2nd Assessment / Observation

[OldNavyRef]

These are hard. So opinion based and everyone seems to contradict someone else.

I've had one report back, it was a 71.32 (not sure how that holds up in the grand scheme of things, I am happy it is over 71 for 5 to 4) and I am awaiting another.

I just find the post game conversation, so awkward.

When they say: so what KMIs have you got. Then they sort of give an opinion on things and you two just sort of randomly decide on things.

I wouldn't mind if they just went for facts, but when they were like, "you went careless, while I felt it was a bit closer to reckless".

Just irks me. I got spoken to about my public rebuke being quiet. It was pouring down and the observer was the far side of the pitch. Players 100% all heard me, and I spoke clearly for them if that makes sense. This one annoyed me, as all observers say, ref like you normally would. But the lesson I have from this is, in future public rebukes etc, makes sure you include the observer.

Also my set piece routine. I have watched a lot of content and spoken to a lot of referees and have had a coaching report mentioning on how they think best to do it. Observer had a preference that you just stand in the box. Saying my running into the box might not allow me to get a full picture.

That sort of stuff. All opinion based. I can imagine, that this gets a harder pill to swallow the more you move up.

 

[es1]

Tbf I think the higher you go, the better easier it is because the observers are better. Higher levels can also use video to confirm accuracy of decisions.

Get to know your observers (or ask around), that way you know what they like and dislike and you can adapt your game accordingly.

 

[Viridis1886]

know what they like and dislike and you can adapt your game accordingly.

Surely this is the ridiculous side of the observation though?

I've no interest in going 5-4 for family/balance reasons, but this bit always struck me as bonkers when you adjust your style to match the observer.

 

[David G]

These are hard. So opinion based and everyone seems to contradict someone else.

I've had one report back, it was a 71.32 (not sure how that holds up in the grand scheme of things, I am happy it is over 71 for 5 to 4) and I am awaiting another.

I just find the post game conversation, so awkward.

When they say: so what KMIs have you got. Then they sort of give an opinion on things and you two just sort of randomly decide on things.

I wouldn't mind if they just went for facts, but when they were like, "you went careless, while I felt it was a bit closer to reckless".

Just irks me. I got spoken to about my public rebuke being quiet. It was pouring down and the observer was the far side of the pitch. Players 100% all heard me, and I spoke clearly for them if that makes sense. This one annoyed me, as all observers say, ref like you normally would. But the lesson I have from this is, in future public rebukes etc, makes sure you include the observer.

Also my set piece routine. I have watched a lot of content and spoken to a lot of referees and have had a coaching report mentioning on how they think best to do it. Observer had a preference that you just stand in the box. Saying my running into the box might not allow me to get a full picture.

That sort of stuff. All opinion based. I can imagine, that this gets a harder pill to swallow the more you move up.

Like you Observers are human and have their own opinions on things - observing is not and will never be an exact science.

These are hard. So opinion based and everyone seems to contradict someone else.

I've had one report back, it was a 71.32 (not sure how that holds up in the grand scheme of things, I am happy it is over 71 for 5 to 4) and I am awaiting another.

I just find the post game conversation, so awkward.

When they say: so what KMIs have you got. Then they sort of give an opinion on things and you two just sort of randomly decide on things.

I wouldn't mind if they just went for facts, but when they were like, "you went careless, while I felt it was a bit closer to reckless".

Just irks me. I got spoken to about my public rebuke being quiet. It was pouring down and the observer was the far side of the pitch. Players 100% all heard me, and I spoke clearly for them if that makes sense. This one annoyed me, as all observers say, ref like you normally would. But the lesson I have from this is, in future public rebukes etc, makes sure you include the observer.

Also my set piece routine. I have watched a lot of content and spoken to a lot of referees and have had a coaching report mentioning on how they think best to do it. Observer had a preference that you just stand in the box. Saying my running into the box might not allow me to get a full picture.

That sort of stuff. All opinion based. I can imagine, that this gets a harder pill to swallow the more you move up.

All Observers are different as are all Referees. An Observer would have been accredited following training, so should know what to be looking for whilst allowing the Referees to be themselves. At the end of the day, although a mark is provided for each section of the report below Level 2, for a Referee to only consider any advice offered, but if they (the Referee) disagree with it, then not to adopt, because for future games it will not work if the Referee is doing something they don’t want to do. Also for Referees to take into account that everything is relative, so that Observer is likely to be consistent with all Referees as too will other Observers with all the Referees they see.

 

[es1]

Surely this is the ridiculous side of the observation though?

I've no interest in going 5-4 for family/balance reasons, but this bit always struck me as bonkers when you adjust your style to match the observer.

Of course but that's the game/system

 

[Kes]

I'm unsure where this notion of "adjusting your game to meet the individual needs of the Observer" comes from?
Sure, adjust or up your game to ensure you meet at the least the minimum requirements of the performance criterion listed on the form (which presumably every referee going for promotion should be conversant with) but that should be a given.
In short, it's got naff all to do with the individual observing you.

 

[David G]

Referees should be themselves - it’s their game and the Observers view is just that - a view, albeit it an important one in terms of marks/merit table etc.

 

[OldNavyRef]

The score was good in the end. It had a lot of tips I absolutely agreed with. But just somethings I would like to keep doing differently.

Overall I think the system we have where a more qualified referee comes out and watches you is probably the best you can get at the lower levels.

It is what it is.

 

[Kes]

Referees should be themselves - it’s their game and the Observers view is just that - a view, albeit it an important one in terms of marks/merit table etc.

I agree, but what I said above still stands.

You'll know yourself that with certain competencies such as using the stepped approach, eye contact and communication with ARs, dealing with the TA if required, can all require the ref to overtly and demonstrably ensure that the Observer sees it in order to tick the box (7) or gain a 7.5 or above.
That's what I meant by the above.
It involves making doubly sure you're SEEN to be meeting the criteria.
"Being yourself" as you put it may sometimes mean that your skillset isn't obvious to some observers.

 

[David G]

There are quite a few current Referees at local county level who double up as Observers and to give them credit many are very good who just want to do their best for the Referee they are observing eg positive & encouraging comments.

 

[OldNavyRef]

I agree, but what I said above still stands.

You'll know yourself that with certain competencies such as using the stepped approach, eye contact and communication with ARs, dealing with the TA if required, can all require the ref to overtly and demonstrably ensure that the Observer sees it in order to tick the box (7) or gain a 7.5 or above.
That's what I meant by the above.
It involves making doubly sure you're SEEN to be meeting the criteria.
"Being yourself" as you put it may sometimes mean that your skillset is obvious to some observers.

Sort of like a driving test. Hahaa the exaggerated mirror check will now be my exaggerated advantage shout.

Not going to lie. I had a game yesterday, an advantage came up, I did double arms and proper screamed advantage. Team that scored and everyone was aware of the advantage.

So was a pretty good observation tip.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

The score was good in the end. It had a lot of tips I absolutely agreed with. But just somethings I would like to keep doing differently.

Overall I think the system we have where a more qualified referee comes out and watches you is probably the best you can get at the lower levels.

It is what it is.

From this season, you may get a more senior referee as the Observer but more likely to be an Observer who covers Level 3 and Level 4 referees weekly.
As @Kes has said, trying to change to suit this week's Observer does not make sense. Observers report on what is in front of them, which varies every match.

 

[David G]

I agree, but what I said above still stands.

You'll know yourself that with certain competencies such as using the stepped approach, eye contact and communication with ARs, dealing with the TA if required, can all require the ref to overtly and demonstrably ensure that the Observer sees it in order to tick the box (7) or gain a 7.5 or above.
That's what I meant by the above.
It involves making doubly sure you're SEEN to be meeting the criteria.
"Being yourself" as you put it may sometimes mean that your skillset isn't obvious to some observers.

I get your point, but it’s the same with driving tests - everyone knows that drivers look in their rear view mirror, but the instructor needs to know so that’s why they like to see the turning of the head. The reason I mention this is not because to overtly & demonstrate for the Observer, but mainly for the players & all in the ground eg if an attacker goes down in the penalty area & the Referee provides zero communication - does the attacker think that he has missed it etc, whereas if the Referee shook his head, shouted no or provided a cut of the grass it is clear to everyone that he has seen the incident but doesn’t consider a foul sufficient for a penalty has been made.

 

[David G]

Sort of like a driving test. Hahaa the exaggerated mirror check will now be my exaggerated advantage shout.

Not going to lie. I had a game yesterday, an advantage came up, I did double arms and proper screamed advantage. Team that scored and everyone was aware of the advantage.

So was a pretty good observation tip.

Very good. I even provided the driving test analogy in a comment after yours, but I hadn’t seen your comment at the time.

 

[Kes]

I get your point, but it’s the same with driving tests - everyone knows that drivers look in their rear view mirror, but the instructor needs to know so that’s why they like to see the turning of the head. The reason I mention this is not because to overtly & demonstrate for the Observer, but mainly for the players & all in the ground eg if an attacker goes down in the penalty area & the Referee provides zero communication - does the attacker think that he has missed it etc, whereas if the Referee shook his head, shouted no or provided a cut of the grass it is clear to everyone that he has seen the incident but doesn’t consider a foul sufficient for a penalty has been made.

Which is exactly what I'm driving () at Dave.

 

[Kes]

Sort of like a driving test. Hahaa the exaggerated mirror check will now be my exaggerated advantage shout.

Not going to lie. I had a game yesterday, an advantage came up, I did double arms and proper screamed advantage. Team that scored and everyone was aware of the advantage.

So was a pretty good observation tip.

Spot on.
Making it obvious helps to avoid the oblivious ...

 

[Kes]

There are quite a few current Referees at local county level who double up as Observers and to give them credit many are very good who just want to do their best for the Referee they are observing eg positive & encouraging comments.

They may even be on this thread Dave.

 

[David G]

Spot on.
Making it obvious helps to avoid the oblivious ...

Exactly right and sorry to go on (and on and on…!!), but let’s say in a different situation there was a penal offence and the Referee waits to see if the Advantage accrues but without providing any arm/supporting voice signal and the advantage doesn’t accrue, whereupon he then stops the game & brings play back to the place of the initial incident. Well technically shouldn’t happen cos can’t be brought back if no Advantage has been signalled and in any event, not only likely to get a bit of rebuke for what the opposition may think is a long time after the initial incident which they thought had got away with, but the importance of the signals is to demonstrate to all in the ground what the Referee is attempting to achieve.

 

[Kes]

Exactly right and sorry to go on (and on and on…!!), but let’s say in a different situation there was a penal offence and the Referee waits to see if the Advantage accrues but without providing any arm/supporting voice signal and the advantage doesn’t accrue, whereupon he then stops the game & brings play back to the place of the initial incident. Well technically shouldn’t happen cos can’t be brought back if no Advantage has been signalled and in any event, not only likely to get a bit of rebuke for what the opposition may think is a long time after the initial incident which they thought had got away with, but the importance of the signals is to demonstrate to all in the ground what the Referee is attempting to achieve.

Sorry David I don't agree. (You should have quit while you were ahead )

After a penal offence (except in the PA) it's a good skill to delay blowing for a second or two to see if the advantage accrues. Only when a definite advantage materialises should you then signal for it. Once you've signalled it, it's then very difficult to bring it back and penalise for the original offence without their opponents complaining you've given two bites of the cherry.
Delaying your whistle, not signalling, and then deciding to awark the FK is infinitely better refereeing and far easier to sell.

 

[RustyRef]

I'm unsure where this notion of "adjusting your game to meet the individual needs of the Observer" comes from?
Sure, adjust or up your game to ensure you meet at the least the minimum requirements of the performance criterion listed on the form (which presumably every referee going for promotion should be conversant with) but that should be a given.
In short, it's got naff all to do with the individual observing you.

Like it or not some observers do have their quirks. One former step 1 observer, who sadly is no longer with us, had a thing about assistants not supporting free kicks with flags, so if on a game with him observing you'd keep your flag down if the referee is giving it, even if right under your nose.

And anyone who has refereed on the Spartan South Midlands will know of one observer who demands that AR1 takes out a spare set of flags, so you are going to do it even though it is totally unnecessary.