Assessors

[SpecsSaver66]

While I've mentioned that I have never had any interest in ever going through the refereeing pathways I tip my hat to those of you that have been and continue to do so.
My question(s) are this; how good are the Assessors themselves and are there any glaring shortcomings in the processes of the assessments themselves?
Thanks for any replies.

 

[es1]

there's good ones and bad ones of course, in my experience some really care about refs and improving them and others are there to nit pick and find fault wherever they can.

in terms of the process, at L4-2a i think it's pretty reasonable now. they've made it much more of a tick box exercise where the observer notes what you did well / badly with timed examples. the only issue is it relies on the observer noticing you ticking the boxes so that you can get rewarded but that'll be the same at every level.

 

[JamesL]

how good are the Assessors themselves

Like referees they are variable

are there any glaring shortcomings in the processes of the assessments themselves?

The marking system is 0-100 but the actual range or marks vary from 68-73.5

If the mark is too high and isn't written well enough then it can be moderated, and that will be by someone who was not at the game.

The FA are attempting to standardise the reports and there is usually a bedding in period every time they make a change and this will make or break some referees seasons.

Referees are being promoted/reclassified on a . Of a mark.

As with the standard of observer there are high markers and low markers and sometimes the mark may not necessarily reflect the game vs what another observer may have marked.

Overall though the system is as fair as it can be save for erroneous club marks

 

[SpecsSaver66]

there's good ones and bad ones of course, in my experience some really care about refs and improving them and others are there to nit pick and find fault wherever they can.

in terms of the process, at L4-2a i think it's pretty reasonable now. they've made it much more of a tick box exercise where the observer notes what you did well / badly with timed examples. the only issue is it relies on the observer noticing you ticking the boxes so that you can get rewarded but that'll be the same at every level.

My only experience of pathways are from the coaching perspective and like most things with the FA there are shortcomings there but I can imagine there are in the refereeing pathways too.

 

[Anubis]

5 out of 10 are fantastic, insightful, supportive, and, neutral
2 out of 10 are sticklers for an speckle of tape sock and will allow this to overshadow anything you do on the pitch.
1 out of 10 will go thro motions and you have no idea how his cornflakes were that morning. Might be great, ok, or poor.
1 out of 10 is politically motivated, will discriminate but disguise it, and you will wish you had called off the game
1 out of 10 just wont be on the same page at all.

 

[RobOda]

how good are the Assessors themselves and are there any glaring shortcomings in the processes of the assessments themselves?

In Wales the process is different from England, but they're basically part of the refereeing team. They have to take a LOTG exam every season, and keep up with the new law changes. They're there to help us with development, so criticism is very unusual.

We have a different scoring method too, we use a 6.0-10.0 scale. Our "Standard expected" as you call it in England, is a mark of 8.4.

My limited understanding is that they have an observer team, and they work with the RDO. Observer reports get sent to the RDO who signs them off to us. Mistakes are rare, everything is fairly uniform as the marking system has been in place for several years now (this year they changed the marks, before an 8.3 was standard expected, but it's up to 8.4 now).

I think, in all the observations I've had under the new system I've only unofficially raised an issue with one point across 14 observations (if my counting is right), which I think is excellent.

So, yeah, basically they're pretty sound, they're all keen to see us go through the ranks and to see us improve and they're always receptive to questions, in fact, I find most of them love it if you ask questions and are interested. The only time I've ever had an observer shoot off is when he was drenched as we had a game on in a storm, and I couldn't blame him!!! Some of them are regular attendees at society meetings too, so you're never far from advice.

2 out of 10 are sticklers for an speckle of tape sock and will allow this to overshadow anything you do on the pitch.

That's how it used to be in the old days. I remember getting pulled up because I wore black socks that didn't have white trims as per the Regulations of the day (this was many years ago), it was silly and I almost felt like they were an enemy that I had to appease.

Can you imagine that? A brand new referee, and being told off because your socks didn't have white tops? Nonsense.

Now it is so much better, they're more part of the team, so we're constantly in dialogue.

 

[Big Cat]

While I've mentioned that I have never had any interest in ever going through the refereeing pathways I tip my hat to those of you that have been and continue to do so.
My question(s) are this; how good are the Assessors themselves and are there any glaring shortcomings in the processes of the assessments themselves?
Thanks for any replies.

Promotion via Levels 6 and 5 is akin to ongoing Refereeing Development. If there were sufficient Observers, I'd make it mandatory
It's not really promotion, ongoing training and qualification would be a better description
Some observers aren't very good. Some are dated themselves. However, even then, it's useful to have someone watch your game. There's always something useful to think about, even if you don't agree with much of the assessment
The observers at 5-to-4 have been astute chaps in my experience. They'll always give you something useful to think about, just because they analyse your game in much greater depth

 

[SpecsSaver66]

In Wales the process is different from England, but they're basically part of the refereeing team. They have to take a LOTG exam every season, and keep up with the new law changes. They're there to help us with development, so criticism is very unusual.

We have a different scoring method too, we use a 6.0-10.0 scale. Our "Standard expected" as you call it in England, is a mark of 8.4.

My limited understanding is that they have an observer team, and they work with the RDO. Observer reports get sent to the RDO who signs them off to us. Mistakes are rare, everything is fairly uniform as the marking system has been in place for several years now (this year they changed the marks, before an 8.3 was standard expected, but it's up to 8.4 now).

I think, in all the observations I've had under the new system I've only unofficially raised an issue with one point across 14 observations (if my counting is right), which I think is excellent.

So, yeah, basically they're pretty sound, they're all keen to see us go through the ranks and to see us improve and they're always receptive to questions, in fact, I find most of them love it if you ask questions and are interested. The only time I've ever had an observer shoot off is when he was drenched as we had a game on in a storm, and I couldn't blame him!!! Some of them are regular attendees at society meetings too, so you're never far from advice.



That's how it used to be in the old days. I remember getting pulled up because I wore black socks that didn't have white trims as per the Regulations of the day (this was many years ago), it was silly and I almost felt like they were an enemy that I had to appease.

Can you imagine that? A brand new referee, and being told off because your socks didn't have white tops? Nonsense.

Now it is so much better, they're more part of the team, so we're constantly in dialogue.

I know English coaches who go through the Welsh FA coaching pathway and they are full of praise for the Welsh FA v their English counterparts. It seems they are pretty good in their refereeing set up too.
Are any Welsh refs at the top level?

 

[RobOda]

It seems they are pretty good in their refereeing set up too.

Welsh football has undergone a huge reform in recent seasons, it's considered a very exciting time to be involved in football here. The Tier review was implemented recently, which is a complete overhaul of the Welsh footballing Tier system, including new Tier 4 leagues (started this season), new unified Reserve Leagues (also started this season) etc.

Through this process we've also had the FAW Modernisation programme, which has moved everything online, so no more paper or snail mail. Everything is online via an app, all the way down to U12 youth football and all appointments come through that, as does discipline etc, it's a lot more hassle free, it's harder to play ineligible or suspended players, and for referees it means you can take two minutes to dish out the discipline on your phone post-match and then go home.

There's FAW Talent and Mentoring Groups which has come into effect this season on a regional and national level, in Tiers 4, 3 and 2 (I'm not sure if there's one or two others).

Are any Welsh refs at the top level?

Yes, we have a few on the FIFA list.

You won't be seeing my name on there anytime soon though!

 

[Justylove]

Here in Hampshire when I was going through my promotion seasons to L5, pretty much all of my observations were done by 'older' observers who refereed quite a few years ago. That was both a good thing and a bad thing - they had lots of experience to pass on, but sometimes could be a little out of touch with the game.

5-4 was different. I had 2 active referees as part of the process as well as some other slightly older observers. At L4 there is a mix, but I'd say in general the standard is pretty good, there's still an acknowledgement that some observers mark a little tighter than others, but that's a fact of life when you base anything on opinion, but it's not a wild variance.

This season, myself and a few other active L4's have all become observers and are doing them as an when we get a chance, it's nice to be able to give something back to up and coming referees to help them progress!

 

[Max2]

Here in Hampshire when I was going through my promotion seasons to L5, pretty much all of my observations were done by 'older' observers who refereed quite a few years ago.

When I took the course down here (in the days of Brian LB), it was almost exclusively ol’ fellas who hadn’t officiated for at least a decade, and were coming into it with the same attitude.

In our “practise” assessment of a fella refereeing at Sholing FC, one of them noted down that the ref didn’t have white tops to his socks

 

[RustyRef]

Observing at all levels is vastly better than it was when I was going through the levels. Back then there was little training for them, there wasn't really the concept of performance competencies, and it was all a bit random. I had one at 7 to 6 that had no more than two words in each section, good, very good, needs improvement or excellent. We didn't get a mark then either, so it was impossible to tell how well you had done or what specifics you needed to improve on. Observers were often ancient, hadn't done any training for years, nor had they kept up with law changes, they have largely disappeared due to a combination of DBS / SGW requirements, mandatory training and continually having their reports rejected. Even worse, they were often invisible and sometimes you only found out you had been observed when they phoned the next day, or sometimes even when the report landed on the doormat.

These days even at 7 to 6 and 6 to 5 the reports are often quality checked with the observer being asked to improve things. Even more so at 5 to 4, and at L4 and above it is meticulous, if the text doesn't match the mark it gets moderated. And if an observer gets too many changed marks they get removed and have to work back up from grass roots. In my fourth season at L4 I averaged not far off 80 and that didn't put me in the top 4, the season after I was closer to 81 and finished top, these days marks to generate those kind of averages just won't be given out, and if they are they will almost certainly be moderated and reduced. I was lucky as my location meant I got two of the observers that marked very high if they liked you, don't think they ever gave me less than 84. Great for me, but not really fair and the new system makes it much fairer for everyone.

 

[Kent Ref]

Many years ago i was being assessed for level 1 (5) and when the letter i received told me i failed i smelled a rat.

After enquiring i was told i failed to meet the standard by 0.17 marks, overall.

I raised a complaint and the person in charge lied to me on the phone (i subsequently found out). This same person used to go to games and hide for the whole of the game and not speak to the referee. On the game he assessed me on he missed a red card i gave out. as he did not mention this in his assessment. He's no longer involved in the game, luckily.

This proved irrelevant as i was in the Forces and they promoted me that season.

I think back in the day assessors / observers were not on the tight leash they are on now.

 

[Anubis]

Many years ago i was being assessed for level 1 (5) and when the letter i received told me i failed i smelled a rat.

After enquiring i was told i failed to meet the standard by 0.17 marks, overall.

I raised a complaint and the person in charge lied to me on the phone (i subsequently found out). This same person used to go to games and hide for the whole of the game and not speak to the referee. On the game he assessed me on he missed a red card i gave out. as he did not mention this in his assessment. He's no longer involved in the game, luckily.

This proved irrelevant as i was in the Forces and they promoted me that season.

I think back in the day assessors / observers were not on the tight leash they are on now.

It takes referees to speak out, far too many, myself included, simply sit at home raging, and on the occasion you do try to challenge anything, you find yourself fesrful of accusations of being a trouble maker.

Factual things like a missed red do then set alarm bells ringing, and we can start to doubt other aspects of the report.

it gladly is a more open door policy today, at grass roots it should be more advisory

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Many years ago i was being assessed for level 1 (5) and when the letter i received told me i failed i smelled a rat.

After enquiring i was told i failed to meet the standard by 0.17 marks, overall.

I raised a complaint and the person in charge lied to me on the phone (i subsequently found out). This same person used to go to games and hide for the whole of the game and not speak to the referee. On the game he assessed me on he missed a red card i gave out. as he did not mention this in his assessment. He's no longer involved in the game, luckily.

This proved irrelevant as i was in the Forces and they promoted me that season.

I think back in the day assessors / observers were not on the tight leash they are on now.

Not "a tight leash" as such(!) but observers at all levels are now subject to quality control.
Contact must be made in advance with the referee, and laid down feedback procedures followed (in recent times modified by the Covid restrictions)
At Contributory and Supply levels the same reporting system is used, and all observers have to attend (in person or at a Zoom/ Microsoft Teams meeting) update and training meetings regularly - two so far this season and a third just being launched. Laws of the Game knowledge is checked regularly, and observers have access to the training/guidance material available to referees.
An observer may only observe a referee once or twice in a season, no more than twice.
Reports which carry a score above or below the regular range are reviewed by a coordinator automatically and at least one observation per observer is also reviewed.
In my county every promotion candidate review is checked by the County FA RDM and the Observer Coordinator before acceptance (or not, as the case may be) and before it is sent to the referee.
My local Supply League publishes twice a season the average mark for each observer, which allows the observers to reflect on their mark compared with the average. I am not a great fan of averages, as one foot in ice and one in burning coals means my feet are comfortable on average, but the table is worth a look.
Quality Control is working

 

[Viridis1886]

one foot in ice and one in burning coals means my feet are comfortable on average

I'll be using this one at some point!