The Ref Stop

Leisure leagues

AlexF said:
That's because the guy behind RefSupport is the owner (one of the owners) of the LL franchise.
Click to expand...
And this is my point. It looks like they invested in Leisure Leagues in early 2020, however most of the 'don't touch them with a bargepole' comments come from folk that did stuff for them Pre this time.

I'd suspect that if they are actively involved now, that the levels of behaviour will have improved, but it feels like they will struggle to attract refs that have been burnt before.

They just opened up near me and have been heavily advertising locally for refs, but I'm not especially interested for a variety of reasons.
 
The Ref Stop
I have just read their rules online.
Confused - you will be!
All free kicks are indirect. If a player's shoe comes off he is cautioned. If he scores whilst the shoe is off a direct free kick is awarded. No registration of players, anyone can play, including guest players, unless the referee doesn't allow the guest to play.
. . . etc., etc., etc.
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
I have just read their rules online.
Confused - you will be!
All free kicks are indirect. If a player's shoe comes off he is cautioned. If he scores whilst the shoe is off a direct free kick is awarded. No registration of players, anyone can play, including guest players, unless the referee doesn't allow the guest to play.
. . . etc., etc., etc.
Click to expand...
Too much time on your hands with an unexpected evening off!
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
I have just read their rules online.
Confused - you will be!
All free kicks are indirect. If a player's shoe comes off he is cautioned. If he scores whilst the shoe is off a direct free kick is awarded. No registration of players, anyone can play, including guest players, unless the referee doesn't allow the guest to play.
. . . etc., etc., etc.
Click to expand...

Confused indeed!

I have no direct knowledge of the leisure leagues at all, but the following link seems to be their current national rules: https://www.leisureleagues.net/terms-and-conditions

It looks like on the linked page the 'quick rules' (summary) have been updated for 2022, but parts of the 'full rules' haven't been modified to match, so the two contradict each other in places. Just a couple of extracts (emphasis added by me):

From 'Quick Rules':
"Set Pieces, All Set pieces are now direct, meaning that you can score from a corner or free kick."

From 'Rules in Full':
"Free Kicks, Kick ins/Roll In's & Corners
9a) All free kicks, kick ins/roll in's and corners are indirect."

The shoe thing seems odd to me (though I guess looking at it objectively a studded boot flying off a foot at high speed is a potentially significant hazard for other players & officials), but I like the 'Two Yard Rule' (advancing a free-kick 2 yards if players dissent / fail to retreat / etc.).

There is an overall 'referee primacy' rule, which I guess gives you a get-out clause for where the rules make no sense, and maybe isn't that different to 'in the opinion of the referee' in LOTG, but as written it sounds like it could be a recipe for a "last week's ref" disaster (especially if teams don't respect the officials):

"THE RULE OF REFEREE PRIMACY
The referee is free to override any of these rules to give them much greater autonomy on the pitch and to ensure they are in sole charge of the games"
 
Ref_Dad said:
Confused indeed!

I have no direct knowledge of the leisure leagues at all, but the following link seems to be their current national rules: https://www.leisureleagues.net/terms-and-conditions

It looks like on the linked page the 'quick rules' (summary) have been updated for 2022, but parts of the 'full rules' haven't been modified to match, so the two contradict each other in places. Just a couple of extracts (emphasis added by me):

From 'Quick Rules':
"Set Pieces, All Set pieces are now direct, meaning that you can score from a corner or free kick."

From 'Rules in Full':
"Free Kicks, Kick ins/Roll In's & Corners
9a) All free kicks, kick ins/roll in's and corners are indirect."

The shoe thing seems odd to me (though I guess looking at it objectively a studded boot flying off a foot at high speed is a potentially significant hazard for other players & officials), but I like the 'Two Yard Rule' (advancing a free-kick 2 yards if players dissent / fail to retreat / etc.).

There is an overall 'referee primacy' rule, which I guess gives you a get-out clause for where the rules make no sense, and maybe isn't that different to 'in the opinion of the referee' in LOTG, but as written it sounds like it could be a recipe for a "last week's ref" disaster (especially if teams don't respect the officials):

"THE RULE OF REFEREE PRIMACY
The referee is free to override any of these rules to give them much greater autonomy on the pitch and to ensure they are in sole charge of the games"
Click to expand...
The rules debate from this lot would satisfy our pedants for a year 😁😁
 
Ref_Dad said:
"THE RULE OF REFEREE PRIMACY
The referee is free to override any of these rules to give them much greater autonomy on the pitch and to ensure they are in sole charge of the games"
Click to expand...
Has anyone sent this to IFAB as suggestion yet? :D

But it did make me think a bit. When the Laws truly were more simple, ITOOTR ruled in a way it doesn't seem to as much today. I suppose we can largely blame TV games with super slow-mo and magic lines. But it seems there used to be much more of a sense of the referee gains trust and the players take the decisions of the day rather than an expectation that every game have exactly the same calls. (There is still some of that--I have watched referees with presence applies years outdated Laws or things that just came out of nowhere and get away with it because they were just trusted by the teams.) Back in the day, there were just a small number of reasons for cautions, and most were just USB and the R decided what USB meant rather than check lists and debates about whether it was outside the Laws because it wasn't listed as a specific example. Not a genie that can go back in the bottle.
 
socal lurker said:
Has anyone sent this to IFAB as suggestion yet? :D

But it did make me think a bit. When the Laws truly were more simple, ITOOTR ruled in a way it doesn't seem to as much today. I suppose we can largely blame TV games with super slow-mo and magic lines. But it seems there used to be much more of a sense of the referee gains trust and the players take the decisions of the day rather than an expectation that every game have exactly the same calls. (There is still some of that--I have watched referees with presence applies years outdated Laws or things that just came out of nowhere and get away with it because they were just trusted by the teams.) Back in the day, there were just a small number of reasons for cautions, and most were just USB and the R decided what USB meant rather than check lists and debates about whether it was outside the Laws because it wasn't listed as a specific example. Not a genie that can go back in the bottle.
Click to expand...
I think it's the constant whine for consistency. You can't have room in the laws for referees to decide what they think counts as unsporting and have consistency between matches. The more you have referees making decisions with a checklist mentality, the more consistency you get between games and the more you eliminate variable like who the referee is and what kind of mood they are in.
 
Would love to know how all of this is enforced ...

1646327465622.png

Points 2 and 3, we know that the police won't get involved unless it is very, very serious, so does that mean the players get away with it?

Point 4 makes no sense at all. Dealt with them initially for what, that implies that if a referee sent a player off for anything that player and team are banned, but only when that referee is officiating.

Points 7 and 8, the words kangaroo court spring to mind. Surely any one accused of any offence has a right to put a defence across?

Point 9 just wow. A referee can ban a player or team before they have done anything wrong, just on the basis he thinks they might cause a problem in the future.
 
RustyRef said:
Would love to know how all of this is enforced ...

View attachment 5494

Points 2 and 3, we know that the police won't get involved unless it is very, very serious, so does that mean the players get away with it?

Point 4 makes no sense at all. Dealt with them initially for what, that implies that if a referee sent a player off for anything that player and team are banned, but only when that referee is officiating.

Points 7 and 8, the words kangaroo court spring to mind. Surely any one accused of any offence has a right to put a defence across?

Point 9 just wow. A referee can ban a player or team before they have done anything wrong, just on the basis he thinks they might cause a problem in the future.
Click to expand...

A league has opened in my town and they've advertised for local refs on a local Facebook group. Sunday evenings which is a good time for me, but reading this charter I am very sceptical. I think I'll sign up and do one session just out of curiosity!

Brings back memories of my first refereeing experience as a 16 year old reffing 5aside leagues in a town called Glossop. I had to collect the money from the teams and mail it off and take my fee from that. Half the time teams didn't have the full amount and I had a mobile phone stolen from the lockers. The company docked my fee for the amount that I didn't collect so I told them to stick it. The behaviour was atrocious. I did say never again....
 
Ben448844 said:
A league has opened in my town and they've advertised for local refs on a local Facebook group. Sunday evenings which is a good time for me, but reading this charter I am very sceptical. I think I'll sign up and do one session just out of curiosity!

Brings back memories of my first refereeing experience as a 16 year old reffing 5aside leagues in a town called Glossop. I had to collect the money from the teams and mail it off and take my fee from that. Half the time teams didn't have the full amount and I had a mobile phone stolen from the lockers. The company docked my fee for the amount that I didn't collect so I told them to stick it. The behaviour was atrocious. I did say never again....
Click to expand...
I remember running an event, for a different firm, and collected money on the nights too. Got accused of taking the money as teams would claim to the company they paid in full when they didn't.
So I created a signing sheet that meant they signed for what they paid.
 
ladbroke8745 said:
I remember running an event, for a different firm, and collected money on the nights too. Got accused of taking the money as teams would claim to the company they paid in full when they didn't.
So I created a signing sheet that meant they signed for what they paid.
Click to expand...

Good idea. I was 16 and did it for about 2 months. Sacked it off and never thought about reffing again (I was playing Saturdays and Sunday mornings at the time too).

I cant remember the firms name. It was 22 years ago.
 
I done a few at powerleague to cover a mate. Only had one issue bloke kicked one guy in the shin then started shouting at me saying he could have broke my leg. I just replied two things here mate first he never broke your leg. Secondly if u had shin pads on u would have been ok. So get on with it. Players laughed and got on with it
 
Dazzykerr said:
I done a few at powerleague to cover a mate. Only had one issue bloke kicked one guy in the shin then started shouting at me saying he could have broke my leg. I just replied two things here mate first he never broke your leg. Secondly if u had shin pads on u would have been ok. So get on with it. Players laughed and got on with it
Click to expand...
No shin pads? Does that leave you as a referee vunerable to possible legal action?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top