The Ref Stop

Heard a Rumour .......

Haha yeah. Doesn't it completely devalue people's hard work to get from 7-6-5 in the last year or two, just to be told they'd be a 5 now anyway?
 
The Ref Stop
forest96 said:
Haha yeah. Doesn't it completely devalue people's hard work to get from 7-6-5 in the last year or two, just to be told they'd be a 5 now anyway?
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, I've just started my promotion season for 7-6 but it appears that this will be pointless as I'll become level 5 for 2017/18 anyway regardless of whether I'm still a 7 or get promoted to 6.
 
forest96 said:
That's absolute lunacy. So anyone can now go straight for Level 4 whenever they want? I'm not getting enough games as it is!
Click to expand...
I think you'll find that the selection procedure will ensure that certain criteria have to be fulfilled before applications for the promotion scheme are accepted.
 
Brian Hamilton said:
I think you'll find that the selection procedure will ensure that certain criteria have to be fulfilled before applications for the promotion scheme are accepted.
Click to expand...
But even the most stringent of "casual selection procedures" can't be equivalent to a two-step, 2 year, minimum 6 assessment, 7 to 5 promotion under the current system? Surely this devalues the work people have put in to go through those stages?
 
Why would you be? The assessment process and/or experience you have been through has improved you as a referee. Don't worry about what other referees are doing, focus on your self and you will be fine.
 
SM said:
Why would you be? The assessment process and/or experience you have been through has improved you as a referee. Don't worry about what other referees are doing, focus on your self and you will be fine.
Click to expand...
It has, there's no doubt about that, but I do strongly feel that grading on experience is only half of what should happen. If it's true that 5A would assist at a higher level then I have a major issue with that. There are some current Level 7's that are more experienced assistants than some Level 5's.
 
Brian Hamilton said:
Ok I've had a few things confirmed today and I'm not sure about some of them

Season 2017-18 all referees below L4 will be classified as Level 5. Within Level 5 there will be different classifications such as Trainee (5T), Junior (5J), etc.

All tutors (and possibly assessors) will no longer be classified as Level 10 if they are no longer active but Level E (for educator).

All assessors will become observers. Observers will not be required to assess and report on Level 5s unless they are going for Level 4. As Observers will not be writing reports on 7-6 and 6-5, they will be asked to observe and comment on referees. As no reports are expected, they can observe multiple referees at the same venue and provide feedback as required.

Apologies for being a doubting Thomas. My County are already wondering how they are supposed to classify all 750 Level 5 referees in the West Riding...
Click to expand...

Hmmm not sure I like the sound of that.....

Think that if a referee is 'observed' something should be recorded so that constructive advice can be given.
Watching multiple referees won't work because the potential to miss a critical decision is huge.
 
SM said:
Why would you be? The assessment process and/or experience you have been through has improved you as a referee. Don't worry about what other referees are doing, focus on your self and you will be fine.
Click to expand...
But in a sense, as soon as you progress beyond entry-level park football, everyone is actively competing with other referees. There are a limited number of non-entry level fixtures and up until now, a L5 is more likely to be given these fixtures than a L7. I will have put 2 years into doing these qualifications and, in my case, putting myself under real pressure to get the 7-6 done in time. For nothing.

And frankly, the nebulous concept of "experience" is nothing next to an actual certification saying that you have met standards and have progressed. What's the point of this change? It doesn't benefit L7's who have no interest in progressing, because why would they care? It definitely doesn't benefit people who are in the process of doing 7-6 or 6-5 qualifications, as that effort will become meaningless soon. It doesn't benefit current L5's because they'll suddenly be considered equal with people who were previously 6, 7, 8. Why do this?
 
GraemeS said:
But in a sense, as soon as you progress beyond entry-level park football, everyone is actively competing with other referees. There are a limited number of non-entry level fixtures and up until now, a L5 is more likely to be given these fixtures than a L7. I will have put 2 years into doing these qualifications and, in my case, putting myself under real pressure to get the 7-6 done in time. For nothing.

And frankly, the nebulous concept of "experience" is nothing next to an actual certification saying that you have met standards and have progressed. What's the point of this change? It doesn't benefit L7's who have no interest in progressing, because why would they care? It definitely doesn't benefit people who are in the process of doing 7-6 or 6-5 qualifications, as that effort will become meaningless soon. It doesn't benefit current L5's because they'll suddenly be considered equal with people who were previously 6, 7, 8. Why do this?
Click to expand...

Because the assessment process is a massive onerous burden on the CFA'S and this change will relieve them of that burden....Along with the associated costs.

If the only actual assessments required are for those going 5-4 the amount of work required drops drastically for each CFA.
Presuming they leave the 5-4 promotion with CFA'S.
 
A bit like if the education minister were to suddenly announce that after next year all GCSEs are to be scrapped and that everybody now has A levels. ... :confused:
 
Can anyone refresh my memory regarding the requirements for 5-4? I remember looking at them as a new L8 and them seeming quite daunting, but can't recall why specifically.
 
GraemeS said:
Can anyone refresh my memory regarding the requirements for 5-4? I remember looking at them as a new L8 and them seeming quite daunting, but can't recall why specifically.
Click to expand...

  • Achieve an average mark of 73 or above* on 3 or more assessments.
  • Referee a minimum of 15 adult male/female matches.
  • Finish in the top 50% of the club mark merit table if less than 5 assessments.
  • Must undertake a minimum of 10 appointments as Assistant Referee on adult male/female matches.
  • Must be prepared to referee Saturday and Midweek matches.
  • Any referee removed from the Level 4 list at the end of the season must referee at Level 5 for a fully playing season before being nominated for a return to Level 4.
  • Must attend one of a possible 9 regional in-service Nomination Training Sessions, delivered by the FA.
  • Must successfully complete an examination on the Laws of the Game.
  • Successfully complete a Contributory League Assistant Referee Fitness Test. The standard to be attained is a 12 minute continuous run with a minimum distance of 2, 600 metres and two 50m sprints with a max of 7.5 seconds for each sprint.
* The assessments have changed now so the mark of 73 does not apply but the same logic is there.

Edit: There seems to be some differences between counties i.e WRCFA show on their site 15 middles and 5 lines are expected, although I am aware they've increased the lines to 10 now but haven't reduced the middles down to 10 so I'm unsure on that aspect. They may have even put it back up to 20 and 10 lines.
 
YorkshireReferee said:
  • Achieve an average mark of 73 or above* on 3 or more assessments.
  • Referee a minimum of 15 adult male/female matches.
  • Finish in the top 50% of the club mark merit table if less than 5 assessments.
  • Must undertake a minimum of 10 appointments as Assistant Referee on adult male/female matches.
  • Must be prepared to referee Saturday and Midweek matches.
  • Any referee removed from the Level 4 list at the end of the season must referee at Level 5 for a fully playing season before being nominated for a return to Level 4.
  • Must attend one of a possible 9 regional in-service Nomination Training Sessions, delivered by the FA.
  • Must successfully complete an examination on the Laws of the Game.
  • Successfully complete a Contributory League Assistant Referee Fitness Test. The standard to be attained is a 12 minute continuous run with a minimum distance of 2, 600 metres and two 50m sprints with a max of 7.5 seconds for each sprint.
* The assessments have changed now so the mark of 73 does not apply but the same logic is there.

Edit: There seems to be some differences between counties i.e WRCFA show on their site 15 middles and 5 lines are expected, although I am aware they've increased the lines to 10 now but haven't reduced the middles down to 10 so I'm unsure on that aspect. They may have even put it back up to 20 and 10 lines.
Click to expand...
The mark of 73 still applies. It is only 7-6 and 6-5 who do not get a mark.
 
Padfoot said:
Hmmm not sure I like the sound of that.....

Think that if a referee is 'observed' something should be recorded so that constructive advice can be given.
Watching multiple referees won't work because the potential to miss a critical decision is huge.
Click to expand...
Me neither, these are the referees that need the most support. maybe they're hoping we'll spot the stars early and not have to spend an afternoon on a report?
 
As long as the criteria doesn't change, there will be very few referees who would meet the criteria for L4 given that in Essex typically only 25% of those who apply actually get to nomination (and these are guys with lots of experience and ability). Achieving over 73 from 5 assessments is not easy, as long as you are good enough nothing will change.

Those who are not will not meet the standard. Same as it is now.
 
GraemeS said:
But in a sense, as soon as you progress beyond entry-level park football, everyone is actively competing with other referees. There are a limited number of non-entry level fixtures and up until now, a L5 is more likely to be given these fixtures than a L7. I will have put 2 years into doing these qualifications and, in my case, putting myself under real pressure to get the 7-6 done in time. For nothing.

And frankly, the nebulous concept of "experience" is nothing next to an actual certification saying that you have met standards and have progressed. What's the point of this change? It doesn't benefit L7's who have no interest in progressing, because why would they care? It definitely doesn't benefit people who are in the process of doing 7-6 or 6-5 qualifications, as that effort will become meaningless soon. It doesn't benefit current L5's because they'll suddenly be considered equal with people who were previously 6, 7, 8. Why do this?
Click to expand...

I think you're missing a crucial point here. There will likely be sub-classifications within the "new" level 5, which will set apart newly qualified refs from a level 5 under the old system for example; I don't believe for a second that the work those referees have put in will be completely forgotten.

Sometimes there is no substitute for experience. A certificate doesn't automatically mean that you are a better referee than someone who has worked at 7 for a long period of time, just because, for whatever reason, they've chosen not to progress. I take myself as a case in point here. I started nine years ago and have been a 7 since I turned sixteen 7 years ago. Do I want to progress? Yes, of course, but with university and work commitments I know that I don't have the time to dedicate to promotion at the moment. Does that mean that I'm automatically not as good as somebody who has a certificate? Of course it doesn't.

I remember reading in this forum a while back that somebody had worked with a 4(?) who had never dealt with a mass confrontation. He had the certificate, but he didn't have the experience.

I actually think that this new system could work. Anything that means grassroots referees are better monitored, which should be the case, can only be a good thing. I do agree, however, that the achievements of those who have gone through the promotion process shouldn't be ignored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top