Add the website to the banned list.
Level 4 Observer Reports
- Thread starter Big Cat
- Start date
Am 2/6Add the website to the banned list.
May as well just promote me now, save all the cuffuffle.
Last edited:
2 tables. 1 for the season and 1 for the calendar year.
Can get successive mid season promos.
1 referee went 5-3 last season and another went 2b-FL or 3 - 2a can't remember which. But it is definitely achievable to get a mid season in half a season. Aug-Jan maybe tight but there is a lot of football player in that time.
bester
RefChat Addict
There was a few promoted midseason on the line who didn't have five observations.
Probably something to be aware of that those above you in the merit table may not be eligible (if they apply the criteria) for promotion.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
The referee that went 5 to 3 came through the Hertfordshire promotion scheme. The referee that went 2B to FL I assisted on his final two games of the season. Maybe I'm just a lucky charm ...
There was a referee from Cornwall who went 5-3 too as well as another from Dorset.The referee that went 5 to 3 came through the Hertfordshire promotion scheme. The referee that went 2B to FL I assisted on his final two games of the season. Maybe I'm just a lucky charm ...
My first assessment score was very good... better than I'd hoped for TBH
Rather surprisingly, I was also observed on my second game on Tuesday night. Luckily, that game was equally as challenging as the first (6 cautions and plenty to keep me busy in front of 300+ folk, all keen to offer their advice!). Had my debrief last night, no development points. Excellent ARs and we put in a solid team effort so hoping to consolidate my early merit table standing
Our Pool Average is 71.9 with 13 Referees in the system so far
Last edited:
not going to lie i was fuming with my first observation of the season. 3 KMIs (all right), red, yellows, end to end game...one minor development on positioning...
71.45 - 0.9 marks below the pool average. I happened to bump into the observer at a mentoring event and he mentioned he thought he was awarding an 'average mark'. he's encouraged me to appeal it (which i have done) but i dont expect much of an uplift (if any).
it's infuriating how different observers have different concepts about what an average mark is. it is surely essential that observers are made aware of what an average mark is so refs dont get screwed
anyway rant over
71.45 - 0.9 marks below the pool average. I happened to bump into the observer at a mentoring event and he mentioned he thought he was awarding an 'average mark'. he's encouraged me to appeal it (which i have done) but i dont expect much of an uplift (if any).
it's infuriating how different observers have different concepts about what an average mark is. it is surely essential that observers are made aware of what an average mark is so refs dont get screwed
anyway rant over
The way I looked at it was almost everyone has got to have them so their good mark is better than they are giving to others.
I had two contrasting games last season 1 game 72.05 and the other 72.9.
One of those games was played in howling wind and driving rain, fierce local derby, close scoreline, 3 KMIs all correct as per Mr observer, red cards, yellow cards, manager misconduct, even got a challenging situations in application of law.
The other a 6 nil, no cards, applauded off by spectators kind of game.
I think you know which scores were for which game...
The way I looked at it was almost everyone has got to have them so their good mark is better than they are giving to others.
I had two contrasting games last season 1 game 72.05 and the other 72.9.
One of those games was played in howling wind and driving rain, fierce local derby, close scoreline, 3 KMIs all correct as per Mr observer, red cards, yellow cards, manager misconduct, even got a challenging situations in application of law.
The other a 6 nil, no cards, applauded off by spectators kind of game.
I think you know which scores were for which game...
yeah it's often so frustrating when things like this happen
i had a few friends watching and they all couldn't believe the mark. if he thought it was an average performance and that 71.45 was an acceptable mark for the game, then that's all fair enough and understandable (i thought i was better than but hey ho). when i spoke to him he wasnt aware how bad a mark it was and what he's done is essentially kill me first game into the season
sorry...rant wasnt quite over
Take it from me, you're not dead yet.yeah it's often so frustrating when things like this happen
i had a few friends watching and they all couldn't believe the mark. if he thought it was an average performance and that 71.45 was an acceptable mark for the game, then that's all fair enough and understandable (i thought i was better than but hey ho). when i spoke to him he wasnt aware how bad a mark it was and what he's done is essentially kill me first game into the season
sorry...rant wasnt quite over
My first mark in the last marking season was 71.4.
Perhaps midseason off the table but your season is still on and you get a fresh slate in January too. Head up pal. Keep working hard.
Likely the average is anomalous due to insufficient scores in the system. No doubt the average will slowly creep below 72 over time
Strikes me that luck is a big factor when it comes to 'escaping' Level 4
Need competitive intense games with sufficient opportunity perform well across most competencies; amongst other things!
Impossible not to get downhearted from your description of events. Dunno how Refs used to stay motivated without the mid-season promotions and reset of the marking season
it's still more than 0.6 marks below last seasons average which was nearly 72.1. either way it's definitely a significantly below average mark for at worst, an average performance.
IMO luck is the single biggest factor. dont get me wrong, the cream does usually rise to the top (and i'm not for a second suggesting i'm the cream here...) but luck in getting the right games and then the right observers on those games is absolutely key
the motivation is getting out there and doing it all again...got told in my match tuesday that was too good for this level by an ex 2a...no observer though, typically (there's that luck thing again!)
They FA probably ought to employ a statistician. Seriously, Figuring out how to use numbers effectively is not the preserve a bunch of old farts in suits. For one thing, how did we end up with a system that scores out of a hundred, yet the 95th percentiles probably lie around 70.0 and 73.0 FFS?
this is (unsurprisingly) the topic of discussion on many a drive to a game with colleagues and there is no perfect solution and there never will be. they trying to make the process as repeatable as possible and within that you will always get outliers, it's just how you deal with those?
Not sure why any observer needs to know the average mark. I've been out of the game a couple of years but it was becoming a fairly tight banding when I left it and the descriptors were pretty clear on how to build your report and mark. If you followed the guidelines, it gave you the mark. If you started messing around with the descriptors to get a mark to fit the feel of the game, you are messing with a well developed system and therefore shouldn't be allowed to use it.
The problem that The FA have is that most Observers want to do a good job but also be popular. Being popular means turning a blind eye to some situations in a game and not putting them in a report. If you do that in your reports, you're showing favouritism. That is how the wrong people get promoted. Also unless things have changed a lot, observers aren't getting any younger.
The problem that The FA have is that most Observers want to do a good job but also be popular. Being popular means turning a blind eye to some situations in a game and not putting them in a report. If you do that in your reports, you're showing favouritism. That is how the wrong people get promoted. Also unless things have changed a lot, observers aren't getting any younger.
Because the system they have come up with is too harsh/rewarding for bad/good performances. If a bad mark is a 6.5 (in a section), it is too close to the norm. As observers, a major development point should be a 5.5 (I know it would kill under the current marking guide) and 2 minors should allow for a deduction. So, doing nothing gets you a 7.0. On the other side, it is difficult to justify a 8.5 for a good decision which enhances match control.
A marking of 6.0 as the norm, should be the starting point.