avoided 2 yellows but both clubs happy.

[Kent Ref]

I did an adults sunday pub game this morning.

Two deliberate handballs (one from each team) where the player committing it did it to stop a promising attack (both in the middle of the park).

My gut said yellow but the tone of the match had been good. I went with a strong word both times but if i had gone yellow nobody probably would have said a word.

In this league i have to sign the result form and one team gave me 95 and the other 90.

Morally i feel i have cheated the county FA out of 2 yellows and 5 year ago i would have carded both times.

Strange how clubs see it differently to a referee.

 

[es1]

We've certainly all done the same!

 

[JamesL]

We've certainly all done the same!

Definitely.
Enough times it has bitten me on the bum more than once

 

[Ben448844]

Club marks seem to be awarded on how much the referee was seen to effect the awarding team and not how the referee applied the laws of the game etc. When they are weighted highly as they are now, it's only to be expected that refs occasionally pander to this when the circumstances are there to do so. I dont see an alternative so I'm not moaning about club marks, just agreeing that there are times when the game hasn't had any major incidents and you can manage situations to keep the marks high...

 

[Kent Ref]

At my age club marks are of no importance.

I was merely highlighting what a club sees as important v what a refs sees as important.

 

[RobOda]

I dont see an alternative

Abolish it?

Haven't had club marks for years now and I think it's the only reason I've managed promotion since!

 

[Justylove]

It's a difficult one.

Here in England unless you are on a promotion scheme you don't get observed as a referee, nor are you likely to get on any of the county schemes that would give you a coach or a mentor.

For many referees they might get to L5 and then decide that's as far as they want to go, happy to stay as a Senior County Referee, doing some decent games with zero aspiration to go any higher. For them, they might be refereeing for upwards of a decade without ever having their performance scrutinised.

Club marks are a way of allowing the clubs to provide feedback on the referees performance. Admittedly, they are not perfect, with variances from club to club, however the appointment secretary receiving those will know which clubs are the high markers, which are the ones that will give low marks when they lose a close game and which will give a fair mark regardless of the result.

All of that allows the appointment secretary to build up an indication of how a referee is performing. If they are constantly getting low club marks, even from winning teams or the "fair markers" then that's a red flag and may lead to someone from the league having a wander down to a game to check out said referee.

Without those marks, you'd never have any view of how a referee is doing over any period of time.

At higher levels, club marks are still used, but in conjunction with observations, but the main onus is on the observation marks.

I haven't yet heard anyone come up with a valid proposal that would meet the need to provide some form of insight on referees performances across the breadth of grassroots football whilst not having the clubs directly marking the referees performance week in, week out.

 

[Big Cat]

It's a difficult one.

Here in England unless you are on a promotion scheme you don't get observed as a referee, nor are you likely to get on any of the county schemes that would give you a coach or a mentor.

For many referees they might get to L5 and then decide that's as far as they want to go, happy to stay as a Senior County Referee, doing some decent games with zero aspiration to go any higher. For them, they might be refereeing for upwards of a decade without ever having their performance scrutinised.

Club marks are a way of allowing the clubs to provide feedback on the referees performance. Admittedly, they are not perfect, with variances from club to club, however the appointment secretary receiving those will know which clubs are the high markers, which are the ones that will give low marks when they lose a close game and which will give a fair mark regardless of the result.

All of that allows the appointment secretary to build up an indication of how a referee is performing. If they are constantly getting low club marks, even from winning teams or the "fair markers" then that's a red flag and may lead to someone from the league having a wander down to a game to check out said referee.

Without those marks, you'd never have any view of how a referee is doing over any period of time.

At higher levels, club marks are still used, but in conjunction with observations, but the main onus is on the observation marks.

I haven't yet heard anyone come up with a valid proposal that would meet the need to provide some form of insight on referees performances across the breadth of grassroots football whilst not having the clubs directly marking the referees performance week in, week out.

Also opens up the possibility of foul play by the appointments secretary. If a Referee's face fits, give them the clubs that score well and vice versa

 

[GraemeS]

Also opens up the possibility of foul play by the appointments secretary. If a Referee's face fits, give them the clubs that score well and vice versa

Occam's Razor. Why bother going to all that fuss as the appointments secretary and still leave the chance the ref might screw up and have a poor game even with generous markers, when you could just "mistype" a number in a spreadsheet? If an appointment secretary is "corrupt" in that way, there isn't enough oversight to require the degree of clever manipulation of the club marks system that you suggest!

 

[Justylove]

Also opens up the possibility of foul play by the appointments secretary. If a Referee's face fits, give them the clubs that score well and vice versa

Disagree here.

At levels for referees where club marks is a factor in their progression or demotion, the weightings are geared towards other elements (observer marks). And in general at that level the marks are being given by the club secretary rather than the manager that is peeved because you didn't award them the last minute dodgy penalty.

At lower levels where promotion is not at stake, what would be the point in an appointment secretary doing that? To sabotage the potential for a referee to get an end of season cup final...? Most of the referees that are not going anywhere don't really care about marks, they rock up, do their game, get paid and then move onto the next game.

 

[Big Cat]

Disagree here.

At levels for referees where club marks is a factor in their progression or demotion, the weightings are geared towards other elements (observer marks). And in general at that level the marks are being given by the club secretary rather than the manager that is peeved because you didn't award them the last minute dodgy penalty.

At lower levels where promotion is not at stake, what would be the point in an appointment secretary doing that? To sabotage the potential for a referee to get an end of season cup final...? Most of the referees that are not going anywhere don't really care about marks, they rock up, do their game, get paid and then move onto the next game.

Just putting it out there as a possibility. If it does happen, it ain't gonna be rife, I'm sure the integrity of the game is generally OK in that respect. But that doesn't mean it won't happen. And yes, I'm only talking about the levels at which Club Marks matter. So 4-to-3 and above

 

[Justylove]

Just putting it out there as a possibility. If it does happen, it ain't gonna be rife, I'm sure the integrity of the game is generally OK in that respect. But that doesn't mean it won't happen. And yes, I'm only talking about the levels at which Club Marks matter. So 4-to-3 and above

L4 - you have dual rankings, observer and club. So if you are ranked 1st in Observers and last in Clubs then that would raise a flag. The criteria for promotion from 4 is (from memory) Top 20% of observers and Top half for clubs.

For demotion again the overriding criteria is based on the position in the Observers table.

At L3 the appointments are done centrally by the FA and I believe that the overall position in the final merit table is based on both Observers and Club marks with a higher weighting on Observers when it comes to calculating the final position

Every system has its potential flaws, but I come back to the question - without club marks how do you get a representative view of a referees performance across the whole season?

 

[Big Cat]

L4 - you have dual rankings, observer and club. So if you are ranked 1st in Observers and last in Clubs then that would raise a flag. The criteria for promotion from 4 is (from memory) Top 20% of observers and Top half for clubs.

For demotion again the overriding criteria is based on the position in the Observers table.

At L3 the appointments are done centrally by the FA and I believe that the overall position in the final merit table is based on both Observers and Club marks with a higher weighting on Observers when it comes to calculating the final position

Every system has its potential flaws, but I come back to the question - without club marks how do you get a representative view of a referees performance across the whole season?

I don't mind Club Marks too much. Certainly more of a necessary evil that Club Assistants!
I don't think they should use the average mark though because appointments could be favourable or detrimental based upon how that Club scores Referees in general. They should therefore use the Median figure, which I think is a more accurate number in this sorta thing
Median is not swayed by outliers and becomes an extremely difficult number to budge once the sample is above around 12 scores. Therefore a very solid reflection on the Ref
Median is used to assess golf handicaps in this way. A previous passion of mine!
For some reason, Club Marks are secretive. When a RefSec has shared them with me (which they don't want to do for some reason),, i've found them fair overall. I understand there's more transparency via MOAS for the high-flyers (WRT Club Marks) as of recently

 

[Justylove]

I don't mind Club Marks too much. Certainly more of a necessary evil that Club Assistants!
I don't think they should use the average mark though because appointments could be favourable or detrimental based upon how that Club scores Referees in general. They should therefore use the Median figure, which I think is a more accurate number in this sorta thing
Median is not swayed by outliers and becomes an extremely difficult number to budge once the sample is above around 12 scores. Therefore a very solid reflection on the Ref
Median is used to assess golf handicaps in this way. A previous passion of mine!
For some reason, Club Marks are secretive. When a RefSec has shared them with me (which they don't want to do for some reason),, i've found them fair overall. I understand there's more transparency via MOAS for the high-flyers (WRT Club Marks) as of recently

That's an option, or you have a system like in diving where the top and bottom <x> number of marks are discarded and the average calculated from the rest.

As it relates to transparency on MOAS the the marks. There was a new function implemented that gave you a live table for Observers marks, however that has disappeared. I had an FA Cup observation which is supposed to count but it never came through, so I don't know if they've taken the system down due to technical difficulties or because they are doing early season promotions.

Club marks were never on MOAS and we were told will only be made available when the regular bandings update is published.

 

[JamesL]

That's an option, or you have a system like in diving where the top and bottom <x> number of marks are discarded and the average calculated from the rest.

As it relates to transparency on MOAS the the marks. There was a new function implemented that gave you a live table for Observers marks, however that has disappeared. I had an FA Cup observation which is supposed to count but it never came through, so I don't know if they've taken the system down due to technical difficulties or because they are doing early season promotions.

Club marks were never on MOAS and we were told will only be made available when the regular bandings update is published.

Still there for level 3s I believe....

 

[RefIADad]

I don't mind Club Marks too much. Certainly more of a necessary evil that Club Assistants!
I don't think they should use the average mark though because appointments could be favourable or detrimental based upon how that Club scores Referees in general. They should therefore use the Median figure, which I think is a more accurate number in this sorta thing
Median is not swayed by outliers and becomes an extremely difficult number to budge once the sample is above around 12 scores. Therefore a very solid reflection on the Ref
Median is used to assess golf handicaps in this way. A previous passion of mine!
For some reason, Club Marks are secretive. When a RefSec has shared them with me (which they don't want to do for some reason),, i've found them fair overall. I understand there's more transparency via MOAS for the high-flyers (WRT Club Marks) as of recently

We don't do club marks in the US, but this makes a lot of sense. The key is to be able to rid yourself of the outliers - whether those outliers are from teams mad they lost (where someone could see a team that gave high marks when they won and low marks when they lost) and those that are just naturally higher or lower scorers (like for me, I'd probably score higher all else equal because I'd give the referee the benefit of the doubt).

If you have a RA person with some spreadsheet skills, you should also be able to determine a standard deviation (it's a formula in Excel or Google sheets). The smaller a referee's standard deviation on scores, the more likely you're getting a more fair number all else equal. As a finance person in my day job, I'm always nervous of analysis that has a lot of variability in it. If a particular referee's scores are clustered around a pretty common number, that should mean the scores more fairly reflect the referee as opposed to outside variables.

 

[RustyRef]

Speaking as a former RefsSec, club marks are invaluable. If I'm appointing 80 referees over a season I have no idea how they have performed, I might go and watch some of them but can't possibly see them all. 80% of them won't be on promotion, so I wouldn't even know what their observations grades were like. So when it comes to big games, grudge games, cup finals, etc, I'd have absolutely nothing to go on. Whilst not perfect, over the whole season you can easily see who is good and who is far from good from the club marks. You also learn which clubs mark high, which mark low, which mark depending on their result, and so on.

Also, as I have said before, I don't see the objection to club marks. Referees are providing a service that they are being paid for, it is therefore only fair that clubs are able to rate them. Is it any different to a customer rating a plumber, electrician, etc. I know nothing about either of those trades, like clubs don't necessarily know about the LOTG, but I still always leave a rating for them on checkatrade.com.

All that said, whilst I think club marks are useful for appointments officers, I don't think they should be used for promotion or retention at any level. Those movements should be based on observer grades.

 

[Ben448844]

Speaking as a former RefsSec, club marks are invaluable. If I'm appointing 80 referees over a season I have no idea how they have performed, I might go and watch some of them but can't possibly see them all. 80% of them won't be on promotion, so I wouldn't even know what their observations grades were like. So when it comes to big games, grudge games, cup finals, etc, I'd have absolutely nothing to go on. Whilst not perfect, over the whole season you can easily see who is good and who is far from good from the club marks. You also learn which clubs mark high, which mark low, which mark depending on their result, and so on.

Also, as I have said before, I don't see the objection to club marks. Referees are providing a service that they are being paid for, it is therefore only fair that clubs are able to rate them. Is it any different to a customer rating a plumber, electrician, etc. I know nothing about either of those trades, like clubs don't necessarily know about the LOTG, but I still always leave a rating for them on checkatrade.com.

All that said, whilst I think club marks are useful for appointments officers, I don't think they should be used for promotion or retention at any level. Those movements should be based on observer grades.

Just to ask a question about Ref appointments and club marks, when you had a referee who transferred into your league from another area, did you ask for or have access to his/her club marks?

I ask this because in my first game on the County League last week I was given a game that is regarded as the toughest that weekend. Local Derby between two of the more difficult teams to referee by all accounts. I see it as a good thing, but I'm wondering if appointment officers have any knowledge of a ref that's new to the league via things like former club marks?

 

[GraemeS]

Just to ask a question about Ref appointments and club marks, when you had a referee who transferred into your league from another area, did you ask for or have access to his/her club marks?

I ask this because in my first game on the County League last week I was given a game that is regarded as the toughest that weekend. Local Derby between two of the more difficult teams to referee by all accounts. I see it as a good thing, but I'm wondering if appointment officers have any knowledge of a ref that's new to the league via things like former club marks?

I doubt it, certainly not at grassroots. I say this because I've just moved areas and got given what should have been a real easy match - to the extent that the appointments sec was almost apologising for giving his new L5 ref such a lowly match! And to be fair, it was....for 89 minutes, before a missed punch and 22-man pile-in livened up the last few minutes!

 

[RustyRef]

Just to ask a question about Ref appointments and club marks, when you had a referee who transferred into your league from another area, did you ask for or have access to his/her club marks?

I ask this because in my first game on the County League last week I was given a game that is regarded as the toughest that weekend. Local Derby between two of the more difficult teams to referee by all accounts. I see it as a good thing, but I'm wondering if appointment officers have any knowledge of a ref that's new to the league via things like former club marks?

I don't recall doing that, but doesn't mean others don't. I was operating in London, and a high percentage of transfers I got came from overseas so it would have been a challenge as not many countries other than England use club marks.