A&H

Footballers becoming refs

E

es1

RefChat Addict
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49007776

I think it's a huge shame that retiring players and those let go from academies aren't becoming refs. I've only ever come across one (Rob Clare) but he's not reffing anymore.

They have a huge advantage over anyone of us (that they've actually played the game at or near the top level), players would likely offer them a bit more respect because of those and they're probably fitter than most of us too (well me anyway!).

I don't agree that they should work up the levels like we have to though. You need to make sure they're competent before allowing them to move up the levels obviously, particularly from 4-3-2-1, but the time it takes must be off putting and I think that should be reduced (let them go 7-4 in 6 months or so) to encourage more to take up the whistle.

Sure plenty of refs would be against fast tracking but I think it's the only way we'd get ex-players into reffing and I think the benefits these refs would offer the game outweigh the potential negative impacts on existing refs.
 
The Referee Store
I have nothing against ex players becoming refs, but I don't agree with fast tracking.

You essentially create a two tier system, telling one group of of referees that they are more important than another because they used to play.

Also, what would it say to referees who have taken 4 years to get to level 4 and then have someone turn up who's only been a referee for 6 months.
 
zarathustra said:
I have nothing against ex players becoming refs, but I don't agree with fast tracking.

You essentially create a two tier system, telling one group of of referees that they are more important than another because they used to play.

Also, what would it say to referees who have taken 4 years to get to level 4 and then have someone turn up who's only been a referee for 6 months.
Click to expand...

Absolutely a fair response. As a 4 I would have no issue myself though.

As I said, I think they can bring skills to the game I don't (and may never) posses. Making them take 3 years to get to 4 would put many/all of them off.

We're in need of more refs, from what I can see, this will help that a little. And if a few of these ex-pros get to level 1/select group 1 of 2 then it will encourage more.

Getting a few younger released academy players interested would be a different scenario, but they should also be encouraged. They have plenty of trials for all these kids who get released, why don't they (or maybe they do?) get some encouragement to try out reffing?!
 
es1 said:
Absolutely a fair response. As a 4 I would have no issue myself though.

As I said, I think they can bring skills to the game I don't (and may never) posses. Making them take 3 years to get to 4 would put many/all of them off.

We're in need of more refs, from what I can see, this will help that a little. And if a few of these ex-pros get to level 1/select group 1 of 2 then it will encourage more.

Getting a few younger released academy players interested would be a different scenario, but they should also be encouraged. They have plenty of trials for all these kids who get released, why don't they (or maybe they do?) get some encouragement to try out reffing?!
Click to expand...
If they're not good enough to get there faster than anybody else, they shouldn't be fast-tracked.
Sure, they'll have advantages with general fitness and mobility, rapport with players and an understanding of the game at a higher level than the average new referee.
But if they can't naturally use those advantages to get promoted faster, or they do things that actively prevent them being promoted faster, you are only setting them up to fail harder higher later if you promote them anyway.
Give them the experience they need to become a good referee, not the experience of being a guinea pig or poster child or stopgap. Encourage them to follow the process - they didn't become amazing players without years of training and practise, I think they'll be okay with needing a few seasons to become amazing referees too.
 
Not suggesting putting them in at prem level

Not suggesting putting them straight in at 4

Put them in at the bottom, but let them progress quicker IF they're good enough.

If they're no good they'll get found out pretty quickly.
 
Nij said:
If they're not good enough to get there faster than anybody else, they shouldn't be fast-tracked.
Sure, they'll have advantages with general fitness and mobility, rapport with players and an understanding of the game at a higher level than the average new referee.
But if they can't naturally use those advantages to get promoted faster, or they do things that actively prevent them being promoted faster, you are only setting them up to fail harder higher later if you promote them anyway.
Give them the experience they need to become a good referee, not the experience of being a guinea pig or poster child or stopgap. Encourage them to follow the process - they didn't become amazing players without years of training and practise, I think they'll be okay with needing a few seasons to become amazing referees too.
Click to expand...

In an ideal world yes, but I don't think many ex-pros will be interested in spending 1 year at 7 then 6 then 5 before even getting to 4.

They'd obviously have less experience and therefore less opportunity to handle tough it unusual situations making them more prone to a failing in a bigger game but they'll have other skills that'll help them progress as well.
 
es1 said:
In an ideal world yes, but I don't think many ex-pros will be interested in spending 1 year at 7 then 6 then 5 before even getting to 4.

They'd obviously have less experience and therefore less opportunity to handle tough it unusual situations making them more prone to a failing in a bigger game but they'll have other skills that'll help them progress as well.
Click to expand...
That's an issue with the system as a whole. Promising and capable new referees shouldn't need an entire year at each of 7 and 6, and then 5, regardless of whether they have played at a high level.
But that's the system now, and giving a free pass to someone who simply hasn't done the same work isn't going to make existing referees feel any better. You'd lose as many as you gained, if not more, and they'd have been the ones who stayed for longer at the levels where referees are least available. Seen it happen over and over, both officials and players: the new guy comes in straight to the top, other contenders getting miffed at the roadblock and unfairness and start leaving because it's just one more political straw on the sport's back, and the prodigy either turns out to be just an average joe or moves on quickly, leaving the association with fewer people than they started, and that at a lower overall quality.
 
Nij said:
That's an issue with the system as a whole. Promising and capable new referees shouldn't need an entire year at each of 7 and 6, and then 5, regardless of whether they have played at a high level.
But that's the system now, and giving a free pass to someone who simply hasn't done the same work isn't going to make existing referees feel any better. You'd lose as many as you gained, if not more, and they'd have been the ones who stayed for longer at the levels where referees are least available. Seen it happen over and over, both officials and players: the new guy comes in straight to the top, other contenders getting miffed at the roadblock and unfairness and start leaving because it's just one more political straw on the sport's back, and the prodigy either turns out to be just an average joe or moves on quickly, leaving the association with fewer people than they started, and that at a lower overall quality.
Click to expand...

Yeah, another fair point
 
es1 said:
Yeah it must be an old quiz. The top one is right under the old law though, isn't it? He's touched it twice with no other player touching it!
Click to expand...

Isn't it also right under the new laws? Possession hasn't changed as result of the ball hitting the ref.
 
es1 said:
But it has created a goal (scoring opportunity)
Click to expand...

The law says it's a dropped ball if the ball touches a ref and goes into the goal. I think it's clearly intended to mean if the ball goes directly into the goal having just touched the ref, not at some future point having been kicked again.

So i think this a IDFK to the other team for two consecutive touches by the free kick taker.
 
Trip said:
The law says it's a dropped ball if the ball touches a ref and goes into the goal. I think it's clearly intended to mean if the ball goes directly into the goal having just touched the ref, not at some future point having been kicked again.

So i think this a IDFK to the other team for two consecutive touches by the free kick taker.
Click to expand...

You could say it started a promising attack
 
es1 said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49007776

I think it's a huge shame that retiring players and those let go from academies aren't becoming refs. I've only ever come across one (Rob Clare) but he's not reffing anymore.

They have a huge advantage over anyone of us (that they've actually played the game at or near the top level), players would likely offer them a bit more respect because of those and they're probably fitter than most of us too (well me anyway!).

I don't agree that they should work up the levels like we have to though. You need to make sure they're competent before allowing them to move up the levels obviously, particularly from 4-3-2-1, but the time it takes must be off putting and I think that should be reduced (let them go 7-4 in 6 months or so) to encourage more to take up the whistle.

Sure plenty of refs would be against fast tracking but I think it's the only way we'd get ex-players into reffing and I think the benefits these refs would offer the game outweigh the potential negative impacts on existing refs.
Click to expand...
Since taking to the middle and watching other referees with more interest, it's my opinion that the Laws can be learned reasonably quickly and AOL should be at a good standard within 3-4 years (assuming the referee is privileged enough to get on-going training). Beyond this point, I see referees making basic errors at all levels, so knowledge of Law and AOL doesn't seem to improve a lot after that. In my opinion, refereeing then becomes a challenge of learning to do a similar job, albeit in an increasingly demanding arena
Ex-professionals with the right personality traits, would hold several massive advantages over those kids who start out early and spend aons clambering up the ladder;
a) They will know the game inside out and be more than fit enough. b) they will be entirely accustomed to the arena in which others may crumble
I think professionals whose careers are cut short should be targeted with Level 4 being a reasonable starting point with fast-track beyond that.
I was watching the Salford City game yesterday when it occurred to me that the referee was so much older than the players. I don't know how old the chap was, but we're not at our best the wrong side of 40 so I fail to see how an endless promotion scheme delivers the best standards by referees employing refs beyond their prime
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
One of the ways in which ex pro players could develop quicker as referees is for them to do their clubs development team matches.

One of the issues with ex players is earnings. How can they sustain their learning period as referees, as to get the experience they would need to do 2-3 matches a week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top