reffing expectations v reward v enjoyment

[Kent Ref]

With the latest law changes the little joy left in reffing is being sucked out.

For the majority of refs who operate down the local park on a Sunday what is being asked of them is ridiculous.

All these countdowns, DOGSO changes, substitution changes. Where is there time for a ref to enjoy the game?

I've been reffing 35+ years so i'm at the end but now the job of reffing a game is so much more harder than the late 80s when i started.

So is the reward fair compared to what is being asked of us?

I think the balance has now totally shifted and i THINK this will be my last season.

 

[ARF]

I really think people are misunderstanding these countdown additions - it's just a handy tool to use if a player/team is deliberately trying to slow the game down/waste time. It doesn't need to be done on every single goal kick and throw-in if the players aren't extracting the urine. It's down to the referee to decide if the restart is being deliberately delayed; then you can still tell them to hurry it up, then if they're not listening, hit the whistle and start the count. If they want to keep delaying on every goal kick and throw-in they get, then you just need to get tighter with it. Unless you were having five cautions or more per game for delaying the restart (or shouting yourself hoarse telling players to hurry up) last season, there shouldn't be any reason why a few countdowns will particularly tax you from now on.

If the only "time to enjoy the game" was the time that was used up when a team were deliberately delaying their restarts, then I think you were doing something wrong

 

[RustyRef]

The game isn't there for referees, it is the other way round and without the game referees wouldn't exist. I've been critical of law changes in the past but the recent ones really seem to work, they speed up the game and cut out time wasting and gamesmanship. Yes, they require additional effort and thought from referees but that is just part of the role.

No one at IFAB sits and considers what impact law changes will have on referees, and arguably nor should they, it is what law changes will improve the game of football.

 

[Archer]

Can't just trundle around and wag your finger at a shouty teenager anymore, have to reflect the additional demands and expectations of the game.

Law changes are only as hard as you want them to be. I understand reticence (as no one ever really likes change, right?) but if you wish to keep being remunerated for a role, then fulfil it consistently like everyone else. You can choose to engage with learning, community, education and develop your own skills. A lack of willing to adapt/learn/improve is more than welcome to be brushed out from the game.

 

[DavidObs]

With the latest law changes the little joy left in reffing is being sucked out.

For the majority of refs who operate down the local park on a Sunday what is being asked of them is ridiculous.

All these countdowns, DOGSO changes, substitution changes. Where is there time for a ref to enjoy the game?

I've been reffing 35+ years so i'm at the end but now the job of reffing a game is so much more harder than the late 80s when i started.

So is the reward fair compared to what is being asked of us?

I think the balance has now totally shifted and i THINK this will be my last season.

The game can’t afford to lose any Referees, let alone vastly experienced ones. However, I’ve been to 4 games between Step 3-6 and the time downs etc have quickened the game up considerably and for a neutral watcher has made them more enjoyable, even though perhaps harder to officiate than the late 80’s with all the detail.

 

[LXIV]

I think the balance has now totally shifted and i THINK this will be my last season.

I can't speak to your goals obviously, but at least for me, while recognizing everything you said as being correct, I personally went into refereeing with the expectation and desire of navigating challenging bureaucracy and idiocy.

For me, I honestly don't enjoy the game at all. I don't really watch it outside of highlights or follow any clubs. For me, the federations have completely sapped any love for the game out of me. I wouldn't go far as to say I hate the sport unequivocally, but I certainly despise how it is handled, played, and governed. I do not go to ref any games with the expectation of being able to enjoy them.

But if I approach it just like any other job, with a clinical attitude, with an mentality close to what Archer said; just fulfilling a duty and a rulebook like any other job that must be done, I find myself still getting small moments of enjoyment that I otherwise wouldn't have come expect. And because of that I am able to appreciate all the more that every once in a while we do get small bits of recognition, and that makes it worth it.

If a referee makes 99 correct decisions out of a 100, you are the only one who could make that last decision right. Nobody else can be on that pitch, at your game, at that time, exactly in your place to make that one missing decision correct except for you. That's something only you can do in that one moment in time and no one else can.

 

[Kent Ref]

I honestly think with all the changes of the last few years, the cost of living, what is now expected of you as a referee both during, before and after games it's a lot more effort, time and frankly more hassle (due to attitudes of players, parents and managers).

If you want more out of referees in terms of effort and time used the compensation has to be higher than before.

The fees in my league have been static for 8 years and 6 years ago they removed petrol money. This league (and its clubs) wanted to up the fees but the CFA vetoed it

Things have to be fairer. Especially at grass roots level.

 

[RustyRef]

I honestly think with all the changes of the last few years, the cost of living, what is now expected of you as a referee both during, before and after games it's a lot more effort, time and frankly more hassle (due to attitudes of players, parents and managers).

If you want more out of referees in terms of effort and time used the compensation has to be higher than before.

The fees in my league have been static for 8 years and 6 years ago they removed petrol money. This league (and its clubs) wanted to up the fees but the CFA vetoed it

Things have to be fairer. Especially at grass roots level.

Move leagues then. In that same time period the fees have increased 5 times on one of the leagues I'm involved with.

I suspect you have been spun a yarn there as CFAs have absolutely no power to veto referee fee increases, and haven't had for decades. It can only be done at a league's AGM, it has to be recommended as a rule change and then voted on by the members present. The CFA can only veto it if the correct process wasn't followed, e.g. it wasn't done at an AGM / SGM, wasn't voted on, wasn't documented in the AGM minutes, etc.

 

[Kent Ref]

Move leagues then. In that same time period the fees have increased 5 times on one of the leagues I'm involved with.

I suspect you have been spun a yarn there as CFAs have absolutely no power to veto referee fee increases, and haven't had for decades. It can only be done at a league's AGM, it has to be recommended as a rule change and then voted on by the members present. The CFA can only veto it if the correct process wasn't followed, e.g. it wasn't done at an AGM / SGM, wasn't voted on, wasn't documented in the AGM minutes, etc.

Have to disagree.

The league voted to up the fees but were overuled as this league were dominating the referees for youth football in the county on a Sunday and the other sunday youth leagues couldn't get referees as my league was paying petrol AND better fees. Sometimes £60 a game (£40 + £20 petrol)

The person driving the fees issue was the RDO who was also the referee secretary for 2/3 years for my youth league.

The refs were also sent the minutes of the AGM showing the clubs voted to accept the increases.

 

[Kent Ref]

Move leagues then. In that same time period the fees have increased 5 times on one of the leagues I'm involved with.

I suspect you have been spun a yarn there as CFAs have absolutely no power to veto referee fee increases, and haven't had for decades. It can only be done at a league's AGM, it has to be recommended as a rule change and then voted on by the members present. The CFA can only veto it if the correct process wasn't followed, e.g. it wasn't done at an AGM / SGM, wasn't voted on, wasn't documented in the AGM minutes, etc.

There is no alternative in the area i live as they all pay the same - this was also the doing of the CFA as they standardised fees in youth football in the county.

For 8 years all fees are EXACTLY the same on ALL youth leagues.

 

[Kent Ref]

Move leagues then. In that same time period the fees have increased 5 times on one of the leagues I'm involved with.

I suspect you have been spun a yarn there as CFAs have absolutely no power to veto referee fee increases, and haven't had for decades. It can only be done at a league's AGM, it has to be recommended as a rule change and then voted on by the members present. The CFA can only veto it if the correct process wasn't followed, e.g. it wasn't done at an AGM / SGM, wasn't voted on, wasn't documented in the AGM minutes, etc.

Individual leagues are generally responsible for determining their own fees. However, under FA regulations, CFAs have the overarching authority to set, cap, or approve these fee structures and-directly set fees for their own County Cup competitions. [1, 2, 3]

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

In my home county:
Hampshire FA does not publish a single fixed referee fee schedule on its public site; match fees are set by the relevant competition (league or cup) and are typically paid per match, with travel expenses added, and vary by FA grade and competition level
Makes sense to me.

 

[RustyRef]

Have to disagree.

The league voted to up the fees but were overuled as this league were dominating the referees for youth football in the county on a Sunday and the other sunday youth leagues couldn't get referees as my league was paying petrol AND better fees. Sometimes £60 a game (£40 + £20 petrol)

The person driving the fees issue was the RDO who was also the referee secretary for 2/3 years for my youth league.

The refs were also sent the minutes of the AGM showing the clubs voted to accept the increases.

Well someone from the league should have grown a pair and took the CFA to task, as they have zero jurisdiction to do that.

You frequently criticise football authorities, whether that is CFA, the FA, or leagues, but have you thought of getting involved? You have a much better chance of influencing things if you are on the inside rather than posting on a referee's forum. That's how I got involved in football administration, I didn't agree with what the RefsSec was doing so stood against him at the league AGM and was unanimously voted in (35 votes to 1 from memory). For the previous 3 seasons he had said at the AGM that if anyone thought they could do a better job he would stand down, although when I eventually called his bluff he refused to stand down and it had to go to the vote.

 

[Archer]

unanimously voted in (35 votes to 1 from memory)

*cough*

 

[Archer]

Well someone from the league should have grown a pair and took the CFA to task, as they have zero jurisdiction to do that.

You frequently criticise football authorities, whether that is CFA, the FA, or leagues, but have you thought of getting involved? You have a much better chance of influencing things if you are on the inside rather than posting on a referee's forum. That's how I got involved in football administration, I didn't agree with what the RefsSec was doing so stood against him at the league AGM and was unanimously voted in (35 votes to 1 from memory). For the previous 3 seasons he had said at the AGM that if anyone thought they could do a better job he would stand down, although when I eventually called his bluff he refused to stand down and it had to go to the vote.

OP has been on my ignore list for a while, but there does seem a constant pattern of "a mate who refs" says XYZ, or county / competition says ABC and i disagree, while they do nothing but criticise or complain. Sod off and take up fishing, will be no loss.

 

[bester]

Birmingham had a strict maximum cap that applied to both Saturday and Sunday grassroots.
Initially came in after on Sunday league tried to offer more.

That disappeared and they then came up with a scheme that assistants could only get 50% of the refs fee, which lead to a big increase in the refs fee.
This also applied this to the supply league which they controlled which had teams from at least 5 different counties.

Both schemes thankfully scrapped now.

 

[Kent Ref]

Well someone from the league should have grown a pair and took the CFA to task, as they have zero jurisdiction to do that.

You frequently criticise football authorities, whether that is CFA, the FA, or leagues, but have you thought of getting involved? You have a much better chance of influencing things if you are on the inside rather than posting on a referee's forum. That's how I got involved in football administration, I didn't agree with what the RefsSec was doing so stood against him at the league AGM and was unanimously voted in (35 votes to 1 from memory). For the previous 3 seasons he had said at the AGM that if anyone thought they could do a better job he would stand down, although when I eventually called his bluff he refused to stand down and it had to go to the vote.

It appears CFAs do have jurisdiction to set caps. Post 11 &16 refer. Your assertion that CFAs cannot set caps is totally wrong.

When this all blew up i was told by my barrister friend who is high up in the RA that this is allowed but most CFAs don't get involved.

When this whole situation kicked off the CFA said they were setting caps to stop the other leagues losing out on getting refs on Sundays.

 

[Kent Ref]

OP has been on my ignore list for a while, but there does seem a constant pattern of "a mate who refs" says XYZ, or county / competition says ABC and i disagree, while they do nothing but criticise or complain. Sod off and take up fishing, will be no loss.

You seem to be very rude.

I think i will not miss refereeing too much either.

It's totally changed and not all for the better.

 

[Kent Ref]

Well someone from the league should have grown a pair and took the CFA to task, as they have zero jurisdiction to do that.

You frequently criticise football authorities, whether that is CFA, the FA, or leagues, but have you thought of getting involved? You have a much better chance of influencing things if you are on the inside rather than posting on a referee's forum. That's how I got involved in football administration, I didn't agree with what the RefsSec was doing so stood against him at the league AGM and was unanimously voted in (35 votes to 1 from memory). For the previous 3 seasons he had said at the AGM that if anyone thought they could do a better job he would stand down, although when I eventually called his bluff he refused to stand down and it had to go to the vote.

I have considered getting involved but, for me, the systems and processes are now far too pro-club and anti-referee. It's all gone too far now and there is no way back. I'm very keen on fairness. It's what i am.

I feel referees are on trial when called to commisions. Especially when refs are charged with false accusations by clubs. This has happened to me twice in my time. Luckily i was well represented. On one ocassion i had a cup final middle taken off of me and when i went to the hearing nobody from the club making the accusations attended. All false and malicious. When i asked that CFA to take action - nothing!

When i first started reffing in the late 80s refs were totally believed and were not really questioned. This was totally wrong as some refs are bad and do bad things. As a clock face we referees were at 9 o'clock.

But as the years have progressed the balance has swung. Instead of stopping at 12 o'clock to be fair to all parties we have now moved to 3 o'clock where clubs are believed against referees.

I don't think things will ever be right again.

 

[RustyRef]

I have considered getting involved but, for me, the systems and processes are now far too pro-club and anti-referee. It's all gone too far now and there is no way back. I'm very keen on fairness. It's what i am.

I feel referees are on trial when called to commisions. Especially when refs are charged with false accusations by clubs. This has happened to me twice in my time. Luckily i was well represented. On one ocassion i had a cup final middle taken off of me and when i went to the hearing nobody from the club making the accusations attended. All false and malicious. When i asked that CFA to take action - nothing!

When i first started reffing in the late 80s refs were totally believed and were not really questioned. This was totally wrong as some refs are bad and do bad things. As a clock face we referees were at 9 o'clock.

But as the years have progressed the balance has swung. Instead of stopping at 12 o'clock to be fair to all parties we have now moved to 3 o'clock where clubs are believed against referees.

I don't think things will ever be right again.

Again, down to individual leagues. On the league that I'm heavily involved in 10 of the 11 committee members are referees or ex-referees, and the other one is the wife of an ex-referee.

Disciplinary hearings have always been a bit of a lottery. I can remember my first one in London where the player and club told a complete pack of lies, and as they got the other team to back them up the charge was thrown out. It is what it is is, the referee is just a witness and not in any way accused, if you were a witness for a crown court case and the accused was acquitted would you feel aggrieved?