Referee's "Club Marks"

[Kes]

We're all aware that each team's manager/coach is required to award the referee a percentage mark for each match as part and parcel of the team sheet and paperwork he submits to the League/CFA. This is of course based on his (or hers) perception of the referee's performance for that particular match.
My Sunday league, (as I'm sure others do) actually dishes out an end-of-season award to the referee who has gained the highest average mark over the course of a season.
Personally, I'm in two camps on whether or not this is a good thing.
I can see the fact that it's nice to have recognition of something over a whole season for the referee that is the recipient - sure. However, having become something of a cynic where the knowledge of the LOTG and therefore qualified judgement of a referee are in relation to coaches/managers and players, I can't help thinking that having a system where ultimately a referee is "judged" by those on whom he passes judgement as it were is rather strange, and if not then certainly ironic. A bit like turkeys voting on Christmas?
What's your opinion of the "club marking" system and what benefits (if any) do you consider it to have?

 

[Russell Jones]

Like you, I can see both sides to this debate. However, on balance, I believe it's a good thing.

Paying too much heed to the marks on any one individual game would obviously be rash .. way too great a possibility that those marking the game would be overly influenced by one or two incidents. However, over the course of a season, I'd be confident that the vagaries would even themselves out and those referees who overall have officiated 'better' will rise to the top. That said, there remains the risk that 'better' in the eyes of those marking might not equate to 'better' in the eyes of assessors / LOTG 'sticklers'. But in the absence of assessors going to every game, I see no fairer way for referee secretaries to get a handle on who their top performers are and therefore who should be given the 'big' games as the season reaches a climax

Interestingly, one of the leagues I officiate on has a rule that if the club marks vary significantly (I think by 20 or more), the club marking lower has to justify its mark .. a nice deterrent to marking low in the heat of the moment!

 

[DB]

I think it's a good thing

 

[Kes]

Like you, I can see both sides to this debate. However, on balance, I believe it's a good thing.

Paying too much heed to the marks on any one individual game would obviously be rash .. way too great a possibility that those marking the game would be overly influenced by one or two incidents. However, over the course of a season, I'd be confident that the vagaries would even themselves out and those referees who overall have officiated 'better' will rise to the top. That said, there remains the risk that 'better' in the eyes of those marking might not equate to 'better' in the eyes of assessors / LOTG 'sticklers'.

I lean more towards the negative view of it if I'm honest.
The petulance and lack of knowledge of some coaches astounds me at times. A good referee, operating strictly and fairly within the remit of the LOTG these days can dish out several cautions or reds during a match for completely valid and correct reasons but incense a coach or player who lacks the impartiality of the referee. This anger or indeed ignorance in many cases will then be reflected in the mark they allocate to the referee. I know you've mentioned that this can "even itself out" over the course of a season but that's only a philosophical presumption mate.
The notion of having to back up or justify a low mark difference is a good one I suppose, but again it's still just asking basically unqualified and more importantly biased individuals to give their opinion. You can't also presume that because one team thought you were bad, there's a good chance the other team thought you were good.
Like I said earlier mate, the irony (or madness) of it for me, is that 2 sets of parties who completely lack impartiality are being empowered to "mark" a referee on his impartiality!!
Bizzarre as it is, at the top levels, referees are (quite rightly) judged by their peers, yet at our level, they're judged by their "customers" or "pupils" if you like.
Just playing a bit of devil's advocate here you understand, but imagine the accused, freshly sentenced, in the dock, before being led away, asked to award the judge and jury marks out of a hundred for performance!!

 

[Kes]

I think it's a good thing

You bloody would!!

Anyway, you're still a player and therefore can't be trusted.

 

[CA]

I personally think it is a positive. Firstly, you may have an assessor come and watch you 5 times a season, providing you with a mark on 5 occasions. If you officiate 50 matches a season, only 10% of your games have been marked - you may have had an outstanding game or contrastingly a shocking game on all five occasions. The clubs mark you on every match, giving a better representation of the level of your officiating. I don't think the team that lose always mark negatively and the team that won, positively, especially as the standard of football increases and the marking is not completed by the manager/coach/someone directly involved with the team (i.e. secretary, chairman, someone with a more holistic view).

Secondly, as rightly or wrongly it may be, your performance - from a spectators point of view, isn't based on being correct in law 100% of the time but rather the perception of how you have officiated the game. Most spectators/players/club officials don't even know there are 17 laws, let alone understand the intricacies of each one. As more spectators watch the game, it is about being able to sell decisions and have an empathy with the game, giving what may be expected - sometimes officiating 100% to the LOTG does not allow this. By having the clubs marking officials, the national and county FA are able to see officials who will survive better at higher levels where the perception of a referee's performance from the clubs and spectators is as important as being correct in law. There are times when you can be 100% correct in law, but still wrong in terms of the spirit of the game.

 

[Kes]

There are times when you can be 100% correct in law, but still wrong in terms of the spirit of the game.

Be prepared for one or two members to take you up on that point my friend. (I can think of one who might for sure )

The rest of your post, I would tend to agree with.

Personally speaking, my club marks were (I'm told) very good last season, resulting in me getting chosen to middle a couple of cup finals and doing more Premier division matches than I did 2nd or 3rd divsion. I put this down to my confident demeanour and good match control, based on personality and (as you put it) match/player empathy. My assessments however, alluded to a rather overly lenient approach to penal offences and perhaps too much tolerance of (non OFFINABUS) dissent. This season, going from 6-5 as I am, I've had to be more clinical and less lenient where my judgement is concerned and have found myself dishing out more cautions and (at times) incurring more wrath from coaches and sometimes players. I have no doubt that this will reflect negatively in club marks given (just my cynical nature ) but I actually feel a much better and more confident referee in terms of my own ability than ever before.
I do generally agree with most of what you and Russell (I normally do ) have posted, but I also feel that because of this marking system that exists, there will always be players who sacrifice strict application of law at times, because of one eye on potentially bad club marks.
Empathy and operating in the "spirit of a particular game" might make you popular with the players and coaches, but it can lose you marks on an assessment when being viewed by the book. That in itself raises the whole question of whether or not you should referee each game as if you were being assessed (like they do at the top levels) or as you see fit within the context of that particular match.
In any event, not refereeing strictly by the book (not that I'm a pedant at all) is what sends out ambiguous messages to players and coaches alike and helps perpetuate the lack of knowledge displayed to me on so many occasions. It's also no doubt where the "last week's ref" phrase emanates from.

 

[OIREF!]

We've never had such a system in my area and I can only imagine such scoring to be heavily biased by the outcome of the match and therefore unreliable.

 

[SM]

In response to your post @Kes I am starting to see that different levels of football do require a slightly different, sometimes more lenient approach from the referee. There I said it!

Where I ply my trade there is a massive gulf in quality between highest and lowest level and refereeing a game at the lower end with the same fastidious application of law as you would apply at the highest level does create problems, bad feeling and a ton of cards.

Before anyone breaks out the LWR cannon to give me the broadside, I am just making an observation based on my own area.

 

[Kes]

Before anyone breaks out the LWR cannon to give me the broadside,

Made me chuckle that one.

In response to your post @Kes I am starting to see that different levels of football do require a slightly different, sometimes more lenient approach from the referee. There I said it!

Where I ply my trade there is a massive gulf in quality between highest and lowest level and refereeing a game at the lower end with the same fastidious application of law as you would apply at the highest level does create problems, bad feeling and a ton of cards.

But what of this club marking system Sir? What of that?

And where is your vote?

Mod edit -> use the +quote feature!!!

 

[MatthewC]

I decided very early on in my so far very short career to completely disregard club marks. As far as I'm concerned, I couldn't care less whether I'm marked 100 or 0. The reason being that although club marks do send a message to the league about the quality of the officials, I think allowing ourselves to be bothered by that fact is asking for trouble. There will always be an element of trying to make the managers happy, which is going to affect the way you referee a game. I'm not saying that we all go out every Saturday and make every single decision on the basis of 'what will make the managers happier?', but it's definitely going to play some part in it. I've known referees fail to report red cards for exactly this reason.

That being said, I can see merit in it. Over the course of the season you'd hope that the particularly good and bad marks should even each other out, and that it will give the leagues at least a vague idea of the quality of their officials, but I don't think we can allow ourselves to be sucked into this, because it's detrimental to our ability to officiate the game properly.

 

[DB]

You bloody would!!

Anyway, you're still a player and therefore can't be trusted.

This hurts my feelings....

 

[Mewcenary]

Club marks balance out over the course of the season. Yes, some clubs will mark down due to a last-minute penalty decision they disagree with, or something equally dubious. But all the referees on the league face the same issue, so the system is fair because of that.

I have always felt, however, that the possible unfairness is simply that some clubs will mark higher than others for the same performance. That only balances out if all the referees see the same teams over a season -- not always possible for geographical reasons. So some form of adjustment to bring the marks in line mathematically would be a good bet.

Note that for L3 and upwards club marks have a lesser weighting than assessment marks (half, in fact).

 

[Yampy]

I was wondering what to say on the subject but the post @Mewcenary sums it up for me.

 

[Padfoot]

Club marks are an awful idea. They exist only to make the CFAs life easier.

If you really need it explaining why they are a bad idea then it will take a more patient person than me.

As for the idea that referees need to modify their approach to application of the LOTG depending on what level of football they are doing......well.....that's why the players will continue to abuse and assault referees, especially at the lower end of the pyramid.

If referees at all levels just stuck to the LOTG and stopped to trying to find ways of making allowances for poor behaviour then players would have a choice....either play within the LOTG or find themselves banned from the game.
Ultimately referees safety will only improve when this approach is adopted. As long as refs keep compromising there will always be a risk to our safety.

The problem isn't the LOTG....it's the players expectations of what they can get away with.

 

[Kes]

Club marks are an awful idea. They exist only to make the CFAs life easier.

If you really need it explaining why they are a bad idea then it will take a more patient person than me.

As for the idea that referees need to modify their approach to application of the LOTG depending on what level of football they are doing......well.....that's why the players will continue to abuse and assault referees, especially at the lower end of the pyramid.

If referees at all levels just stuck to the LOTG and stopped to trying to find ways of making allowances for poor behaviour then players would have a choice....either play within the LOTG or find themselves banned from the game.
Ultimately referees safety will only improve when this approach is adopted. As long as refs keep compromising there will always be a risk to our safety.

The problem isn't the LOTG....it's the players expectations of what they can get away with.

Won't argue with any of that either.

 

[lincs22]

Yes, because there simply isn't another option.

There are not enough Assessors to cover promotion matches, who judges the referees not in the promotion schemes, and if there were enough - who would pay for the assessors?

Yes @Padfoot - if we could find a better system, then we should try it.

 

[RegalRef]

In response to your post @Kes

Before anyone breaks out the LWR cannon to give me the broadside, I am just making an observation based on my own area.

Now where did I leave my cannon.....?

 

[Yampy]

Now where did I leave my cannon.....?

Maybe you should have read the whole thread before commenting?

 

[Monotone Whistle]

I love it, I was in the Top 3 in my league last season, so the clubs are obviously getting something right.

Possibly my post-match schmoozing helps....actually in all seriousness, I am willing to have a chat through some decisions post-game and I know this is always appreciated by the manager. If I get something wrong, I'll admit it as well. I don't do it for club marks by the way, but too many refs are aloof so I like to be different.

It's not a perfect system of course, but in general if your averaging a low mark across 20 games then I would imagine there is an issue.