower) can get away with just 2, or worst case - 1. If my kids had the time and/or inclination, they could pick up 6-8 games a weekend every weekend without fail.

 

[Grace T.]

Where are they desperate for refs? We can never get enough games. Dont know if AYSO is a different assignor vs the club leagues.

Well certain leagues, like MLSN or UPSL, are less in short supply because some refs are trying to get points to move up the ranks. BUT it's very interesting to have you say that. If, for example, SoCal League were not having a supply problem that would be a very big deal. One of the reasons parents are told they have to deal with incompetent refs, or even refs who are just not physically fit enough to handle the game, or even a lack of ARs in youngers games, is because there aren't enough refs. IF THAT'S ALL BS, and everything they've said (and third parties like refsneedlove who recently complained about a brand new youth ref getting assigned to a U14 academy game, no doubt because of the physical fitness aspect) is contra, well then that would be a very big deal and the all stick no carrot approach would not be justified.

 

[Socal-Soccer-Dad]

you have to report the income on your taxes now

really? they issue you a 1099? who does?

don't teams just pay the refs cash at the fields?

 

[sigmabody]

really? they issue you a 1099? who does?

don't teams just pay the refs cash at the fields?

Technically you would have always had to report the income. I don't think there's any change there. Ref fees are explicitly only cash at the field, per league rules (nothing else is permissible). A cynical person might assume that's because at least some of the refs are... let's say, not able to easily populate a federal employment verification form. There are also many, anecdotally, who don't speak English at all, which is not an indicator of anything per se, but also might hamper job qualification (if that was ever considered), since they cannot effectively communicate with many players and coaches.

I'd assume that most of the ref income goes unreported, although I could certainly be wrong. It would be far from an isolated case where a job is traditionally done for cash, and reporting income would be more rare.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Soccer needs to get rid of the offsides rule. It causes more problems than it solves. It also creates animosity between spectators and refs.

What would happen if you got rid of offsides? Teams would score more goals. God forbid I dont have to watch players kick a ball for 90 minutes and have the game end in a tie.

From a ref perspective you could get away with 1 ref per game instead of 3. Leagues still might want line refs to watch for the ball going out but this isn't really nessasary. I'd rather refs miss a few going out to keep the pace of play happening.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

I agree that goal scoring would be likely to go way up. I'm not sure I agree that it would make the game more enjoyable to play or to watch. Making it a viable strategy to cherry pick and always leave an attacker 25 feet from the goal, keep kicking it to them and hoping things can bounce around enough that a goal is scored - sounds alot like playing at recess. A goal that is temporarily scored now where the player is obviously very offsides isn't fun to watch or perceived as "fair", it looks like cheating - because once you've beaten the defense there certainly should be a goal one-on-one unless the striker isn't very good at all.

I hate having to use a complicated computer system and multiple replays in the pro game to determine if someone is onside or offside by a few inches - it really does take much of the excitement & enjoyment out of the game. I hate that the accuracy of youth refs calling the rule is always going to be spotty. I'm not sure that the best answer is removing the rule entirely; I don't have a great suggestion/solution.

 

[Grace T.]

Soccer needs to get rid of the offsides rule. It causes more problems than it solves. It also creates animosity between spectators and refs.

What would happen if you got rid of offsides? Teams would score more goals. God forbid I dont have to watch players kick a ball for 90 minutes and have the game end in a tie.

From a ref perspective you could get away with 1 ref per game instead of 3. Leagues still might want line refs to watch for the ball going out but this isn't really nessasary. I'd rather refs miss a few going out to keep the pace of play happening.

Chestertons fence. The reason the rule was put in place was because teams would just park a player in front of the goal all games. They’d also always long ball it up.

Technically you would have always had to report the income. I don't think there's any change there. Ref fees are explicitly only cash at the field, per league rules (nothing else is permissible). A cynical person might assume that's because at least some of the refs are... let's say, not able to easily populate a federal employment verification form. There are also many, anecdotally, who don't speak English at all, which is not an indicator of anything per se, but also might hamper job qualification (if that was ever considered), since they cannot effectively communicate with many players and coaches.

I'd assume that most of the ref income goes unreported, although I could certainly be wrong. It would be far from an isolated case where a job is traditionally done for cash, and reporting income would be more rare.

Mlsn ecnl and upsl are (at least all supposed) to be on arbiterpay/refpay. The system automatically generates 1099s. Tournaments and Latino league Iiuc are still largely cash…which also may in part determine the quality of ref you get. I don’t know about SoCal league. They are all supposed to generate 1099s regardless after the threshold (there was an irs crackdown on this at the beginning of the Trump 45 admin). Ss numbers are not a big deal in SoCal. Those insurance offices on the valley floor…some of those deal in false papers…rumor has it from the press reporting that the bishop Montgomery football scandal the parents were trading on fraudulent bills with fraudulent addresses. One got caught because the bill was for February 31.

 

[watfly]

Soccer needs to get rid of the offsides rule. It causes more problems than it solves. It also creates animosity between spectators and refs.

What would happen if you got rid of offsides? Teams would score more goals. God forbid I dont have to watch players kick a ball for 90 minutes and have the game end in a tie.

From a ref perspective you could get away with 1 ref per game instead of 3. Leagues still might want line refs to watch for the ball going out but this isn't really nessasary. I'd rather refs miss a few going out to keep the pace of play happening.

You know that's not extreme as it sounds. Put in a 3 line rule and it might work. Yeah, a striker could just camp out in front of the goal and cherry pick, but the defense can adjust to make it less effective. Different game, but you don't typically see a player camping out in front of the goal in indoor soccer and futsal. Probably looks uglier at the younger ages than after skills are developed by players.

It will never happen, but not the worst idea.

 

[Grace T.]

Chestertons fence. The reason the rule was put in place was because teams would just park a player in front of the goal all games. They’d also always long ball it up.

Mlsn ecnl and upsl are (at least all supposed) to be on arbiterpay/refpay. The system automatically generates 1099s. Tournaments and Latino league Iiuc are still largely cash…which also may in part determine the quality of ref you get. I don’t know about SoCal league. They are all supposed to generate 1099s regardless after the threshold (there was an irs crackdown on this at the beginning of the Trump 45 admin). Ss numbers are not a big deal in SoCal. Those insurance offices on the valley floor…some of those deal in false papers…rumor has it from the press reporting that the bishop Montgomery football scandal the parents were trading on fraudulent bills with fraudulent addresses. One got caught because the bill was for February 31.

Wasn’t there an issue a while back btw with a major cup bringing in refs from Mexico and bypassing San Diego? I seem to remember there was.

You know that's not extreme as it sounds. Put in a 3 line rule and it might work. Yeah, a striker could just camp out in front of the goal and cherry pick, but the defense can adjust to make it less effective. Different game, but you don't typically see a player camping out in front of the goal in indoor soccer and futsal. Probably looks uglier at the younger ages than after skills are developed by players.

It will never happen, but not the worst idea.

Interestingly I found out from Ollie’s dad that the uk does not have offside until u10 but that you can’t park in the pk area (which effectively recreates out buildout line).

 

[watfly]

Chestertons fence. The reason the rule was put in place was because teams would just park a player in front of the goal all games. They’d also always long ball it up.

Mlsn ecnl and upsl are (at least all supposed) to be on arbiterpay/refpay. The system automatically generates 1099s. Tournaments and Latino league Iiuc are still largely cash…which also may in part determine the quality of ref you get. I don’t know about SoCal league. They are all supposed to generate 1099s regardless after the threshold (there was an irs crackdown on this at the beginning of the Trump 45 admin). Ss numbers are not a big deal in SoCal. Those insurance offices on the valley floor…some of those deal in false papers…rumor has it from the press reporting that the bishop Montgomery football scandal the parents were trading on fraudulent bills with fraudulent addresses. One got caught because the bill was for February 31.

Technically, a league would be required by the IRS to file 1099's.

 

[watfly]

Wasn’t there an issue a while back btw with a major cup bringing in refs from Mexico and bypassing San Diego? I seem to remember there was.

Interestingly I found out from Ollie’s dad that the uk does not have offside until u10 but that you can’t park in the pk area (which effectively recreates out buildout line).

7v7 at the Gothia Cup doesn't have offside.

 

[Carlsbad7]

You know that's not extreme as it sounds. Put in a 3 line rule and it might work. Yeah, a striker could just camp out in front of the goal and cherry pick, but the defense can adjust to make it less effective. Different game, but you don't typically see a player camping out in front of the goal in indoor soccer and futsal. Probably looks uglier at the younger ages than after skills are developed by players.

It will never happen, but not the worst idea.

If teams park a forward in front of the goal opponents will just put a defender on them. This will open up the midfield.

Longballs up to forwards will be 50/50s which arent any more effective than crosses.

Nothing really changes but the game would become more exciting to watch.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

You may be right in describing the potential outcomes - but it's also essentially laying out why the offside rule was put in place in the first place. It was determined that allowing teams to play like that was detrimental to the game. If the offside rule didn't fix the issue, it's not clear just removing it is the appropriate response either.

 

[Slobodan]

Soccer needs to get rid of the offsides rule. It causes more problems than it solves. It also creates animosity between spectators and refs.

What would happen if you got rid of offsides? Teams would score more goals. God forbid I dont have to watch players kick a ball for 90 minutes and have the game end in a tie.

From a ref perspective you could get away with 1 ref per game instead of 3. Leagues still might want line refs to watch for the ball going out but this isn't really nessasary. I'd rather refs miss a few going out to keep the pace of play happening.

Spoken like a true striker. Shame on you.

 

[Grace T.]

If teams park a forward in front of the goal opponents will just put a defender on them. This will open up the midfield.

Longballs up to forwards will be 50/50s which arent any more effective than crosses.

Nothing really changes but the game would become more exciting to watch.

As with corners it just resulted in shoving near the goal which is interesting for a corner but not if it’s going on all game (you’ve also just added a second ref necessary to police it). Iirc isn’t that also the origin of the line of scrimmage in football?

 

[Carlsbad7]

You may be right in describing the potential outcomes - but it's also essentially laying out why the offside rule was put in place in the first place. It was determined that allowing teams to play like that was detrimental to the game. If the offside rule didn't fix the issue, it's not clear just removing it is the appropriate response either.

Theres several variations of how offsides can be changed in Soccer. I picked the most extreme example so the less extreme versions seem more reasonable. ;-)

I also wanted to highlight how you could go from 3 to 1 ref per game if offsides didn't exist since that's what this thread is about.