General communication

[Big Cat]

As Big cat says he is doing. Try and work this out of your game. You're only inviting conversation and dissent.
I too am trying to cut down on how much talking I am doing and saving it for when it's needed.
Save it for the less obvious fouls or if a player politely asks what it was for.

I should imagine that this is a perpetual battle for referees at all levels!

 

[RobOda]

As im only twenty games into my reffing days ive found myself explaining a lot of free kicks even when not questioned, is this common ?

Yes, I think it is a bad habit that new referees get into - just my opinion though.

Blow the whistle, signal, get into position for the drop zone (unless you need the wall). No fuss, no issues, don't give them rope to hang you with.

Anyone asks; "It's a foul." No need to elaborate at all unless it's an obscure issue that really needs explaining - and even then, I'll only explain it if the players will actually be quiet and listen to what I'm saying. If they're not, I'm not going to get into an argument over it.

 

[spuddy1878]

I find myself explaining more when bringing something back after no clear advantage.

Comments such as "blue free kick, tried to play advantage, nothing came from it so we are going back here"

 

[santa sangria]

Explaining advantage/no advantage like that is really good. I do that to stop dreamers complaining that they wanted an advantage 60 yards from goal in sea of opponents.

The other day I haf a Dogso-r decision to make. After the whistle I ran in with the YC out shouting ”distance and the other defender” (in a strange language only understood by rally drivers, really) and it scotched all complaints. I will use that again.

But I must learn to shut up when the ref’s interference, commentary is not necessary,