Observers (Step 6 and above) To No Longer See The Overall Mark Awarded To Referees

[Kes]

From 1st Jan 2026, MOAS Observer reports will no longer display the "final mark" that their report has given to the referee.

The referee will of course still see it, but the observer won't.

I think this has been on the cards for a while and personally, suspect that recent "over-marking" might have finally caused the FA to implement this.

I think it's a good thing.

 

[DavidObs]

From 1st Jan 2026, MOAS Observer reports will no longer display the "final mark" that their report has given to the referee.

The referee will of course still see it, but the observer won't.

I think this has been on the cards for a while and personally, suspect that recent "over-marking" might have finally caused the FA to implement this.

I think it's a good thing.

As with everything there are pros and cons. The process was used in NLN & S before Obsevers were no longer used at the end of the 2024/25 season. The main con being that whereas Observers generally cast an eye over the overall mark to double check to ensure the report is accurate, by not seeing it there is potential for an error eg missing out certain competencies & therefore the mark is lower than intended.

 

[Samuel]

I have heard that apparently they would sometimes lower a mark they give to ensure that their average is not too high. Not something I could say I've seen but heard that from some other refs in the area. Looking forward to seeing what this does to the average mark in 2026 though

 

[Kes]

As with everything there are pros and cons. The process was used in NLN & S before Obsevers were no longer used at the end of the 2024/25 season. The main con being that whereas Observers generally cast an eye over the overall mark to double check to ensure the report is accurate, by not seeing it there is potential for an error eg missing out certain competencies & therefore the mark is lower than intended.

Fact is that the "weighting" for each competency is still available to see on the current version so effectively, any observer that really wants to work out what the final mark they've given is - will still be able to do so.

 

[DavidObs]

Fact is that the "weighting" for each competency is still available to see on the current version so effectively, any observer that really wants to work out what the final mark they've given is - will still be able to do so.

Perhaps I am being a bit slow & I haven’t got a live version to look at, but if still able to see the weightings then pointless in many cases, though many will not bother to look/work out. I think they found for NLN/S that there was clear evidence that when the Observer didn’t see the mark, the average for all went down.

 

[JamesL]

I think that there are observers out there that mark to an average. Be that their own or the pool.
There are also many more that just do the report as intended and let the report mark itself so to speak.

There must be some data or science behind it but in my l experience the average mark on the level 3 pool never goes down, but always creeps up on an upward trajectory.

 

[DavidObs]

Perhaps I am being a bit slow & I haven’t got a live version to look at, but if still able to see the weightings then pointless in many cases, though many will not bother to look/work out.

I think that there are observers out there that mark to an average. Be that their own or the pool.
There are also many more that just do the report as intended and let the report mark itself so to speak.

There must be some data or science behind it but in my l experience the average mark on the level 3 pool never goes down, but always creeps up on an upward trajectory.

I agree with you James and your final paragraph is probably why they are introducing the scheme from 1st Jan, cos I can almost guarantee the average mark will go down, albeit probably only by a small percentage. However, although a bit strange introducing it mid-season, the impact good bad or indifferent should be the same for everyone.

 

[JamesL]

I agree with you James and your final paragraph is probably why they are introducing the scheme from 1st Jan, cos I can almost guarantee the average mark will go down, albeit probably only by a small percentage. However, although a bit strange introducing it mid-season, the impact good bad or indifferent should be the same for everyone.

It won't be the same for everyone per se.

I could benefit it I could really lose out. I've done 9 games this season and had 1 observation. I know of other referees who have done less games but had 4 observations.
So if the average mark goes up I win but if it goes down then I lose because those marks will have a greater impact to my average than someone with 4 observations already.

 

[DavidObs]

It won't be the same for everyone per se.

I could benefit it I could really lose out. I've done 9 games this season and had 1 observation. I know of other referees who have done less games but had 4 observations.
So if the average mark goes up I win but if it goes down then I lose because those marks will have a greater impact to my average than someone with 4 observations already.

That’s true with opening sentence though with you only having 1 observation with probably 3 others due and others having had 4 and may not need any others, you could lose out.

 

[bester]

@JamesL Prediction. This change will lower the mark around the same amount it normally creeps up and the FA will conclude the change has had no impact.

 

[Big Cat]

I was given a sh1t score in my first observation of the season. And I mean sh1t. Bottom of the pile sh1t
Completely unexpected. I was expecting something fairly average
No development points whatsoever. Blue writing only. Very light on content. He missed loads of stuff, good and bad
I called the observer a few days later. He stated the score should be average based on the 'pilot scheme'. I categorically told him he was completely wrong with his expectation of average and I ended up 50/50 some weeks later

Total, nonsense, all of it. I've found the standard of observers to be poor in my area. Almost certainly biased by Parent County. I'm often underwhelmed by referees' debriefs when I'm on the line. I've since had a score which was well above average and my club marks are in Band A. And I've had it both ways, with occasional inflated scores on account of getting lucky with match incident
I've lost interest in the scheme and give it as little thought as possible, but continue to referee every game to the best of my ability and am having quite a good season in that respect. I don't care if they see the score or not. I'm not bitter, I've just lost faith in the process and have lost interest in becoming an observer myself

FWIW, one absurdity of the scheme that's quite conspicuous........ It wouldn't surprise me whatsoever if the FA take an average of two merit positions (I'm across two step5/6 leagues) when deriving an overall table. One of mine has two games, the other has ten. Doubt very much they'll weight accordingly and it gives them latitude to be opaque in their selection process

Rant over. Not even sure why I bothered ranting! No further comment!

 

[DavidObs]

Great that you have recovered extremely well. I don’t disagree with the overall policy, but what I do definitely disagree with and shouldn’t happen is that not only should you be left to be surprised with your comments/with no development points, but that they also said the score should be the average based upon the pilot scheme. Your reports since can only confirm that he/she must have completely misunderstood what was happening & I have never been told that. Yes, observers to be mindful of over or under scoring but that’s it and at the end of the day, it’s what the observer sees/skills they have that should justify the end result etc.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Some background:
When observing, I regularly have to ask/tell match officials not to talk about League averages, pool averages, and/or any reference to their last observation and marks, all of which are immaterial.
Observers at 3-6 mark each section of the report against the standards laid down in the Report Writing Handbook, which is available to referees and observers via The FA Community. The system then calculates the total mark.
This season all Observers were given training on completing the new form, how to handle post-match debriefs, etc. Only after completing a report on a screened match to a satisfactory level, and a LOTG test, were they able to start observing this season.
Match officials are invited to report on every observation, with various defined questions/headings. Feedback is given to Observers individually and as a group. Early season results show a modest improvement over last season.
Currently early season observations are being reviewed by the Peer Review Team, anonymously as all match details are removed before submission.
Individual feedback is then sent to each Observer and to their Regional Observer Support Officer.
Appeals from match officials are reviewed thoroughly and impartially, again with no match details.
Improvements are happening and will continue. If a match official is unhappy with a report, please do appeal.
Explanation over - hope it helps.

 

[Big Cat]

I came last in the August Lottery
Just looked back at it again.... scant amount of 'blue writing'. 4x Above. Nothing else of mention. No dev points... 71.0.... 50/50 weeks later
It was about 33 degrees on the night. I wasn't at my best, but nothing much to remember aside from feeling terrible in the heat during the first half. One to forget, but it nailed my opinion of 'the scheme'. I'm not that bothered. I'd say I'm winding my commitment down somewhat

Anyway, back the topic. It's obvs from how many aboves/belows are given what the score will be (give or take), so it makes no odds

 

[bester]

@ChasObserverRefDeveloper The major reason referees are unhappy with reports is lack of content which isn't appealable.

 

[RefereeX]

I came last in the August Lottery
Just looked back at it again.... scant amount of 'blue writing'. 4x Above. Nothing else of mention. No dev points... 71.0.... 50/50 weeks later
It was about 33 degrees on the night. I wasn't at my best, but nothing much to remember aside from feeling terrible in the heat during the first half. One to forget, but it nailed my opinion of 'the scheme'. I'm not that bothered. I'd say I'm winding my commitment down somewhat

Anyway, back the topic. It's obvs from how many aboves/belows are given what the score will be (give or take), so it makes no odds

August 12th by any chance??

Remember that Tuesday night well never had a drinks break on a night game before. And when we got back in the changing room it was like a sauna as it had consumed all the heat!

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

@ChasObserverRefDeveloper The major reason referees are unhappy with reports is lack of content which isn't appealable.

There is a fine balance in deciding which aspects of a report are able to be appealed.
This season, the scope was increased:
"Once again, there are two criteria under which a match official may appeal against a report. The first criteria (the observer is incorrect in Law) is unchanged. The second criteria has been extended to now include the words 'and associated impact statement', putting greater emphasis on the the observer's use of the marking pendulum to reflect game impact. More guidance on determining impact can be found in Section Two of the Match Observer Report Writing Handbook"
Subjective decisions are by definition more difficult to determine (as RefChat readers know only too well!) so the above parameters apply currently.

 

[RefereeX]

There is a fine balance in deciding which aspects of a report are able to be appealed.
This season, the scope was increased:
"Once again, there are two criteria under which a match official may appeal against a report. The first criteria (the observer is incorrect in Law) is unchanged. The second criteria has been extended to now include the words 'and associated impact statement', putting greater emphasis on the the observer's use of the marking pendulum to reflect game impact. More guidance on determining impact can be found in Section Two of the Match Observer Report Writing Handbook"
Subjective decisions are by definition more difficult to determine (as RefChat readers know only too well!) so the above parameters apply currently.

Feels like you're a fan of the system, and thats fair enough... are there any changes you would make?

I always feel uncomfortable talking to observers about average marks etc and it's something I avoid... but then it does feel like some observers are still marking to well below the group average and have no idea that they're doing so. I'm not sure, without introducing a very complicated system that takes an observers seasonal average mark and compares your mark against that, there is any better way to do it.

 

[Quarryref]

but then it does feel like some observers are still marking to well below the group average and have no idea that they're doing so.

There is no perfect observation system, because any system involves human beings, judgement and all the natural variations that come with that.

My own view looking at this from more than one angle is that the best observers work within the framework of the process to deliver a report and a score that is all 3 of a fair reflection of the performance, has development value and has a fair impact on merit table position - the same way the best referees use the LOTG as a framework for delivering the game, not as a box ticking exercise.

I don't see how any observer can do that without some awareness of a typical / average mark - and I do mean some awareness, not using the average as a start point.

My own worst (and best) surprises from observation reports have been where the observer either doesn't know, or just likes to be a maverick and do their own thing. Thankfully, I think those are few and far between, but if you only have 1 observation in 6 months ......

 

[DavidObs]

Feels like you're a fan of the system, and thats fair enough... are there any changes you would make?

I always feel uncomfortable talking to observers about average marks etc and it's something I avoid... but then it does feel like some observers are still marking to well below the group average and have no idea that they're doing so. I'm not sure, without introducing a very complicated system that takes an observers seasonal average mark and compares your mark against that, there is any better way to do it.

Although it must be frustrating for Referees that they can receive reports well below the group average, but quite rightly, Observers have no idea what the group average is - otherwise it may influence what happens next & reason why Observers will not see the mark from 1st January. Would I like to be aware of the group average and still see the mark from 1st January - deep down probably yes. Do I think it could influence my report - deep down probably yes.