May not have been a promising attack, though . . . if it wasn't, the caution would be right.The missed caution on the advantage was for a reckless challenge right? If he tries to do you for a promising attack then he'd be incorrect in law.![]()
May not have been a promising attack, though . . . if it wasn't, the caution would be right.The missed caution on the advantage was for a reckless challenge right? If he tries to do you for a promising attack then he'd be incorrect in law.![]()
I got marks 7-to-6 & 6-to-5This. ^^^
There are no "marks" for 7-6 and 6-5. The marks-out-of-70 thing is for Level 4 and above or for a referee being observed on a 5-4 promotion game.
For Level 6-5 you need to satisfy the Observer that you've shown competency in the 6 "performance competencies" listed on their Observer form.



Yes that's what I said....May not have been a promising attack, though . . . if it wasn't, the caution would be right.
Well, it doesn't surprise me that there's geographical inconsistency. Assuming you're in England and you got 'standard expected' for all six competencies, that ought to equate to 70 and ought to equate to a 'pass'. If any of those assumptions are not correct, then who knows?
That said, I don't think there is a well above/below standard at 6-to-5. There only above and below (and expected)
Let me ask you this ...Be interested to know what the observers are looking for...
I maybe make the mistake of reffing games the same way, regardless. Maybe I don't care enough, lol...but then again, I'm almost 48!!!
7->6 and 6->5 I've had expected, and am reasonable happy with that, tbh.
I can only say how my reports were completed...That isn't right, the grades are the same at 7 to 6 as 6 to 5, the forms are identical except for the three extra competencies. Five possible grades from well below standard to well above standard. The number that some CFAs might give out as well might relate to the fact that a referee can go from 6 to 5 in a season. Obviously 6 to 5 uses grades and 5 to 4 a mark out of 100, so I think some CFAs associate a mark to a grade so that they can also derive a mark out of 100. Although personally I wouldn't match standard expected to 70, as in doing so you are saying that someone who is the standard expected for a L6 referee is good enough to referee at L4.
We didn't touch on what it was for, I wasn't thinking about that to be honest, the way he spoke about it when he mentioned it made me think it was a standard reckless caution.The missed caution on the advantage was for a reckless challenge right? If he tries to do you for a promising attack then he'd be incorrect in law.![]()
I've done 19 already. Two observations so far at expected standard. Sheffield and Hallamshire.
One game to go (already allocated two on Saturday and a week on Saturday). One observation needed - 4 months to get it done in.
How's about you?
Wait, I think something is wrong. In my case I had to do 20 middles and had to be observed 3 times from the 1 August to the 15 December and then they promoted me to the Level 6 (mid-season promotion), now I am operating as L6, and need to do 20 more middles and get observed 3-6 times. I thing they were supposed to promote you in the beginning of the year.If I can chime in on this thread, I'm doing 7-5 as well this season, my first 3 observations were standard expected, above standard and well above standard.
Haven't had anything about being promoted to 6, I had another observation this morning, I feel I know what I'll get for it which I'll be happy with, it wasn't the easiest Sunday league game but then not the most difficult, enjoyable though and gave me enough to deal with for the observer to look at.
He did tell me I missed 2 cautions (one playing an advantage on), and a penalty, so we'll see what comes of it.
Need to get roughly 11 middles in now I believe, and 2 more observations, then I'll have done my 40 middles, 5 lines and all my observations. Unless I don't get the 3rd observation and get in the top 50% of club marks. So we'll see...
Good luck to you all.