Debate: Is too much emphasis placed on referee 'levels'?
- Thread starter RegalRef
- Start date
Depends.
Going with the information given it's like asking "is handball a caution?".
Level is gained via meeting criteria and assessed against standards, which take time to learn and therefore be able to competantly demnstrate. And with time comes experience, therefore it would be taken that they "know better" than those less expereiced.
kids become adults, grow up an learn to become teachers and professors and experts in their field - but someone with a view from a different field / trade or train of thought can throw a curveball that floor them for an answer. The Professor is lost for words.....
Going with the information given it's like asking "is handball a caution?".
Level is gained via meeting criteria and assessed against standards, which take time to learn and therefore be able to competantly demnstrate. And with time comes experience, therefore it would be taken that they "know better" than those less expereiced.
kids become adults, grow up an learn to become teachers and professors and experts in their field - but someone with a view from a different field / trade or train of thought can throw a curveball that floor them for an answer. The Professor is lost for words.....
HertsFinest
Next Weeks Ref
'There are no levels, we all bleed red'
- HertsFinest, 2016
- HertsFinest, 2016
RegalRef
Politically Incorrect
It really all depends on what they are being asked for an opinion on....
Have a poll ruffleref.
As it looks like you are determined to have this discussion, let me just remind you - this descends into bitter argument it will be locked. Behave like grown ups though...
No intention of an aguement, just interested to hear thoughts...
HertsFinest
Next Weeks Ref
Now rufflerug and HF are involved, it only takes a couple of adversary's and all hell could break loose
I'll be good
I'm not seeing the difference between the two questions in this context?
HertsFinest
Next Weeks Ref
To be fair Ruffrug if they didn't have levels there'd be no way to distinguish between who's applicable to referee at what step of the ladder
So even if we say 'yes there's too much emphasis on it' the alternative is far worse
Just imagine they have to draw straws and @SM ends up on the champions league final?
So even if we say 'yes there's too much emphasis on it' the alternative is far worse
Just imagine they have to draw straws and @SM ends up on the champions league final?
What about me? Been a 6 for 16 years. What does that make me?
In my opinion, yes, sometimes. There are plenty of great level 6s and 7s out there who could go far but can't make progress because of other commitments (eg, work, family). I've seen them overlooked by counties and leagues for good appointments because of this and it can be unfair.
HertsFinest
Next Weeks Ref
What a ridiculous comment.
Not if you don't want to go further you don't
I know plenty of 6s that have been there for years
Here in Canada, a lot of emphasis is put onto levels. Unfortunately, like in any situation, you sometimes end up with people at those higher levels who are very good on the field, excellent at match management, etc... but just don't know the Laws well at all. You sometimes get lower levels who know the Laws cold, but do not excel at match management, etc.
Is emphasis given to the higher levels? Usually.
Should it be? Usually.
To get to that higher level, you do have to prove yourself to others, and with that comes the experience, the learning of things that are difficult to codify and/or teach (such as match management, reading the game, etc). As such, that experience (like in any other realm) has a large value. As long as the person takes the time to keep up on changes, etc... that person has "proven their worth" so to speak.
But, just because emphasis is given to that... doesn't mean that you shoudn't listen to the lower levels, hear what they have to say, think about the questions they ask. Those questions aren't always as simple as you might think at a glance...
Is emphasis given to the higher levels? Usually.
Should it be? Usually.
To get to that higher level, you do have to prove yourself to others, and with that comes the experience, the learning of things that are difficult to codify and/or teach (such as match management, reading the game, etc). As such, that experience (like in any other realm) has a large value. As long as the person takes the time to keep up on changes, etc... that person has "proven their worth" so to speak.
But, just because emphasis is given to that... doesn't mean that you shoudn't listen to the lower levels, hear what they have to say, think about the questions they ask. Those questions aren't always as simple as you might think at a glance...
YorkshireReferee
Well-Known Member
There's no straight answer to this. I've met very, very good Level 7's and I've met both Level 6's and Level 5's that, I wasn't sure how they got to that level as they acted like a club official.
There's so much more to it. For example I have a league cup final this weekend and I did a bit of research on my assistants, basically was trying to work out who is senior/junior in advance in case they're both the same. Now one is a Level 6 and one is a Level 5, however, what if the Level 5 had no experience as an assistant but the Level 6 has 4 years of experience as a supply league assistant referee? I'd actually think that the Level 6 would be more suitable as the senior.
There's so much more to it. For example I have a league cup final this weekend and I did a bit of research on my assistants, basically was trying to work out who is senior/junior in advance in case they're both the same. Now one is a Level 6 and one is a Level 5, however, what if the Level 5 had no experience as an assistant but the Level 6 has 4 years of experience as a supply league assistant referee? I'd actually think that the Level 6 would be more suitable as the senior.
RegalRef
Politically Incorrect
A great example of what I'm talking about.
As a referee with 16 years experience should you not be held in as high regard (at least) as a level 5 or 4 who has 5 years experience?
Charlie Jones
Work Until You Don't Have To Introduce Yourself
I think yes, there is too much emphasis. my mums Uncle is 78 years old, been refereeing for nearly 40 years. he has had to drop to a level 7 due to age - so does that make him less knowledgeable than a 22 year old level 4? of course not - if anything he is more! I know of plenty of level 7/6's out there that are fantastic referees but due to other commitments (like myself with work) they cant possibly go further than a 6 as they cant guarantee availability for the games. on the flip side, ive been AR for a level 5 and 4 and thought to myself 'how on earth are these guys at this level?' both missed obvious cautions, free kick, incorrect throw in decisions/corners (and I mean obvious!) and this was at Senior Saturday, step below Ryman!
I agree that the levels are needed for the games you can/can't officiate, but that in no way does your level ascertain your knowledge and experience on the refereeing circuit
I agree that the levels are needed for the games you can/can't officiate, but that in no way does your level ascertain your knowledge and experience on the refereeing circuit
Monotone Whistle
Well-Known Member
I've voted No, as there is no alternative.
Everyone can progress through the county system (currently to L5) of their own volition, so the emphasis on Levels is more of an incentive. Once you get to L4 and above, this is the only method of allocating referees to the right level of football. The refs are assessed to death, so if they are not good enough they are removed. Seems right to me.
Everyone can progress through the county system (currently to L5) of their own volition, so the emphasis on Levels is more of an incentive. Once you get to L4 and above, this is the only method of allocating referees to the right level of football. The refs are assessed to death, so if they are not good enough they are removed. Seems right to me.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Pretty much agree with @Monotone Whistle . 'Emphasis' on those who are currently operating at L4 and above seems entirely reasonable given that those folk a) must have a decent amount of games under their belt and b) have been and are being regularly assessed. Whilst the odd one seems surprisingly poor, the vast majority I've worked with have been good or excellent referees.
Where it gets interesting is at L5 / 6 as these two levels cover a 'multitude of sins'! Within these levels you can get folk like me with only a few years experience, folk like @Ross with many years of reffing under their belt and even former referees from a much higher level who have now taken a step back to L5. When I know a referee is a 5 or a 6 I make little or no presumption as to their age, level of experience or current ability, as from experience all these things are highly variable! This is obviously also true of L7s ... though as a generalisation, from my interactions, the average L5 has been overall better than the average L7.
So, too much emphasis? For me, no, it's one useful tool in the armoury of appointments officers and is generally treated as such
Where it gets interesting is at L5 / 6 as these two levels cover a 'multitude of sins'! Within these levels you can get folk like me with only a few years experience, folk like @Ross with many years of reffing under their belt and even former referees from a much higher level who have now taken a step back to L5. When I know a referee is a 5 or a 6 I make little or no presumption as to their age, level of experience or current ability, as from experience all these things are highly variable! This is obviously also true of L7s ... though as a generalisation, from my interactions, the average L5 has been overall better than the average L7.
So, too much emphasis? For me, no, it's one useful tool in the armoury of appointments officers and is generally treated as such
Do you want a reply to this question?
We could say anything and get a ban
I will say the best of the Mods... Creep, creepy...