2nd Assessment / Observation

[DavidObs]

It's frustrating but most observers will accept if you explain your justification on things like positioning (especially if you have another observer or coach having told you to do it!), plus it does tend to average out. Obviously every season a few people are unfairly caught out by a dodgy obs but it's relatively unavoidable.

Of course, as I'm frequently told, our observers are completely impartial regardless!

For me if you change the way you ref when an assessor is there but drastically change it when not observed that's dodgy ground. But i am autistic and see things in a certain way.

Best practice is to Referee the game how you would do normally, reflect upon any Observers advice and if not agreed then do not adopt, but if agreed, then to adopt in future performances. There are likely to be some occasions when an observer offers opposite advice to a different observer & on these occasions, to review/reflect & to do the same again - if not agreed by you, then to carry on doing what you do & if you do agree, then to do something different, be it the remedy the observer should have provided, or something you would feel more comfortable doing.

 

[Big Cat]

Best practice is to Referee the game how you would do normally, reflect upon any Observers advice and if not agreed then do not adopt, but if agreed, then to adopt in future performances. There are likely to be some occasions when an observer offers opposite advice to a different observer & on these occasions, to review/reflect & to do the same again - if not agreed by you, then to carry on doing what you do & if you do agree, then to do something different, be it the remedy the observer should have provided, or something you would feel more comfortable doing.

I play advantage more often in the absence of an observer because that's what everyone wants
I've never experienced negative consequences by employing advantage aggressively, but it has cost me a couple of 'major dev points'
Evidently, observers must be instructed that promising attacks do not originate from the defensive half at Step 5/6, but I (like the players) don't agree with being cautious with advantage from deep positions as my best games have always involved low foul count and a learned expectation of delayed whistle and/or advantage. I'm quite sure my Club Marks improved dramatically last season at the cost of major dev points

On occasions, combined with a high bar for upper body foul count, I've taken the low foul count thing to extremes. I find players learn to accept this approach much better that giving soft fouls or inconsistent recognition of borderline penal offences
It's not easy to achieve the above, but I'm at my best when games turn out this way. I'm aware of the dangers and have adapted on other occasions

Other than that, I'm near enough on board with all other aspects of my observation reports, good and bad

 

[DavidObs]

It's frustrating but most observers will accept if you explain your justification on things like positioning (especially if you have another observer or coach having told you to do it!), plus it does tend to average out. Obviously every season a few people are unfairly caught out by a dodgy obs but it's relatively unavoidable.

Of course, as I'm frequently told, our observers are completely impartial regardless!

For me if you change the way you ref when an assessor is there but drastically change it when not observed that's dodgy ground. But i am autistic and see things in a certain way.

Best practice is to Referee the game how you would do normally, reflect upon any Observers advice and if not agreed then do not adopt, but if agreed, then to adopt in future performances. There are likely to be some occasions when an observer offers opposite advice to a different observer & on these occasions, to review/reflect & to do the same again - if not agreed by you, then to carry on doing what you do & if you do agree, then to do something different, be it the remedy the observer should have provided, or something you would feel more comfortable doi

I play advantage more often in the absence of an observer because that's what everyone wants
I've never experienced negative consequences by employing advantage aggressively, but it has cost me a couple of 'major dev points'
Evidently, observers must be instructed that promising attacks do not originate from the defensive half at Step 5/6, but I (like the players) don't agree with being cautious with advantage from deep positions as my best games have always involved low foul count and a learned expectation of delayed whistle and/or advantage. I'm quite sure my Club Marks improved dramatically last season at the cost of major dev points

On occasions, combined with a high bar for upper body foul count, I've taken the low foul count thing to extremes. I find players learn to accept this approach much better that giving soft fouls or inconsistent recognition of borderline penal offences
It's not easy to achieve the above, but I'm at my best when games turn out this way. I'm aware of the dangers and have adapted on other occasions

Other than that, I'm near enough on board with all other aspects of my observation reports, good and bad

i do get it, but to bear in mind that under new promotion criteria (if that’s what you are looking for), club marks only account for 10%. It’s understanding what’s required in each game rather than what an Observer is looking for. For Advantage, in most situations it should be played following trivial penal offences from credible attacking areas of the FoP since otherwise it’s often the case to just award a free kick - but you should do whatever works for you, which you have described.

 

[Big Cat]

Best practice is to Referee the game how you would do normally, reflect upon any Observers advice and if not agreed then do not adopt, but if agreed, then to adopt in future performances. There are likely to be some occasions when an observer offers opposite advice to a different observer & on these occasions, to review/reflect & to do the same again - if not agreed by you, then to carry on doing what you do & if you do agree, then to do something different, be it the remedy the observer should have provided, or something you would feel more comfortable doi

i do get it, but to bear in mind that under new promotion criteria (if that’s what you are looking for), club marks only account for 10%. It’s understanding what’s required in each game rather than what an Observer is looking for. For Advantage, in most situations it should be played following trivial penal offences from credible attacking areas of the FoP since otherwise it’s often the case to just award a free kick - but you should do whatever works for you, which you have described.

My overriding point is that it's what observers are told to do that's the problem with advantage
As at all levels of refereeing, the actual standard of refereeing is a function of what we're all told to do to a large degree
For example, I'm strongly inclined to deduce that bad refereeing at the top levels is not down to the individuals themselves (referees), rather the instruction they work to

One thing to add.... it makes no sense to deny an attacking side a promising attack to stop the game for a reckless challenge
If the overall temperature of the game allows it, come back to the YC offence. To do so is a competency of awareness and divided attention.... or so I thought. This cost me a major dev last year as I did it twice in the same game

 

[RustyRef]

Can't see how the observer of whom you speak would be able to do that Rusty? Not with the current form anyway. There is no competency that requires an AR to "not flag" at the same time as the ref blows. Nor is it written in the LOTG. I'd suggest that there's more validity in giving a development mark or advice to an AR that doesn't - especially when it's glaringly obvious and is right in front of them. Unless I've misunderstood what you originally wrote(?)

Part of most pre-match briefs involves the referee telling their ARs to be brave and flag anything they're sure of (unless the ref is signalling or shouting otherwise - like with penalty decisions).
As an AR, if an observer marked me down for complying with the ref's more-than-reasonable pre-match instructions, I'd have more than a word to say about it.

I'm going back a few years and the forms were different then. I'm not saying he would mark down if you flagged simultaneously, but if you reacted to the referee blowing by flagging he could and would mark you down.

No chance of an appeal as you'd have to prove he was incorrect in law or the mark didn't match the text. Would be a bit of a push to say that criticism of your flagging technique was incorrect in law.

 

[RustyRef]

For me if you change the way you ref when an assessor is there but drastically change it when not observed that's dodgy ground. But i am autistic and see things in a certain way.

It is more around soft skills and technique than applying the laws that a switched on referee would use. Using another example of a different sadly passed observer, he hated seeing referees standing still, his view was that they should always be doing something. In a game without him observing and a keeper was fetching the ball out of the stand I'd move into position for the restart and wait there, but with him watching I'd find something to do, like chat to an assistant or a player.

It isn't cheating, it is maximising opportunities to get a better mark.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

My overriding point is that it's what observers are told to do that's the problem with advantage
As at all levels of refereeing, the actual standard of refereeing is a function of what we're all told to do to a large degree
For example, I'm strongly inclined to deduce that bad refereeing at the top levels is not down to the individuals themselves (referees), rather the instruction they work to

One thing to add.... it makes no sense to deny an attacking side a promising attack to stop the game for a reckless challenge
If the overall temperature of the game allows it, come back to the YC offence. To do so is a competency of awareness and divided attention.... or so I thought. This cost me a major dev last year as I did it twice in the same game

Observers for Steps 2 to 6 were invited recently to the referee briefings for 2024-5, and the FA Referee Managers attended all the early season referee meetings.
There has been no specific guidance for Observers about advantage.
By coincidence, I praised a referee I observed last week for playing the advantage on a breakaway counter-attack and returning at the next stoppage to caution for the reckless challenge.

 

[Big Cat]

Observers for Steps 2 to 6 were invited recently to the referee briefings for 2024-5, and the FA Referee Managers attended all the early season referee meetings.
There has been no specific guidance for Observers about advantage.
By coincidence, I praised a referee I observed last week for playing the advantage on a breakaway counter-attack and returning at the next stoppage to caution for the reckless challenge.

OK, I don't know what to make of your post and my experience then
I'd rather the explanation be down to instruction given to observers than pot luck
My observation in question, I thought one advantage was definitely a promising attack. The other I could have just stopped the game in hindsight, but coming back to the YC had no impact on MC.
Not to worry, better luck this year then..... It can never be an exact science

 

[DavidObs]

My overriding point is that it's what observers are told to do that's the problem with advantage
As at all levels of refereeing, the actual standard of refereeing is a function of what we're all told to do to a large degree
For example, I'm strongly inclined to deduce that bad refereeing at the top levels is not down to the individuals themselves (referees), rather the instruction they work to

One thing to add.... it makes no sense to deny an attacking side a promising attack to stop the game for a reckless challenge
If the overall temperature of the game allows it, come back to the YC offence. To do so is a competency of awareness and divided attention.... or so I thought. This cost me a major dev last year as I did it twice in the same game

I am not overly keen on Advantage following a reckless tackle especially if the player is motionless/potentially seriously injured since the priority is players welfare, but so long as this is not the case & there is as you say a ‘promising attack’ with a decent chance of scoring a goal then fair enough - the Laws of the Game/Guidance to officials relates to not playing Advantage in cases of serious foul play/sending off offences.

 

[Russell Jones]

My overriding point is that it's what observers are told to do that's the problem with advantage
As at all levels of refereeing, the actual standard of refereeing is a function of what we're all told to do to a large degree
For example, I'm strongly inclined to deduce that bad refereeing at the top levels is not down to the individuals themselves (referees), rather the instruction they work to

One thing to add.... it makes no sense to deny an attacking side a promising attack to stop the game for a reckless challenge
If the overall temperature of the game allows it, come back to the YC offence. To do so is a competency of awareness and divided attention.... or so I thought. This cost me a major dev last year as I did it twice in the same game

Playing devil's advocate ... Law is very clear on those occasions when we should play advantage ... "allows play to continue when an offence occurs and the non-offending team will benefit from the advantage". Benefit = a BETTER outcome than the alternative free kick.
Therefore, maybe observers who only want the obvious advantages played might be more in tune with the Laws than the players / coaches?!

 

[DavidObs]

Any system which values both club marks and observer marks will lend itself to people refereeing games slightly differently depending on whether an observer is there or not, and similarly if a referee knows that one observer is impressed by certain things (like maybe box to box sprints for example) it's human nature to try and exaggerate those things to give yourself a chance of earning that extra half point.

Perhaps true but not the way to do it and could catch them out in the end eg not concentrating on what’s in front of them and relying on what they believe the observer likes. If they get to L2 with every game covered by an Observer, then that’s a lot of homework!

 

[RefereeX]

Perhaps true but not the way to do it and could catch them out in the end eg not concentrating on what’s in front of them and relying on what they believe the observer likes. If they get to L2 with every game covered by an Observer, then that’s a lot of homework!

Agreed. Sometimes the best policy for me is just to referee what you see, human nature dictates otherwise though

 

[lincs22]

Perhaps true but not the way to do it and could catch them out in the end eg not concentrating on what’s in front of them and relying on what they believe the observer likes. If they get to L2 with every game covered by an Observer, then that’s a lot of homework!

As observers, we can normally spot when somebody is refereeing for us. They don't look natural in what they do and are always going to talk what they did during the match to impress us.

 

[DavidObs]

Yes, I can relate to that - which includes issuing formal misconduct action when not required and consequently, not rewarded for it (but the opposite)!

 

[Big Cat]

Quite honestly, I referee every game as if being observed. How else would I practice the competencies, all of which I'm aware of?
There is one caveat however. When being observed and faced with a borderline sanction, the risk of managing that situation exceeds the risk associated with issuing the sanction. In a game with no cautions, I've been rewarded for 'finding' an offence late in the game. Far side of the FOP from the observer, two players go up, one takes an accidental elbow. Hey presto, player a bit injured, yellow card and extra 0.5 on AOL. That sort of thing. I've never had an observer contest a caution or dismissal.
There's a reason why clubs and players don't like the Referee being observed. The sanction count goes up

I'm being observed tomorrow as it goes. One thing that concerns me, is this notion of a Sin Bin for two or more players crowding the Referee (me). Unless one of the players is out of order in terms of dissent, that low bar for C2 would cause a loss of respect
By the same token, I was on the line Step 3 Tues night and had a player right in my face on 88 mins. Ref did nowt cos there was no observer and he had club marks in mind. That was p1ss poor refereeing and completely against the mandate. I wadsn't bothered by it, but that's not the point

 

[DavidObs]

Quite honestly, I referee every game as if being observed. How else would I practice the competencies, all of which I'm aware of?
There is one caveat however. When being observed and faced with a borderline sanction, the risk of managing that situation exceeds the risk associated with issuing the sanction. In a game with no cautions, I've been rewarded for 'finding' an offence late in the game. Far side of the FOP from the observer, two players go up, one takes an accidental elbow. Hey presto, player a bit injured, yellow card and extra 0.5 on AOL. That sort of thing. I've never had an observer contest a caution or dismissal.
There's a reason why clubs and players don't like the Referee being observed. The sanction count goes up

That’s my point with last para - there shouldn’t be any difference if the Referee does what he/she normally does. As an Observer I do not necessarily want to see a high caution/send off count - I want to see an appropriate caution/send off count appropriate to the game/offences. It’s good you’ve never had a caution or dismissal contested - but it does happen, especially from L2 upwards & especially because of available video footage.

 

[DavidObs]

Quite honestly, I referee every game as if being observed. How else would I practice the competencies, all of which I'm aware of?
There is one caveat however. When being observed and faced with a borderline sanction, the risk of managing that situation exceeds the risk associated with issuing the sanction. In a game with no cautions, I've been rewarded for 'finding' an offence late in the game. Far side of the FOP from the observer, two players go up, one takes an accidental elbow. Hey presto, player a bit injured, yellow card and extra 0.5 on AOL. That sort of thing. I've never had an observer contest a caution or dismissal.
There's a reason why clubs and players don't like the Referee being observed. The sanction count goes up

I'm being observed tomorrow as it goes. One thing that concerns me, is this notion of a Sin Bin for two or more players crowding the Referee (me). Unless one of the players is out of order in terms of dissent, that low bar for C2 would cause a loss of respect
By the same token, I was on the line Step 3 Tues night and had a player right in my face on 88 mins. Ref did nowt cos there was no observer and he had club marks in mind. That was p1ss poor refereeing and completely against the mandate. I wadsn't bothered by it, but that's not the point

Club marks account for only 10% of promotion criteria, but in any event, he should be doing his job & supporting you etc.

 

[JamesL]

By the same token, I was on the line Step 3 Tues night and had a player right in my face on 88 mins. Ref did nowt cos there was no observer and he had club marks in mind.

I had 5 dissent cautions and an extraordinary report for surrounding on my non-observed game on Tuesday evening... Obviously I am perturbed by such a high level of dissent but have identified some potential root causes and aim to remedy.

 

[DavidObs]

I had 5 dissent cautions and an extraordinary report for surrounding on my non-observed game on Tuesday evening... Obviously I am perturbed by such a high level of dissent but have identified some potential root causes and aim to remedy.

Wow, and no wonder you would be perturbed especially so early in the season when all clubs have been informed of their expectations as to behaviour toward officials etc. However, you should be congratulated for following Law with the cautions & protocol with extraordinary report.

 

[FirsFox40]

I had 5 dissent cautions and an extraordinary report for surrounding on my non-observed game on Tuesday evening... Obviously I am perturbed by such a high level of dissent but have identified some potential root causes and aim to remedy.

You'd think they'd have realised after the second.

Out of curiosity, what was the split between the teams?