A&H

Consistency v match temperature v game level

L

lesbobly

Member
I see, hear & read (this forum) a lot about CONSISTENCY in decisions across referees (ie be consistent in application of LOTG as it makes it easier for the next referee)- and MATCH TEMPERATURE (ie “I judged that the temperature in the match made me take xxxxx decision”)

There are many examples of both - then of course add in the obvious it’s was a FRIENDLY/UNDER 12/PREMIER LEAGUE/SUNDAY MORNING/LAST WEEK THEY MET AND IT WAS A STINKER game (all used to describe the “variables” that influence decisions it seems)

For example I’ve heard comments like “I gave the foull/free kick as I wanted to stamp my mark early on as it looked like the temperature was going up” (does that meet the consistency criteria? Make it easier/harder for next ref?)

As a point of discussion I am interested in peoples take on these variables and do you consider you have a hierarchy of thought process …
 
The Referee Store
There are times where you have to change your approach to the game. Most referees will be cautious in the first ten minutes, not letting much go and avoiding all but the most obvious of advantages, then if all is going well you can take the leash off a bit. If you know the two clubs had a big fight or there was a major incident the last time they played then chances are it is going to last longer than 10 minutes, if not the entire game.

The incidents during the game might change how you are refereeing. If you've had a red card for a bad tackle or there has been a mass confrontation you would be ill advised to let a lot of contact go or play a lot of advantage immediately after it.

As observers we are looking to see how referees react to changes in the game. Did they identify potential escalation points and make adjustments as necessary.
 
RustyRef said:
There are times where you have to change your approach to the game. Most referees will be cautious in the first ten minutes, not letting much go and avoiding all but the most obvious of advantages, then if all is going well you can take the leash off a bit. If you know the two clubs had a big fight or there was a major incident the last time they played then chances are it is going to last longer than 10 minutes, if not the entire game.

The incidents during the game might change how you are refereeing. If you've had a red card for a bad tackle or there has been a mass confrontation you would be ill advised to let a lot of contact go or play a lot of advantage immediately after it.

As observers we are looking to see how referees react to changes in the game. Did they identify potential escalation points and make adjustments as necessary.
Click to expand...
That’s exactly as I think it should be … how do you square that with the “consistency” comments that I often see/read/hear …. If WE as a refereeing body are not consistent in our application of LOTG you make it harder for the next ref … and how you square that circle with your (in my opinion, correct) advice … I suppose what I am saying is “consistency (dogma?) sacrificed for this approach?

After all, with the absolute variable of “referee experience” it just widens the gap between the two approaches - of course the less experienced referee has to rely on consistency until experience is developed …
 
Managers will get consistency from referees - if they get their players to behave consistently. Where players are all over the place, a good referee reacts to that.
 
I think part of what is important here is the black, the grey, and the white.

some things are 100% fouls (or misconduct) and need to be called (or carded) every time.

some things are 100% not fouls and should never be called.

the black and white drive the quest for consistency

But there is a a grey zone. It’s the grey zone where Rs operate to the temperature of the and needs of a particular match. And that tool is going to be used more in the middle of the field than in the PA.
 
lesbobly said:
That’s exactly as I think it should be … how do you square that with the “consistency” comments that I often see/read/hear …. If WE as a refereeing body are not consistent in our application of LOTG you make it harder for the next ref … and how you square that circle with your (in my opinion, correct) advice … I suppose what I am saying is “consistency (dogma?) sacrificed for this approach?

After all, with the absolute variable of “referee experience” it just widens the gap between the two approaches - of course the less experienced referee has to rely on consistency until experience is developed …
Click to expand...
The "consistency" thing whilst a good yardstick for referees in general is (in my own opinion/experience) something that the players/coaches claim/moan that they want. Don't get bogged down in that stuff. Just referee what is in front of you on a minute by minute basis, taking into account the temperature of the occasion and base any decisions on that and of course in accordance with the LOTG.
You shouldn't be concerned with "last week's ref" so why worry about "next week's?". Just do what you know is right during your game and go home safe in the knowledge that you acted professionally and to the best of your ability. 😉🙂👍
 
Remember as well that players and managers don't really want consistency, they want the decisions to go their way. If they have had a team mate cautioned for a foul they will then claim every foul by their opponents is a caution, yet if one of their opponents has been cautioned for a foul they won't be asking you to caution their players for similar offences, and in fact the last thing they want there is consistency.

Consistency is just a word they use, they don't really mean it.
 
Last edited:
Kes said:
The "consistency" thing whilst a good yardstick for referees in general is (in my own opinion/experience) something that the players/coaches claim/moan that they want. Don't get bogged down in that stuff. Just referee what is in front of you on a minute by minute basis, taking into account the temperature of the occasion and base any decisions on that and of course in accordance with the LOTG.
You shouldn't be concerned with "last week's ref" so why worry about "next week's?". Just do what you know is right during your game and go home safe in the knowledge that you acted professionally and to the best of your ability. 😉🙂👍
Click to expand...
Interesting / I wholeheartedly agree with you - I will try to ignore those (some on this forum) who beat the consistency drum,, as I believe each game stands on it’s own merits - sometimes I feel the less able(?) hide behind the “consistent” barrier as defence, rather than referee each game on its own merits - perhaps 🤔 - difference between getting caught speeding by a camera and a policeman - one works to a “consistent “ set of rules - the other weighs up the moment, reviews the circumstances and takes appropriate action … question is … which one works best for the health of the game ? AMD to the benefit of those with the biggest invested interested - THE PLAYERS …

putting in my tin hat 😂😂😂😂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top