ref accountablity .

[MyDaughtersAKeeper]

If you want to improve the level of referee performance I would suggest the following:

EVERY competitive player is required to obtain a grade 8 or 9 referee license (depending on the age of the player) during their 1st year of competitive play. The player is then required to referee a minimum of 4 games (2 as a CR and 2 as an AR). The referees would not be paid for these games; this is part of the "cost" of being a competitive player. The referees would be utilized for local rec or AYSO games. This would increase the players' knowledge of the rules. This would allow for the players to gain an understudying of how & why the games are called the way they are, and this would hopefully encourage parents to be more patient with the referees since their kid is going to have to referee some games. Over time this should increase the pool of eligible referees (start them young) and it would increase the overall game knowledge for everyone hauling heir kids out to games.

My daughter and her teammate volunteered to referee some local AYSO games this weekend. I can tell you:
1 - they made mistakes
2- they got better each 1/4 that they refereed (AYSO has 1/4s at this age)
3 - they have a better understanding of the rules today than they did on Friday
4 - they have more appreciation for the work of referees
5 - they learned how to deal with a coach who didn't like how they called the game
6 - it was a good experience, they want to do it again, and they were learning to be more assertive with parents/coaches that didn't like the calls.

 

[MWN]

@watfly, unless a parent has read the IFAB (Law of the Game) they have not complied with the Code of Conduct. There is only 1 source for the official laws. The beauty here is if they had actually read the Laws of the Game they would understand that a fundamental Law of the Game is that you don't challenge the Referee's decision:

Law 5

1. The authority of the referee Each match is controlled by a referee who has full authority to enforce the Laws of the Game in connection with the match.​

2. Decisions of the referee 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 referee may not change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or on the advice of another match official if play has restarted or the referee has signalled the end of the first or second half (including extra time) and left the field of play or terminated the match. If a referee is incapacitated, play may continue under the supervision of the other match officials until the ball is next out of play.​

The answer to every single question or challenge to a referee's call or non-call during a game that get's spectators all riled up is: "Clearly it was in the Referee's opinion that the facts observed by the Referee did/did not warrant a different call."

This doesn't mean that a different referee, in a different position, or on a different day or the same referee in a different game would make the same call. One of the things the referee's are asked to do is to make "no call" when an careless foul is trifling.

 

[socalkdg]

Here is a good example of not reading the rules. Your basic question is answered in IFAB Law 12 (http://www.theifab.com/laws/fouls-and-misconduct/chapters/direct-free-kick)

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.

If I could get the parents to do just 1 thing it would be go to the source material. Read the IFAB rule and the notes. 99% of your questions are going to be answered there. Then accept the fact that the Referee has to make a determination of the degree a Law was broken. We ask:

1. Was the foul careless? (i.e. lack of attention or consideration)
2. If careless, was the foul Trifling? (i.e. not serious and calling it would disrupt the flow of the game, spectator enjoyment, etc.)
3. Was the foul reckless? (i.e. disregard to the danger to, or consequences for and opponent)
4. Was the foul done with excessive force? (i.e. exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent)?

Its all in the Laws of the Game.

But it isn't 2+2=4

The angle of a persons view greatly affects how each person sees these interactions. Plus one referee's reckless isn't going to be the same as another referees reckless. We parents have to remember this when in one game something happens that is called, and in another game it isn't. Especially #2, but I think due to #2, the intensity ramps up and we start getting a bunch of #3 and #4.

Was the foul reckless? (i.e. disregard to the danger to, or consequences for and opponent)
Isn't my daughter diving in front of a player with the ball when playing keeper a bit reckless as there is always danger and a consequence for one or the other, sometimes both.

I say increase the pay to refs, get more refs, get more refs to stay and get more experience, thus becoming better.

 

[timbuck]

If I was told that my kid could play club soccer for free (or a massive discount), I would move my AYSO intermediate badge to Grade 8 and referee quite often. As it stands, I like volunteering and giving back to the AYSO region in our area.

 

[MWN]

But it isn't 2+2=4

The angle of a persons view greatly affects how each person sees these interactions. Plus one referee's reckless isn't going to be the same as another referees reckless. We parents have to remember this when in one game something happens that is called, and in another game it isn't. Especially #2, but I think due to #2, the intensity ramps up and we start getting a bunch of #3 and #4.

Was the foul reckless? (i.e. disregard to the danger to, or consequences for and opponent)
Isn't my daughter diving in front of a player with the ball when playing keeper a bit reckless as there is always danger and a consequence for one or the other, sometimes both.

I say increase the pay to refs, get more refs, get more refs to stay and get more experience, thus becoming better.

The Referee can't call what they didn't see. Being blocked by players frequently occurs and smart players use the Referee's position to their advantage if they are going to play dirty.

What is "careless" versus "reckless" is different when we have U19 Flight 1/Gold v. U13 Flight 3/Bronze v. U9s. We evaluate the skill of the players, the temperature/tenor of the game, etc. We know that the 1st half is going to probably go smoothly, but the 2nd half is going to get a bit chippy when a team is down by 1 or 2. Are these boys? Girls? All these factor into a perception of careless v. reckless.

When it comes to keepers, the Referee and players have a hightened duty to protect the safety of keepers who typically use their hands on the ground. Because keepers can use their hands the other players must not be careless or reckless.

If we were to state the Law in a positive tone, then the "Don't play careless, reckless or with excessive force" is better understood as follows:

Every player owes a duty of care to every other players to play in a careful manner so as not to expose the other players to unreasonable risk of injury.
​

Virtually all of the discord comes down to 50/50 balls. Both players have an opportunity to get to the ball with fast, aggressive play. The Referee will be faced with the task of deciding if the players actions were careless and/or reckless and/or excessive. Getting to the ball first doesn't matter if the act of getting there was followed by a "reckless" use of the body that disregarded the safety of the opponent.

 

[charlie murphy]

Increasing the pay grade is not going to increase the ref pool. I really doubt that in southern California there is a person who counts only on ref fees and refs as a career choice. Now if $ was based on the grade of the ref then you might create incentive for refs to invest in themselves and participate in association trainings and continued education. Furthermore, the association could aid in performance through merit by holding back a small portion of each game's ref fees and using that pooled money to pay for championship games as a bonus/ differentials. There would be an incentive during the season for each ref to do the very best they could each and every game. The players have to perform to a certain level to compete in these games, why not the refs. It would be additional work . The association would then have to perform on field evaluations on a regular basis. Evaluations are not always negative and a positive evaluation would be a very positive affirmation of a refs hard work in light of the negatives coming from the side line. just throwing this out there maybe someone with the ability will read this and think it is one hell of a good idea.

 

[GunninGopher]

I hear time and time again from Refs here that some rule is in place that contradicts published rules. They state that they heard it at a meeting or read it somewhere, but when asked to provide evidence its crickets. There seems to be a whole black box of unwritten rules, which so be it, but don't put the expectation on the parents to know every rule when that's what Ref's are paid for.

For that you should blame the tournament that your team probably paid over $1000 to play in. Every tournament had different short sided rules of competition. I don't think it is fair to pin that one on the referees. Every training session, monthly meeting and other development activity I've had in my brief stint as a competitive referee has cited the written laws of the game and the written interpretations, with the exception of last season when the heading was being sorted out. I did hear contradictory hear-say from some circuit and league directors. Heading was a done deal until the 2018 Summer tournaments got things all stirred up and they made a mess of the build out line, punts and kick offs because they kept wanting to stuff short sided games onto fields that were too small.

My pregame with 9v9 teams last weekend emphasized that they should forget what they were told about punts, when goals score and other things. We are playing regular soccer (with the exception of heading in U11) the same as the older kids. The coaches and players were very happy to hear it. I have yet to referee a 7v7 with BOL, but that is fairly straight forward, and covered in writing, too.

 

[Mystery Train]

On the three 90 minutes games I ran 5.8, 6.9 and 7.2 miles

I hope you took an ice bath and knocked back a few cold ones. I can't run that far in one day even if I'm being chased by dogs. #respect

 

[baldref]

I refereed 5 games Saturday (2 9v9 games with two centers and 3 U16-19 games with one center) and 4 games Sunday (U17-19 games with 2 centers). Exhausted would be an understatement for how I felt Sunday evening and I am still rehydrating today since I have three adult games tomorrow evening. On the three 90 minutes games I ran 5.8, 6.9 and 7.2 miles. What people forget about is the mental fatigue. Just going out and running 6-7 miles around San Diego Bay is easy and relaxing for me. The difficult part is running that distance while processing a soccer game. As a CR I have to process how the players are playing, formation, foul or no foul, advantage, style of play offense and defense, paying attention to what the players are saying, individual player styles and skill level, subs, injuries, etc. I also have to process what my ARs are telling me with both verbal and nonverbal cues. As an AR, I may only run 3-4 miles in a 90 minute game but I am still mentally processing almost as much as the CR. What makes it worse for me is I get a lazy referee on my crew. The rest of the crew has to pick up his slack. I would rather have an inexperienced ref than a lazy ref. At least with the inexperienced AR I can instruct them on what I want and don't want them to help me with. Most new referee's do not realize actually how far they will run in a game or consider the mental aspect of being a referee. Now, throw into the equation the coach and parents yelling at you and questioning your decisions. Most youth referee's are not mentally prepared to process a fast paced soccer game and catch crap from the sidelines. I am surprised that more youth referee's don't drop out after their first year.

If those parents and some coaches continue to belittle and question the referees, especially the new ones, there will continue to be a referee shortage

Are there lazy or bad refs? Yes. Most experienced refs know the lazy ones, slow ones, don't give a shit ones, ones that are just in it for the cash, and the flat out bad ones. Do I enjoy working with them, usually not but I still try to provide them with some mentorship.

i was over 20 miles saturday, and 14 yesterday. i had three great high level boys whistles. i'd rather not do 34 miles in two days, but who can do it better than i can? haha!

 

[Grace T.]

Every player owes a duty of care to every other players to play in a careful manner so as not to expose the other players to unreasonable risk of injury.
​

.

Reads like a negligence standard in tort law. And the case law is filled with court cases and conflicting precedent that varies from context to context over what it means to have "a duty to care" and what is an "unreasonable" act or omission. And in the legal system we have [well...had] books filled with precedent, judges and juries to decide all this over a course of years.

Soccer places the ref (with varying levels of competence and ability) as judge and jury to make the call within a course of seconds. So given the ambiguity in the rules, and the very wide discretion given to soccer refs, I'm not really surprised by the controversy. It's an issue with the Laws themselves.

Also, if I understand correctly, no where in the Laws does it plainly say the keeper should be given some more leeway by refs either for their safety, because they play with their hands, or because the challenge takes place in the box. Those are all interpretations that have developed based on the notes and custom and practice. So how's a football parent whose DD is playing soccer for the first time supposed to know that?

 

[Grace T.]

. I have yet to referee a 7v7 with BOL, but that is fairly straight forward, and covered in writing, too.

It's not. We've had issues. Our ref told us this weekend the keepers couldn't kick their goalkicks or kick the long ball...they had to roll their goalkicks to someone on the fair side of the buildout line. I'm pretty sure that wrong (unless there's some other doc out there other than the CalSouth rules I circulated).

There's also an ambiguity in the rules over whether the keeper must wait for the opposing team to have the ref set the build out line...talking with some 2008 parents from other teams last night and a coach from another team at a party, some refs are forcing the keepers to wait and others aren't. A literal reading of the rules seem to imply the keeper must wait (which hands a big advantage back to the other side). The flip to that is if a keeper releases early if the other side can challenge even if they are over the line.

The other big issue is the new offside rule...the rule itself is straight forward but it's causing all sorts of problems. Maybe it's just early roll out jitters but so far it's a cluster-f.

 

[Mystery Train]

It's not. ... Maybe it's just early roll out jitters but so far it's a cluster-f.

Yeah the BOL rule requires a whole other thread.

 

[baldref]

It's not. We've had issues. Our ref told us this weekend the keepers couldn't kick their goalkicks or kick the long ball...they had to roll their goalkicks to someone on the fair side of the buildout line. I'm pretty sure that wrong (unless there's some other doc out there other than the CalSouth rules I circulated).

There's also an ambiguity in the rules over whether the keeper must wait for the opposing team to have the ref set the build out line...talking with some 2008 parents from other teams last night and a coach from another team at a party, some refs are forcing the keepers to wait and others aren't. A literal reading of the rules seem to imply the keeper must wait (which hands a big advantage back to the other side). The flip to that is if a keeper releases early if the other side can challenge even if they are over the line.

The other big issue is the new offside rule...the rule itself is straight forward but it's causing all sorts of problems. Maybe it's just early roll out jitters but so far it's a cluster-f.

I had some games using the build out line and it wasn't a cluster F. no ambiguity that i know of. you're over thinking counselor. it's basically 8 year olds kicking a ball around.

 

[Grace T.]

I had some games using the build out line and it wasn't a cluster F. no ambiguity that i know of. you're over thinking counselor. it's basically 8 year olds kicking a ball around.

Ahh but good sir, you are one of the "good refs" So may I ask what you did? Did you let the goalkeepers kick the ball or did you force them to roll it.

Did the goalkeeper have the option to distribute before the line was set? If so how did you treat the players that were out of position forward to the line?

What did you think of the offside rule and how did the team react?

ps you may think it's just kids kicking the ball, but my GK son has been told now to do this 5 different ways...good lesson as a GK yes, but they're 9 and it may not be important to you, but it is to him.

 

[GunninGopher]

It's not. We've had issues. Our ref told us this weekend the keepers couldn't kick their goalkicks or kick the long ball...they had to roll their goalkicks to someone on the fair side of the buildout line. I'm pretty sure that wrong (unless there's some other doc out there other than the CalSouth rules I circulated).

There's also an ambiguity in the rules over whether the keeper must wait for the opposing team to have the ref set the build out line...talking with some 2008 parents from other teams last night and a coach from another team at a party, some refs are forcing the keepers to wait and others aren't. A literal reading of the rules seem to imply the keeper must wait (which hands a big advantage back to the other side). The flip to that is if a keeper releases early if the other side can challenge even if they are over the line.

The other big issue is the new offside rule...the rule itself is straight forward but it's causing all sorts of problems. Maybe it's just early roll out jitters but so far it's a cluster-f.

Below are links to Cal-South's documentation, which I received by e-mail directly from Cal-South. Not sure if it is because I'm a team manager or referee:

7v7 Environment

9v9 Environment

I read them again and now I'm going to back off and say that maybe it isn't so straight forward.

The 7v7 document says "Once the opposing team is behind the build out line, the goalkeeper can pass, throw or roll the ball into play". This seems to infer that if the opponent hasn't cleared the line, that the keeper must wait, which is contradictory to what I recall being told in meetings. I will refer to my notes, but I'm pretty sure we were told that the keeper can play the ball whenever he/she wants to and if that happens, the players can challenge before getting to the line. The '6 seconds' doesn't start until the opponents have passed the line, however, if the keeper keeps the ball in hand.

The documentation above also doesn't say that the keeper is allowed to place the ball on the ground and kick or dribble it, which I understand is allowed. It isn't explicitly disallowed in the referenced guidelines. Again, I need to refer to my notes, but I can see where the guidelines above do leave some questions unanswered.

I've had a long day. Maybe someone can set me straight.

 

[baldref]

Ahh but good sir, you are one of the "good refs" So may I ask what you did? Did you let the goalkeepers kick the ball or did you force them to roll it.

Did the goalkeeper have the option to distribute before the line was set? If so how did you treat the players that were out of position forward to the line?

What did you think of the offside rule and how did the team react?

ps you may think it's just kids kicking the ball, but my GK son has been told now to do this 5 different ways...good lesson as a GK yes, but they're 9 and it may not be important to you, but it is to him.

goal keepers can either throw it out, or set it on the ground and kick it. no punting or drop kicking allowed.
goal keeper can release the ball as soon as he/she wants, although most coaches were urging them to wait.
before the game, i talked to the players and coaches and gave a 30 second shpeel about what they needed to do. coaches took exception because coaches already know everything, but i did it any.
offside after the build out line is fine. once again, these are 8/9 year olds or younger? who cares what the rules are. just let them go for it.
I love these games. i have to shush some parents but it aint so bad.

 

[Grace T.]

goal keepers can either throw it out, or set it on the ground and kick it. no punting or drop kicking allowed.
goal keeper can release the ball as soon as he/she wants, although most coaches were urging them to wait.
before the game, i talked to the players and coaches and gave a 30 second shpeel about what they needed to do. coaches took exception because coaches already know everything, but i did it any.
offside after the build out line is fine. once again, these are 8/9 year olds or younger? who cares what the rules are. just let them go for it.
I love these games. i have to shush some parents but it aint so bad.

I said you were one of the "good refs". That's consistent with what I got in my meeting, but not with what actually happened in either game I saw on Saturday (or from talking to a few parents on other teams). It's also not what the rules actually say as Gunnin Gopher pointed out, and it seems to imply that the keeper must wait.

Allowing the keeper to take the option of using the line or not would preserve the possibility of a long ball which would discourage opponents from lining up on the build up like a line of scrimmage. The issue with the offside rule is that coaches are adapting to have their defenders take the long ball to a striker or wing in a formerly offside position...that's going to force teams to defend back towards the line rather than to press up (think AYSO before offsides are enforced...those teams generally have a defender sit back with the keeper). Smart teams will then react by using the 8/6 to make use of that open space, but it's a risky move since it requires a long ball from the big legged defender to an 8/6. And rather than teach kids to pass back (as we used to do) it seems to penalize them for passing backwards, particularly to the keeper.

 

[Mystery Train]

offside after the build out line is fine

Not sure what you mean there. Could you elaborate?

 

[baldref]

Not sure what you mean there. Could you elaborate?

Offside doesn't happen until past the build out line going forward. And that's fine?
I'm just if the opinion that it doesn't matter that much if ussf mucks up a bunch of silly rules. Just let the kids know what to do and let them do it. They're little kids and they're having fun. Parents and coaches care about this crap, the kids don't. They just play with what they're given. Even if some dufus ref goofs it, so what? If the coaches and parents don't scream and whine the kids don't know and don't care

 

[watfly]

Maybe bad choice of words, let me rephrase..."Parents aren't required to implement the LOTG". Like I said, which you obviously missed, I think its important for me to know the laws of the game. But whether or not a parent knows the LOTG, has no impact on the Ref's ability to do his job. A parent abusing a ref is wrong whether the parent knows the LOTG or not. Whether the parent is right or wrong about a call is meaningless. An incompetent ref is no better than an abusive parent. Yes, it would be nice if more parents knew every single rule and intepretation of the game, circuit and tournament (which they aren't paid to do) but if you think that will change a chirping parent to a quiet chair sitter then I have some waterfront property in Houston for you (too soon?). Here's the thing, the problem parents are the ones who think they know the rules and are in full compliance with item 1 of Code of Conduct.

GraceT brings up an excellent point regarding accessibility of the rules of the game. How are parents expected to "Learn and respect the rules of soccer and the rules of the CYSA-South" when many of the rules aren't made available to parents. I hear time and time again from Refs here that some rule is in place that contradicts published rules. They state that they heard it at a meeting or read it somewhere, but when asked to provide evidence its crickets. There seems to be a whole black box of unwritten rules, which so be it, but don't put the expectation on the parents to know every rule when that's what Ref's are paid for.

I see the common comment from Refs about how it would be so much better without parents and make parents out to be the enemy. Those refs seem to forget their commitment to ensure "spectator enjoyment" of the game.[/QUOT

@watfly, unless a parent has read the IFAB (Law of the Game) they have not complied with the Code of Conduct. There is only 1 source for the official laws. The beauty here is if they had actually read the Laws of the Game they would understand that a fundamental Law of the Game is that you don't challenge the Referee's decision:

Law 5

1. The authority of the referee Each match is controlled by a referee who has full authority to enforce the Laws of the Game in connection with the match.​

2. Decisions of the referee 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 referee may not change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or on the advice of another match official if play has restarted or the referee has signalled the end of the first or second half (including extra time) and left the field of play or terminated the match. If a referee is incapacitated, play may continue under the supervision of the other match officials until the ball is next out of play.​

The answer to every single question or challenge to a referee's call or non-call during a game that get's spectators all riled up is: "Clearly it was in the Referee's opinion that the facts observed by the Referee did/did not warrant a different call."

This doesn't mean that a different referee, in a different position, or on a different day or the same referee in a different game would make the same call. One of the things the referee's are asked to do is to make "no call" when an careless foul is trifling.

I understand completely and agree that calls are 100% at the discretion of the ref, I have zero problem with that and I don't need a refresher course. I will say it again, what I have a problem with is refs that don't show up to a game mentality and physically prepared to fulfill their game responsibilities. Being mentality prepared includes having read and understood the rules as they apply to a particular league or tournament.

Your implication that parents' knowledge of the LOTG impacts a ref's ability to perform his duties is ludicrous and deflects blame. It is also absurd to claim that there is some sort of equivalency between a parent's responsibility and the ref's responsibility to know the LOTG. If the issue is that you are offended by someone that is questioning you with less knowledge than you than that is an entirely different matter.

As I said before, the problem parents think they know the LOTG. What's your suggestion? Should CalSouth make all parents pass a LOTG test? Should parents not be allowed to sit on the sideline if they haven't passed the LOTG exam? What would you recommend for a passing score? Can you call my wife and let her know that she, along with 1,000's of other soccer parents, are in violation of the Cal South Code of Conduct since she hasn't read IFAB. Also let her know that its "vile" if she doesn't think her sideline friends should have to know IFAB. Please return and report how that goes.

I'm not on a ref witch hunt here (although maybe I'm a little sensitive after yesterday's ref debacle)... let the record reflect that my first response to this thread was against the public shaming of refs and for letting coaches handle the matter with the league and association.