Referee Observer

[Edward]

Hi all,

I decided to abandon my match at HT today due to deterioration of part of the pitch which I felt posed a danger to player safety. As I was considering my decision the referee observer, in full view of players and management, called me to the side of the pitch and tried to persuade me to play the match. This of course led to huge protests from players upon my decision, who complained that the observer felt the pitch was fine and that I should've taken his advice.

My question is, was it appropriate for the observer to take such a public opinion? I felt a little let down that he had questioned me publicly and ultimately left me in a situation where I was facing a lot of dissent and pressure. Also, he left the ground without so much as speaking to me inside my dressing room, which I was disappointed with as I was left in a situation where I was on my own and in quite a vulnerable situation as the players anger had gotten to a point where things may very well have boiled over.

 

[zarathustra]

Sounds a bit off to me.

The decision about the suitability of the pitch is the referees and theirs alone.

I might expect an observer to ask me to explain why I felt it would be unsafe to continue the match, but I wouldn't expect them to try and persuade me to change my mind publicly.

 

[SM]

Sounds dodgy. For me he should have waited and spoken to you in the dressing room privately rather than the public word.

That said, I'm not an observer.

 

[Padfoot]

Without knowing more about what the conditions were that made you feel it was appropriate to abandon......taking into consideration about the conditions at the start of the match......it's difficult to know what the observer's motivations were?

Did you discuss the conditions with the observer prior to KO?

 

[Edward]

@Padfoot

We didn't speak about the condition of the pitch before KO. It was a fairly wet day, but before KO the pitch seemed to be holding up okay, and I was more than happy to play. The pitch deteriorated very quickly, and after about 10 minutes players were starting to complain about it cutting up.

When I came out for the 2nd half a part of the pitch that was particularly bad was shown to me by a player. It was an area a couple of square feet big, that was full of mud and water, and was very slippy - there was absolutely zero grip. I dropped the ball on it and there was no bounce whatsoever. In fact, the area that was really bad was getting bigger as more players began to walk around it whilst I was considering what decision to make, so I could see that things were only going to get worse as the match went on.

Considering the quick deterioration of the pitch in the first half, and the particularly bad area becoming larger due to people standing on it, I decided to abandon, based on the fear that a player running at full speed may well lose his footing, and either injure himself or unwittingly slide into another player.

 

[Paul March]

I was under the impression observers were there to do just that- observe and provide feedback. That sort of interference serves no purpose other than to undermine you and your decision. The sad thing being any mark you get will be severely hampered along with the implications for promotion that this will no doubt bring. I feel for you

 

[GraemeS]

I was under the impression observers were there to do just that- observe and provide feedback. That sort of interference serves no purpose other than to undermine you and your decision. The sad thing being any mark you get will be severely hampered along with the implications for promotion that this will no doubt bring. I feel for you

Although having said that, prepare to appeal any report this Observer does put in based on what you've said here....

 

[NERef]

Were the teams wanting to start the game? If so and if you weren't sure the pitch was going to hold out, I'd suggest saying to the teams and observer beforehand that you will start the game and if it holds out great. However, the moment any players start complaining, or you aren't happy and can see it getting worse, you will abandon the game.
That sets your stall out from the start and all involved know what to expect.
When the players started to complain in the first half, that would then have been an ideal time to stop the game and abandon.
Full credit to you for going with your decision and not giving in to the pressures around you!

 

[Padfoot]

Were the teams wanting to start the game? If so and if you weren't sure the pitch was going to hold out, I'd suggest saying to the teams and observer beforehand that you will start the game and if it holds out great. However, the moment any players start complaining, or you aren't happy and can see it getting worse, you will abandon the game.
That sets your stall out from the start and all involved know what to expect.
When the players started to complain in the first half, that would then have been an ideal time to stop the game and abandon.
Full credit to you for going with your decision and not giving in to the pressures around you!

If there are any doubts about being able to finish the game....don't start it.

 

[Padfoot]

@Padfoot

We didn't speak about the condition of the pitch before KO. It was a fairly wet day, but before KO the pitch seemed to be holding up okay, and I was more than happy to play. The pitch deteriorated very quickly, and after about 10 minutes players were starting to complain about it cutting up.

When I came out for the 2nd half a part of the pitch that was particularly bad was shown to me by a player. It was an area a couple of square feet big, that was full of mud and water, and was very slippy - there was absolutely zero grip. I dropped the ball on it and there was no bounce whatsoever. In fact, the area that was really bad was getting bigger as more players began to walk around it whilst I was considering what decision to make, so I could see that things were only going to get worse as the match went on.

Considering the quick deterioration of the pitch in the first half, and the particularly bad area becoming larger due to people standing on it, I decided to abandon, based on the fear that a player running at full speed may well lose his footing, and either injure himself or unwittingly slide into another player.

Obviously without actually being there, it's very difficult to make a realistic judgment on what happened......however....some general thought.....

If the pitch was bad after 10 minutes of play, I wonder whether it was really holding up okay......

Depending on where the 2 ft square area of boggy pitch was....if it's in a corner or right out on a touchline....makes a difference in decision making.

If I'm honest, it sounds to me like the pitch was never really playable and a chance was taken in an effort to a game on, which backfired. This may be a motivating factor behind the observers efforts to get the game finished, he knows the referee has probably started a game that he shouldn't have.....
However, the observer shouldn't be trying to influence your decision......if it were me, I'd let the referee make their decision and depending on what I thought about it, I would mention it on debrief and the report.
The caveat to that is that if, by starting the game, I felt the referee was putting player safety seriously at risk, I would mention that to the referee but the final decision would still be theirs to make.

A point to bear in mind is that many of us observers are of a more mature vintage, and subsequently, have played and officated on pitches that used to resemble to Somme. Pitches that in today's game would be called off in a heartbeat, so maybe that was colouring this particular observers thinking.

 

[DB]

I had exactly the same last week. Senior pitch had taken quite a bit of rain the night before. I turned up in the morning to inspect and deemed it playable. Went and reffed another game (pitch cut up but was fine) then went back to the first ground in this women's match. Pitch was fine and I applied the same logic as I did for the game before.

Half hour in, the pitch started getting bad. It had taken a battering in the centre circle and wasn't in the best shape. Shortly after, an injury was suffered to the knee of the away striker after a collision with the goalkeeper. Whilst she was receiving treatment, I went over to both managers and took them aside for a chat. I stated my concerns about the condition of the pitch and made them aware than any challenges which were using the pitch conditions as an advantage (sliding in from 10 yards, using the pitch for its reduction in friction) would be penalised. They were fine. The away team had travelled two and a half hours for the game, I made it perfectly clear that the players safety was my main concern and it is obviously theirs too. I told them that if at any point they felt that the game was becoming dangerous due to the conditions, to let me know and I will abandon. The away manager said "let's just finish it ref, it's a long way to travel. I'll tell my players to attack from the wings".

Although at times I was thinking "crap, this is getting bad", both teams took the option to use the wings instead of the centre. In the end, the pitch held up just about enough to finish the game.

We get these games from time to time where the pitch holds up fine then just crumbles. I knew this pitch quite well and have never seen it cut up like it did that day. I received an email applauding me for "using common sense" and giving the team managers the options. "The safety of our players is our main concern and it was clear to see that it was your priority also".

On any other day, they pitch would have held up fine, but on the flip side, I could have abandoned after half hour.

Regardless, I'd have loved playing in those conditions. I enjoy sliding about; mud's good for the complexion isn't it?

 

[Mintyref]

I had exactly the same last week. Senior pitch had taken quite a bit of rain the night before. I turned up in the morning to inspect and deemed it playable. Went and reffed another game (pitch cut up but was fine) then went back to the first ground in this women's match. Pitch was fine and I applied the same logic as I did for the game before.

Half hour in, the pitch started getting bad. It had taken a battering in the centre circle and wasn't in the best shape. Shortly after, an injury was suffered to the knee of the away striker after a collision with the goalkeeper. Whilst she was receiving treatment, I went over to both managers and took them aside for a chat. I stated my concerns about the condition of the pitch and made them aware than any challenges which were using the pitch conditions as an advantage (sliding in from 10 yards, using the pitch for its reduction in friction) would be penalised. They were fine. The away team had travelled two and a half hours for the game, I made it perfectly clear that the players safety was my main concern and it is obviously theirs too. I told them that if at any point they felt that the game was becoming dangerous due to the conditions, to let me know and I will abandon. The away manager said "let's just finish it ref, it's a long way to travel. I'll tell my players to attack from the wings".

Although at times I was thinking "crap, this is getting bad", both teams took the option to use the wings instead of the centre. In the end, the pitch held up just about enough to finish the game.

We get these games from time to time where the pitch holds up fine then just crumbles. I knew this pitch quite well and have never seen it cut up like it did that day. I received an email applauding me for "using common sense" and giving the team managers the options. "The safety of our players is our main concern and it was clear to see that it was your priority also".

On any other day, they pitch would have held up fine, but on the flip side, I could have abandoned after half hour.

Regardless, I'd have loved playing in those conditions. I enjoy sliding about; mud's good for the complexion isn't it?

Whilst I wouldn't question your judgement in this case, but it has me thinking about the next game and the condition you have now left the pitch in.
Should this too, be part of our considerations?

 

[Sheffields Finest]

I don't wholly follow the logic that a muddy pitch is an unsafe pitch.. I often feel that rock hard sun baked pitches in August and September are far more dangerous and we don't ever give them a second thought!.. Icy pitches etc are different but i don't buy into this modern argument about player safety being compromised is just nanny state anti lawyer stuff...

 

[DB]

Whilst I wouldn't question your judgement in this case, but it has me thinking about the next game and the condition you have now left the pitch in.
Should this too, be part of our considerations?

Nope. It crossed my mind but there was a high-profile incident here last season where a pitch was deemed playable by the referee but the home side refused to play because they needed the pitch playable for their next game. That shouldn't matter.

The game is a league game and must be played if conditions allow. The conditions allowed, although they did tinker on the edge. A game was payed on it yesterday so I assume that the pitch recovered well, as I expected it would.

I don't wholly follow the logic that a muddy pitch is an unsafe pitch.. I often feel that rock hard sun baked pitches in August and September are far more dangerous and we don't ever give them a second thought!.. Icy pitches etc are different but i don't buy into this modern argument about player safety being compromised is just nanny state anti lawyer stuff...

My thinking aswell. A sun baked August pitch is surely as dodgy as a ice-covered January pitch? Both horrible to play on. For me, the safety concerns start at the players diving in from 5-10 yards to make a challenge. It wouldn't happen in August on a hard pitch because they'd slide about a yard before stopping. Wet, muddy pitch, the majority of body control is lost so it becomes dangerous.

As a player, I'd have enjoyed it. The girls did aswell...

 

[lincs22]

I was under the impression observers were there to do just that- observe and provide feedback. That sort of interference serves no purpose other than to undermine you and your decision. The sad thing being any mark you get will be severely hampered along with the implications for promotion that this will no doubt bring. I feel for you

As the match was only 45 minutes in length, the observation report may not be valid. There is an understanding that the should be at least 45 minutes in length, to produce a valid mark.

 

[DanCohen17]

If there are any doubts about being able to finish the game....don't start it.

Not sure I wholeheartedly agree here actually. Doubts about finishing shouldn't automatically mean a postponement. This is where experience comes in and that old adage of referee's opinion is huge. We've all, I'm sure, started games we weren't 100% sure would finish and come out surprised at the end (equally, I'm sure the reverse is true too).
Yes, if it's dangerous it's off. But if it's 50/5 or better, playing (and praying!) is often a good idea!

 

[Padfoot]

Not sure I wholeheartedly agree here actually. Doubts about finishing shouldn't automatically mean a postponement. This is where experience comes in and that old adage of referee's opinion is huge. We've all, I'm sure, started games we weren't 100% sure would finish and come out surprised at the end (equally, I'm sure the reverse is true too).
Yes, if it's dangerous it's off. But if it's 50/5 or better, playing (and praying!) is often a good idea!

By starting a game you are not sure you will be able to finish, you are inviting massive pressure from managers, players etc to continue the game if and when the pitch does become dangerous..........whilst some ref's may be able to stand their ground, others will end up being pressurised into continuing......not to mention how that pressure can easily cross the line into intimidation.

Really want to expose young and inexperienced refs to that?

Experience should tell whether you can complete the game safely......not whether you can take a 50/50 gamble, praying that the pitch holds up and then looking a prize **** when it doesn't and you have to abandon anyway.

I'll reiterate.....if you aren't sure you can complete the game, don't start it.

 

[DanCohen17]

By starting a game you are not sure you will be able to finish, you are inviting massive pressure from managers, players etc to continue the game if and when the pitch does become dangerous..........whilst some ref's may be able to stand their ground, others will end up being pressurised into continuing......not to mention how that pressure can easily cross the line into intimidation.

Really want to expose young and inexperienced refs to that?

Experience should tell whether you can complete the game safely......not whether you can take a 50/50 gamble, praying that the pitch holds up and then looking a prize **** when it doesn't and you have to abandon anyway.

I'll reiterate.....if you aren't sure you can complete the game, don't start it.

"Really want to expose young and inexperienced refs to that?"
No. Which is why I said "this is where experience comes in".
A good & experienced referee will be able to communicate to players/managers/chairpersons both before & during the game, what the situation is. In this discussion, that is a 50/50 (or better) pitch but we all want to try & play. If the referee feels conditions deteriorate to a point of player danger, the game is immediately abandoned, which again would be communicated.

I'll reiterate, I don't wholeheartedly agree with you.

 

[Andy A]

I was on a line yesterday. I had been in the middle on the same pitch a few weeks earlier. The pitch was actually in a much worse condition than it was those few weeks ago and we struggled towards the end of that game

I explained this to the ref and advised that I wouldn't start the game if I was him. The ref inspected and said he wanted to give it a go. The other assistant didn't think it should be played either. At this point I said to ref if you want to try it I will back you up obviously but I don't think you should. He calls both managers in and says he will give it a go. At this point it is still pouring with rain.

Some players agree and some are questioning the decision.

Game starts and 15 minutes in he comes over to me and says I think i should abandon this as it is becoming too dangerous. So he blows his whistle and the match ends.

Cue, endless complaints of you have wasted our time ref. He got more stick for starting it than he would have if he didn't.

So the moral of this story is: Don't start the game if there is any doubt, and there was plenty of doubt before the kick off in this circumstance.

 

[NERef]

By starting a game you are not sure you will be able to finish, you are inviting massive pressure from managers, players etc to continue the game if and when the pitch does become dangerous..........whilst some ref's may be able to stand their ground, others will end up being pressurised into continuing......not to mention how that pressure can easily cross the line into intimidation.

Really want to expose young and inexperienced refs to that?

Experience should tell whether you can complete the game safely......not whether you can take a 50/50 gamble, praying that the pitch holds up and then looking a prize **** when it doesn't and you have to abandon anyway.

I'll reiterate.....if you aren't sure you can complete the game, don't start it.

Would the young, inexperienced refs not also be ones who give in to pressure to start the game?

Surely that's the same pressure as finishing a game which shouldn't have started?