repetitive navigational links
L-Soft  -  Home of  the  LISTSERV  mailing list  manager LISTSERV(R) 14.3
Skip repetitive navigational links
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (March 2009, week 4)Back to main SOCREF-L pageJoin or leave SOCREF-LReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional fontLog in
Date:         Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:32:15 -0400
Reply-To:     Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Ralph  Bigio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: What if the assessor gets it wrong?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

It wasn’t a case of AR2 doing her own thing or insisting rather than assisting. It also wasn’t a non-standard instruction. I think it was just nerves and/or inexperience. Here’s what actually happened. When discussing end-line calls, I included “if the ball crosses the end line on your side of the goal but you’re not sure who touched it last, put your flag straight up and I will make the call”. I gave a similar instruction for touch-line calls. AR2 was only in her third season, so I added that there should be a flag *every* time the ball goes out of play, either direction or straight up, according on circumstances. Before the game, AR2 had helped me with the player check-ins, and we chatted informally about the game, her experience, and her ambitions. She was 17, in her third season as a ref, had plans to advance, and was working several games in that weekend’s tournament. She was relaxed and chatty, so I think she was comfortable working with me. Around the 20th minute, players were challenging for the ball in AR2’s corner. I was at the penalty arc. I saw the ball cross the end line, so I looked for her flag but it stayed down. Players hesitated, then resumed playing, and a few seconds later it crossed the touch line in her corner. This time she signalled TI. I went over to her and quietly asked if the ball had crossed the end line. She said it had, but she wasn’t sure who had touched it last. I quietly reminded her to put her flag straight up in such cases, then I signalled CK and resumed my position. There were no further incidents, and she followed that instruction afterward. The rest of her game was fine - good eye contact, good positioning, and good signals. Under Teamwork, the assessor’s written report said “You did have a pre-game instruction with one of your AR, unfortunately the other had a game previous your match and had to rush, so no time for a long briefing. You place one of your AR in a delicate position when you went to see her, maybe if it was touched in your pre-game instruction by just asking her if the ball is out of play with a flag straight up.“. I look for positives in this comment as some of you suggested. I don’t overuse the delay-restart-to-consult-AR thing so I wouldn’t change my game-time response. In this case it was necessary in order to get the correct restart and to make sure AR2 understood what I wanted her to do. Even though I’m conscientious about my pre-game, tune it to my audience, and observe the ARs’ responses while I'm talking, I’m sure I could improve it. But I got more information about the quality of my pre-game from AR2’s non-call than I did from the assessor’s comment. Again I should note that his comments in other areas *were* helpful, and that he correctly noted a couple of problems & bad habits that I was able to correct in the next day’s game. I got good value from this assessment and noted that fact in my comments to the assessor and to the Referee Development Committee. I don’t want to leave the impression that I am complaining about the whole assessment. It was only this Teamwork paragraph that irked me. And one more minor detail. ARs were not part of the post game discussion - they both had other game assignments. BTW - You mentioned that the US scoring system is changing. It has been changing here in Canada too, although I don’t know if the change is nation-wide yet. Each referee is now graded according to the standard *for that level*. A score of 70 means you met the standard for *your* level, regardless of the level. Above 70 means you exceeded the standard, and below 70 means you did not meet it. Ralph On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:56:20 -0700, Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >I think the normal process during the debrief, if the AR has done >something outside the normal parameters, is for the assessor to ask the >AR "What were your pre-game instructions from the referee regarding X?" >If the pre-game instruction was, for example, don't call anything in the >penalty area, then the assessor turns to the referee to ask "Why did you >give that instruction?" and it goes from there. If no calls in the >penalty area wasn't the CR's instruction, then the AR should be asked >what he/she saw and we can go from there. If they didn't see what >happened, what was their position, where were their eyes looking? If >they had a good reason to be directing their attention elsewhere, then, >fine, there really isn't anything more to say about what was missed. >"Open your eyes" is not valuable feedback to an official. > >Patrick Duffy > >-----Original Message----- >From: Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees >[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of doug smith >Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 2:35 PM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: What if the assessor gets it wrong? > > > >I guess I see a distinction between an AR challenging (gently) an >invalid instruction in the pre-game, and ignoring an instruction after >the match starts. I would much rather take an extra minute before we >start to get us all on the same page; if an AR doesn't (or can't) >understand me, or the referee insists on doing things invalidly, I have >the option of sending her away, or walking away (if I'm the AR). I >don't have the option of proceeding when we are at cross purposes. > > > >In that vein, I have sensed an undercurrent, during these discussions of >a difficult assessment, of trying to affix or deflect blame. If one or >more of the referees has screwed up, the key issue should be why, not >who. If the pre-game was inadequate, that is the area to fix; if it is >referee-AR communication, then that is; if an AR has ignored the >referee's instruction, I hope I am a good enough assessor to discern >that without the referee pointing fingers. > > > >I would much rather have the referees engendering trust in (and >trustworthiness with) each other than scoring brownie points off each >other in the assessment. But that could be just me. > > > >Doug Smith > >USSF 06 USSF Instructor USSF Assessor > >ex-NISOA NF Oregon > > >> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:54:33 -0700 >> From: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: What if the assessor gets it wrong? >> To: [log in to unmask] >> >> There are some instructions from a CR that I would not follow. >> 1. "Don't call any fouls in the penalty area." Of course the usual >admonitions of giving the CR a chance depending on his position and >point of view as well as eye contact would apply. I have had a national >instructor/assessor tell that this is simply an incorrect instruction >and the CR would fail an assessment for giving out such an instruction. >> 2. "Don't mark down misconduct or goals." In these cases I mentally >note who and what happened and would write them down at an appropriate >stoppage. This is based on personal experience where my CR didn't >realize he gave out two yellows and didn't give the red until I got his >attention to tell him what happened. >> >> ...larry >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ron Leedy >> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 12:06 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: What if the assessor gets it wrong? >> >> Neil Montgomery wrote --> >> >> > - he didn't like your instructions at all and just went his own way >> >> How does an AR leaving the world of "assisting" and enters the world >of "insisting" become the CR fault in his pre-game? I don't always like >the instruction I get from my CR but I always follow them. Or try my >best. If there is an instruction that doesn't follow the GTP than I ask >about it but he is the boss during the game. I will assist and support >him as a teammate. Only when we are away from the players do I comment >or become quizzical about why he made a call or refused to apply the >LOTG. >> >> Ron Leedy >> >> >> __________ NOD32 3955 (20090323) Information __________ >> >> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. >> > >_________________________________________________________________ >Get quick access to your favorite MSN content with Internet Explorer 8. > >7MSN55C0701A

Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SOCREF-L page

LISTSERV.URI.EDU CataList email list search Powered by LISTSERV email list manager