The Ref Stop

Im against Club Marks

  • Thread starter Thread starter AndyW
  • Start date Start date

What do you think to being marked by clubs

  • Im in favour of it !

    Votes: 8 57.1%

  • Its a stupid idea !

    Votes: 6 42.9%
  • Total voters
    14
A

AndyW

Guest
Is it just me or do you think that its a terrible idea letting football clubs dish out marks about a referees performance. The thing that gets me on my high horse is that club marks are taken into consideration when being promoted .
 
The Ref Stop
Put it this way, if the winning team give you an 90, the losing team give you a 50, average is 70. In my experience, most teams wont mark below 50 as that means submitting a report, which inevitably they can never be bothered to do. What would you suggest instead then?
 
Scrap the stupid idea when I first started refereeing in 2007 they never had it so why have it now ?
 
You sure? Been reffing since 1996 and club marks were part of promotion criteria then
 
Well ive never been marked before that I knew of lol . Just think its a crap idea
 
By all means let assesors and other referees mark us but why let clubs mark us when the majority of them dont no the LOTG
 
I'm in favour of it, however only if it changes. Currently I agree that the winning side will give you a high mark and the loosing side will give you a low score and that usually gives you a below par average for the game which is unfair, if leagues issued managers with a set list of scoring criteria that they had to submit that would give a better overall score and also the league secretaries something to utilise for positive feedback, whether that means we had a bad game we could look at it for area's of improvement etc'
What does everyone else think on this?
 
Andi Keats said:
I'm in favour of it, however only if it changes. Currently I agree that the winning side will give you a high mark and the loosing side will give you a low score and that usually gives you a below par average for the game which is unfair, if leagues issued managers with a set list of scoring criteria that they had to submit that would give a better overall score and also the league secretaries something to utilise for positive feedback, whether that means we had a bad game we could look at it for area's of improvement etc'
What does everyone else think on this?
Click to expand...
Now were talking this would be a better idea , Atleast then they no what to look for when marking us
 
I suppose they might prove some value when you want to decide wich teams a ref should ref, but other then that, they seem pretty inaccurate to me.
 
They are looked at objectively as Ross says. Clubs are also issued with a set of guidelines as to how to mark referees.

They do have their place, however. I do understand the concerns over them but this is how it was put to me: At the moment there is no other way of seeing how a referee is performing. There simply are not enough assessors to go and watch every referee at every game. If a referee receives consistently low marks, there may well be a problem there, and it allows the CFA to target their assessors to that referee to see how they are doing.
 
Normally in the county handbooks their is a form for club to use for marking a referee it also has the criteria for how to mark correctly

The club marks are not used in promotion from 7-6-5-4 unless you are a border line case with your assessors marks . then and only then, they may take them into consideration

Club marks only come into force at supply league level as you need to achieve a high average with assessors and clubs to get to the lofty heights of L3 and referee on the Contrib

I am a Refs Sec and the only marks that go to county is your season average and position in the list of referees however when appointing for matches in my league i will use the league markings to determine who gets certain appointments so we do need them if only for the league basis
 
''I am constantly questioned as to why a certain referee is given a certain game, why certain refs are given cup games, why refs that played for clubs previously are now refereeing them etc etc. I allocate cup games and finals on a points system from the marks given throughout the season, your managers fill in the marking forms then moan about who is doing the games. Same goes for referees that moan at me. Same rule applies, if you are good enough then i don't care if it's the refs first season, he gets the final. SIMPLE!!!!!''

E-mail we've just had from our youth league ref sec.
 
No problem with Club marks if they were made to justify the mark given for all scores, not just that which falls below a certain level.
 
I think club marks get a bad press, but they are needed as some referees will never be assessed. As a referee's secretary who receives upwards of 60 marks every week I can say that the notion that losing clubs mark lower than winning clubs isn't really true. It does happen occasionally, but more often than not the two marks are very close together. You tend to find that if one team marks in the 60s the other team will also mark lowly. Likewise if one is in the 90s the other will be high as well.

What needs to be remembered is that a level 7, 6 or 5 who is not going for promotion will never be assessed as a referee. The leagues that he officiates on need to know how well he is performing as they need to know who to appoint to cup finals and big league games, or grudge matches. The only possible performance measure they have is club marks. The same applies to county FAs when they are appointing for their competitions.

What I tend to do when looking at marks for appointments is discard unnaturally high or low ones, as that gives a much more representative picture. The current FA rules are also that any mark of below 61 requires a written report justifying this, so marks below 61 are rare. Although I do regularly encourage clubs not to use 61 as a barrier so that they don't have to write a report, and would rather see a report justifying the 61, or if they think he was worse than than then give him a lower mark and justify it further.

The biggest compliant I used to get when I took over was that it was pointless marking referees down and sending reports as nothing happened to them. Now that clubs know that I use the marks, and have removed several referees who get low marks all of the time, the majority of them are marking far more sensibly and actually seem to take pride in sending the marks and reports. Whereas I used to just get a mark and a report for low marks, I now regularly receive praise for referees from clubs, and this helps me out a lot.
 
Im a registrations secretary and referees marks come in to me, my gripe is the following: clubs do not know how to mark a referee. I refereed a game a few weeks ago and my marks came in 95/100 and 100/100. I phoned both clubs up and asked them do you really think i had a faultless performance both said no but no one is perfect so i said why mark me as if i had. They both said i was far better thank the other referee they had this season so thats why we marked you them marks. My opinion of the game was a good performance but as usual with any referee mistakes were made my marks should of been 70-80/100.
How can club marks be taken serious as a part of the promotion process by your CFA when no one know how to mark a referee.
This is the fa guide lines for club marks:

Club Marking of Referees

In League and County Cup Competitions Clubs are required to award the referee a mark on a scale of 1 - 100. If a Club awards a mark of 50 or less they are required to submit a report explaining why they have given the mark.


For League Competition matches where a mark of 50 or under is given the report will be forwarded by the League’s Referees’ Appointment Secretary to the County Referees’ Secretary. For County Cup Competitions the reports should be forwarded with the Result Sheet to the County Office, who in turn will forward them to the County Referees’ Secretary. Once received, the reports are used to help referees with their ongoing development.

Currently there is a standard form that should be used. However, these are not always used and there is no guidance on how to determine the mark to be given. In addition I have received a report where a club has given a mark of “Under 40” and another has awarded “11 marks.” Then there was a game when one team awarded 35 marks, the other team awarded 75 marks, and the match assessor awarded 93 marks. I wonder how the marks were derived.

In order to be able to use the club marks to help referees the Referees’ Committee have agreed to a Standardised Marking Scheme (based on the Supply League’s Scheme) which will be introduced for the forthcoming season.

The Scheme allows clubs to mark on the referee’s overall performance, not based on isolated incidents or past history. It will also help in the ongoing development of the referee.

Therefore, when marking the referee would you please consider the chart below:

Mark Range Comment

91-100 The referee was extremely accurate in decision making and very successfully controlled the game using management and communication skills to create an environment of fair play, adding real value to the game.

81-90 The referee was very accurate in decision making and successfully controlled the game using management and communication skills to create an environment of fair play.

71 - 80 The referee was accurate in decision making and controlled the game well, communicating with the players, making a positive contribution towards fair play.

61-70 The referee was reasonably accurate in decision making, controlled the game quite well and communicated with players, establishing a reasonable degree of fair play.

51-60 The referee had some shortcomings in the level of accuracy of decision making and control, with only limited success in communicating with the players resulting in variable fair play.

50 and below The referee had significant shortcomings in the level of accuracy of decision making and control with poor communication with the players which resulted in low levels of fair play

Then complete the Club Marking of Referees form:
When completing the form please consider the way in which the referee controlled the game, the accuracy of decision-making, player management, and communication with players and club officials.
Copies of the forms are available on the website click here or from the Referees’ Secretary.
Finally, the following aide memoir may be of help:
Control & Decision Making
  • How well did the referee control the game?
  • Were the players’ actions recognised correctly?
  • Were the Laws applied correctly?
  • Were all incidents dealt with efficiently/effectively?
  • Were all the appropriate sanctions applied correctly?
  • Was the referee always within reasonable distance of incidents?
  • Was the referee well positioned to make critical decisions, especially in and around the penalty area?
  • Did the referee understand the players’ positional intentions and keep out of the way accordingly?
  • Did the referee demonstrate alertness and concentration throughout the game?
  • Did the referee apply the use of the advantage to suit the mood and temperature of the game?
  • Was the referee aware of the players’ attitude to advantage?
  • Did the referee use the assistants effectively?
  • Did the officials work as a team, and did the referee lead and manage them to the benefit of the game?
Communication & Player Management
  • How well did the referee communicate with the players during the game?
  • Did the referee’s level of involvement/profile suit this particular game?
  • Did the referee understand the players’ problems on the day – e.g. difficult ground/weather conditions?
  • Did the referee respond to the changing pattern of play/mood of players?
  • Did the referee demonstrate empathy for the game, allowing it to develop in accordance with the tempo of the game?
  • Was the referee pro-active in controlling of the game?
  • Was the referee’s authority asserted firmly without being officious?
  • Was the referee confident and quick thinking?
  • Did the referee appear unflustered and unhurried when making critical decisions?
  • Did the referee permit undue questioning of decisions?
  • Did the referee deal effectively with players crowding around after decisions/incidents?
  • Was effective player management in evidence?
  • Was the referee’s body language confident and open at all times?
  • Did the pace off the game, the crowd or player pressure affect the referee negatively?
 
RustyRef said:
I think club marks get a bad press, but they are needed as some referees will never be assessed..
Click to expand...


I have to agree with RustyRef... We currently have no RDO in bedfordshire so i sit on the referees committee and have just done the county cup final appts pretty much based on general feeling and nearly wholely club marks. Have to say Everyone bar 2 in the entire county are averaging over 70... and easily over half are on 75+

That out of 400 referees is some bloody good going I hope u agree... But what was clear was the ones i knew were having a good season on feedback from colleagues people on the circuit and assessors - were matched on club marks. think that backs Rusty's statement of they do genuinely get a bad press imho.
 
It may be that in OA competition the clubs are better are marking refs, but that certainly doesn't apply in Youth Leagues.

The league i ref in has a box on the match report form where the teams award their mark......most games they have filled that in before the ref signs so you know what you have been marked.......its obvious when one team hangs back to fill it in after that you are getting a "low" mark!

It's also blindingly obvious when a team who feels they have had little or none of the decisions mark you down.....when you know that you have had a decent game. Had one game where both teams were pretty even in terms of decisions, but the away side felt they should have had a penalty (never in a million years was it a penalty) so they gave me 60, while the home side gave me 90.....and it was a draw. So, based on one incident across the whole 80 mins, the away side arrive at a below average mark.

This could affect a ref's chances of getting league cup appointments, or County Cup's.

Until clubs are made to write a brief report justifying their mark for all marks, then i am afraid i have little or no confidence in the club marking system. It's too corruptible in terms of getting back at the ref, and too much reliance is placed upon it. If clubs had to justify their mark then at least people reading it would be able to make a bit of a better informed decision about how realistic the mark is.

The system as it stands, encourages refs to keep clubs "sweet" and therefore boost their club marks to give themselves the best possible chance of plum appointments. And certainly when you get towards the top of the ref pyramid the situation is even more skewed towards reffing for club marks more than the LOTG. Hence why there is lots "managing" of things like OFFINABUS when they should really be sending the players off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top