Like I said earlier, that was not my intention. I was merely using a personal experience to illustrate my point.
First Impressions
- Thread starter Matthew
- Start date
Like I said earlier, that was not my intention. I was merely using a personal experience to illustrate my point.
DanCohen17
Simply The Best
Ever heard the old adage "Don't judge a book by its cover"?
To say a referee looks poor therefore he will be poor, is an awful statement to make. Countless times I've seen refs look perfect in the build-up and then be truly awful and much the same in reverse. In fact, I pretty much guarantee that any club in my old Sunday league that had me ref in my first year as a 4 (did it every so often as a favour for ref sec when short) would put me in the category of poor first impression. Does that make me a bad ref? Does that mean I had a bad game? No, definitely not!
To say a referee looks poor therefore he will be poor, is an awful statement to make. Countless times I've seen refs look perfect in the build-up and then be truly awful and much the same in reverse. In fact, I pretty much guarantee that any club in my old Sunday league that had me ref in my first year as a 4 (did it every so often as a favour for ref sec when short) would put me in the category of poor first impression. Does that make me a bad ref? Does that mean I had a bad game? No, definitely not!
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
I don't think Matthew meant it to sound like that. But he is making IMO a very valid point and using a personal experience as a way of showing it.
I am in a similar boat and hate to turn up late because I like plenty of tine to get my pre match stuff out of the way.
I was playing for an U15 team, last game of the season, whoever won got promoted.
The ref (who looked about 12) turns up about 5 minutes before KO, he wanders over to our team while we were in a team talk, shirt out, socks down, then while dribbling a ball at his feet goes through his pre match talk, it went something like.
" right guys not much to say really, erm, have fun, erm, don't shout at me, erm, and make sure your tackles are clean."
He then walks off to the centre circle and blew his whistle for KO, no pre match checks at all. He didn't know the importance of the game which I think he really should've done. I knew that he'd befrom the start.
Then we started the match, he was scared to blow his whistle, his positioning was all wrong, he got his signals wrong and was generally terrible. He also stopped his watch every time the ball went out of play so instead of the first half being 40 minutes, it was 55. He was extremely arrogant and his knowledge of the law was abysmal.
The point I am making is that even if the referee is good the first impression is also very important because often (with the exception of Matthew's ref) if the ref's first impression is
Or maybe following your first impression of them being less than your expectation, you immediately and prematurely judge them? Subsequently every decision they make is tainted by your already made up opinion of them meaning they are on a hiding to nothing?
Nothing worse than a young referee who is still playing and thinks they know it all....last one I came across suddenly found out that they didn't know quite as much about what constitutes dissent as they thought......a swift lemon soon sorted that out!
I try make an excellent 1st impression where i can, but that does not guarantee me a 'good game'. I don't think @Matthew meant for his post to come across as anything other than an example. However I do agree with @DanCohen17 on not judging a book by its cover!
Yes, it is human nature that pre-conceptions of people are made upon first inspection. Whether or not it is fair is a completely different matter - what does matter, however, is that it is a fact. This means that, in my opinion, Mathew was highlighting a very important point that as referees we should always strive to make a good first impression... it is clear from this thread alone that referees are judged, sometimes harshly, so all we can do is learn from this ourselves and try to avoid this.
It is obvious that on many occasions, referees will have perfectly valid reasons for being late or whatever. Unfortunately, the players and spectators will not know this and it is just a situation that is sometimes unavoidable.
And it is very true that a referee's abilities should not be judged by his first appearance, but I think that there is no way that anybody on here would not have at least subconscious question marks over a ref who turns up 5 minutes before a game with his shirt untucked and socks rolled down.
Well then the irony of the OP giving a terrible first impression should not be lost.
hattersfan
Active Member
As Owen said, surely your first paragraph just proves how important a good first impression is? Right or wrong, you are judged by the managers, the players, and the spectators as soon as you turn up.at the ground. You may have a valid reason for being late, but they don't know that, and they will still judge you.
So, if you DON'T have a valid reason then why put yourself in a position where people can have a negative pre conceived impression of you (be it right or wrong)?
Last edited:
DanCohen17
Simply The Best
I have no doubt that every referee endeavours to create a positive first impression at every possible occasion, but this isn't always a possibility! Why should someone who doesn't know the full facts pre-judge someone else, because their standards aren't the same? Equally, how do you know that this ref wasn't appointed 15 minutes ago and has arrived as soon as was practicable? Maybe he's not come from home and has borrowed kit, because he's covering as a last minute favour?
As I said earlier, be very careful when judging! (This doesn't mean to say I don't think first impressions are important, as they definitely are!)
I don't think I know everything, I am fully aware that I have a lot of learning to come but this ref knew even less than me and by quite a long shot as well. I did pre judge him, that is my whole point! Because he was so unprofessional everyone (from both teams) thought he would be rubbish and we were right. It's not just about the time that a ref turns up at, it's about what they do when they get there, I know some great refs too that turn up 5 mins to KO but then fill you with confidence with their appearance and the way they carry out their pre match duties.
Were not supposed to but this ref couldn't keep time properly.
As I said, it's completely unfair but unfortunately people will always judge you anyway! That's the point - on occasions where you do have a valid reason, all you can really do is try to rectify the situation for next time. Even then it might be impossible but that's just how it is sometimes!
Matthew, I agree that first impressions are important....I also agree with those who would argue that doing a job well is far more important than merely looking the part.
A bit surprised at some of the venom launched at you by some of your refereeing peers on this thread, never used to happen in my day
I've just started working with people with challenging behaviours.....refchat has prepared me well
A bit surprised at some of the venom launched at you by some of your refereeing peers on this thread, never used to happen in my day
I've just started working with people with challenging behaviours.....refchat has prepared me well
Last edited:
No that was me telling you about it, I still can't believe it, I have forgotten to restart my watch before but have never played an extra 15 minutes.Didn't someone on here once post that he'd played 55 minutes in the first half of his first ever game cos he stopped his watch every time the ball went out of play. I hope it wasn't him, he'll be mortified
Just out of interest, what should he do in the second half if he plays 55 minutes in the first half, see who gets it right/wrong??
Nah there was somebody on here, think it was Tom Henderson but not sure, who played 55 minutes by accident in one of his first games for a 30 minute half!!!
Nothing he can do about it, gotta play the allocated time for the second half
EDIT - actually I don't think it was him, but I remember talking to one person about it
Even though the game has to be of two equal halves??
Pretty sure there's a rule that says that referees cannot make up for any time lost or gained in the first half, but I may be wrong...
EDIT: Thinking about it again, I'm certain that is the case - you should definitely not play 55 minutes (or 35 to average it out)
I didn't play 55 minutes!
Okay my bad - must have been somebody else!!! Sorry for questioning your integrity!
