Well I know one who finished 9th in the observer table in his pool and didn't get automatic OR invited to the selection day.
Can you guess which demographic/s he fits into?
Level 4 Observations/Merit Tables
- Thread starter NE32
- Start date
Can you guess which demographic/s he fits into?
9th is not high enough unless the pool has well over 100 refs
I was 6th last year and knew I had no chance
134 in our pool matey.
Yeh, well I had a female ref promoted ahead of me last year despite being lower in the Observer Merit Table. That said, her Club Marks may have been significantly better than mine but I don't know that bit of info. On that basis, I was OK with that particular selection
There was also some literature somewhere about being considered with less than 5 observations if you have achieved the average number of observations for the group you're in I believe, so appears I would have come under that part of it.
So essentially, the FA have overruled the statistics to fit their agendas? I wouldn't be happy if I finished above said candidates for them then to be promoted based on being lower on observation marks.
RefGod
Active Member
What needs to be challenged ? What suggests the FA are being unfair ?
I'll answer my own question
Merit Tables (including the lesser spotted Consolidated Merit Tables) are not made Public
Obviously this results in a lack of transparency
However, I'm not stupid. Publishing the Merit Tables causes problems of it's own because the final positions do not reflect some relevant considerations like availability, dependability, communication, administration, misconduct and previous year's statistics. In the absence of this supplementary information, selection could appear to involve favouritism
So complete transparency is a problem either way
My concern is that as far as Woke Organisations go, the FA is right up there. By 'Woke Organisation', I'm referring to image and the perceived marketing importance of being on the right side of social injustice. They have a genuine problem that football seriously lacks diversity and I can understand they're desperate to redress that. Inevitably, such pressures will lead to positive discrimination and we can only cynically estimate how much of a role that plays in promotion selection
Others may disagree given the need to redress the diversity crisis, but I can't abide any form of discrimination, positive or negative. I'd be amazed if the former is not a factor in redressing a history of the latter
Some of the posts on here would suggest things are not transparent.
I think those posts speak for themselves (on here).
Yeh, but they ultimately use the consolidated merit table for selection (% of observer + lesser % of club marks)
RefGod
Active Member
You wish to challenge those selected for an assessment day ? You wish to challenge the criteria set out for those attending the assessment day ?
I fail to see why the FA would elect to promote those not best suitable for promotion above 4. It would only set up the referee and the organisation.
We had this few years ago with the old marking system.. someone I know finished A,A in the standings for obs and clubs
A female finished A,D
The female got promoted
She was quite open at the time where she finished which was quite surprising
It happens unfortunately,
Some of your posts?
And mine. Hopefully, I've been balanced with my postings however
Not mine - the posts of others are pretty clear. Shall i number them?
There is no such thing as a consolidated merit table any more as far as I'm aware.
Observer marks are the be all and end all for positioning, however you can be excluded (from promotion or reclassification) if you're at the opposite end of the club marks table.
The 'weighted merit table' which is what has been used for this bunch of selections, is purely observer mark based, but is weighted based on when these marks were received.
I don't understand your problem. Things are as transparent as they could possibly be.
A few years ago, we never got to see a specific position in a merit table, never saw our club marks and just got banding updates 4 times a year (?), then the FA select those who will be promoted and, as stated in one of these posts you're concerned about, a female was promoted above a male who appeared to have a better overall banding.
Now, we see a live merit table for clubs and observers at any given point. In fact we see 4 tables. Annual marks clubs, annual marks observers, seasonal marks clubs and seasonal marks observers.
This system of having an assessment day was clearly laid out, along with how people would be chosen, at the start of the season.
I was transferred onto a game recently. I replaced a female official who had one of those random Level 4 Coaches on the game. The Coach was promptly taken off the game and stuck on a game with a young lad in the Middle!
So be it! The kid might fit the FA's bill and might be a star of the future. I'm not really bothered. But discrimination of any form gets a red card from me and we live in a world plagued by corporate/capitalist wokism that has everything to do with marketing and image and nothing to do with righting the world's wrongs
So be it! The kid might fit the FA's bill and might be a star of the future. I'm not really bothered. But discrimination of any form gets a red card from me and we live in a world plagued by corporate/capitalist wokism that has everything to do with marketing and image and nothing to do with righting the world's wrongs
Last edited:
I'm a big fan of equality. Just like Big Cat.
Judging by at least 7 or 8 posts on here things are a little murky.
I'm not even involved in "assessment day" but i'm entitled to make a judgement on others feelings / thoughts on this.