Have just been sent my first observation report for 5-4 this season. Overall score 72.4 on a very very quiet zero caution one-sided game, which I think is OK?
In terms of individual sections, he's marked me 6.5 in 2 areas, which I have no problem with, think the comments are fair and will take on board. But there are a couple of comments in sections marked as 7 that I don't agree with - one point in section 1.2 where he thought I wanted to talk to a player but let myself be rushed (in reality, I just wanted to warn him against standing over the ball at FK's, which only needed a few words and which he took on board) and one "missed caution" for a FT in section 2.2, which is a challenge I saw clearly and just don't think needed a card. EDIT: He also has the player number wrong on this one, which I think might be why he wants a card as the player he's named was on a final PI warning, but the actual player who did the challenge was a fresh sub.
Is there any point/benefit trying to challenge those comments, or given it was such a quiet game, do I just take the 72.4 and count myself lucky he found enough in that game to give that score?
---
Also, as a side note (since it didn't make it into the report), he did criticise me post-match for standing the same side as my NAR on some corners and FK's. In previous 7-6 and 6-5 promotions, I've usually been told to mix up my position on these set pieces to give yourself a different angle each time - is that CAR-specific advice and with NAR's I should just routinely get to the opposite side, or is this just observer preference that I need to accept will vary?
In terms of individual sections, he's marked me 6.5 in 2 areas, which I have no problem with, think the comments are fair and will take on board. But there are a couple of comments in sections marked as 7 that I don't agree with - one point in section 1.2 where he thought I wanted to talk to a player but let myself be rushed (in reality, I just wanted to warn him against standing over the ball at FK's, which only needed a few words and which he took on board) and one "missed caution" for a FT in section 2.2, which is a challenge I saw clearly and just don't think needed a card. EDIT: He also has the player number wrong on this one, which I think might be why he wants a card as the player he's named was on a final PI warning, but the actual player who did the challenge was a fresh sub.
Is there any point/benefit trying to challenge those comments, or given it was such a quiet game, do I just take the 72.4 and count myself lucky he found enough in that game to give that score?
---
Also, as a side note (since it didn't make it into the report), he did criticise me post-match for standing the same side as my NAR on some corners and FK's. In previous 7-6 and 6-5 promotions, I've usually been told to mix up my position on these set pieces to give yourself a different angle each time - is that CAR-specific advice and with NAR's I should just routinely get to the opposite side, or is this just observer preference that I need to accept will vary?