The Ref Stop

suspension due to low club marks?

The Ref Stop
I have mentored a few "young refs" and mainly the motiviation to referee has not been about development and reffing. It has been financial.

One ref i mentored many years ago is now a conference south ref so he's doing well.

Reffing long-term (more than 2 years) needs somebody who is actually interested in the game.

This person needs some serious intervention from the CFA / support network. I wish them luck.
 
I have mentored a few "young refs" and mainly the motiviation to referee has not been about development and reffing. It has been financial.

One ref i mentored many years ago is now a conference south ref so he's doing well.

Reffing long-term (more than 2 years) needs somebody who is actually interested in the game.

This person needs some serious intervention from the CFA / support network. I wish them luck.
With all due respect, I think you have just judged me on a post and some data that was given to me and frankly didn't read my post where I've said no feedback and the decision to stop appointing me was not communicated. If I frankly didn't care about my own personal development then I don't think I would have asked for some advice.
 
This having apparently been an issue over several years, (including during the period of Covid), I would certainly suggest that you contact your CFA, speak to your RDO and take his advice guidance (for reason identified by RustyRef). He may well be able to obtain more specific information from the leagues involved.
As others have mentioned mentoring / coaching may be of benefit, but without knowing the reasons for the low marks it is difficult to offer any constructive advice.
I've already engaged in conversation with RDO and he has identified that I'm lacking in managing players effectively and thinks that because I'm not managing players effectively and inconsistently that this is the reason why clubs are marking me low, I have worked on this for the past two seasons since RDO has identified it. When I do ask for mentoring and coaching, I always get told that there isn't enough mentors to be . I've also been recommended to go to the academies, which I have gone these past two seasons and have learnt a lot. I go and watch games and I see things that go against best practice and they will continue refereeing as normal. Things like shouting at players and managers; center circle referees; referees coming late when the expectation is to come 20 minutes before kick off, but they'll get appointments but just wanted to know why I was singled out. I've gone and ran Step 5 lines so that I can learn from Level 4 referees
 
With all due respect, I think you have just judged me on a post and some data that was given to me and frankly didn't read my post where I've said no feedback and the decision to stop appointing me was not communicated. If I frankly didn't care about my own personal development then I don't think I would have asked for some advice.
The only answer here is to contact your RDO and ask for help. He or she may be able to try and persuade the leagues to start giving you games again, on the proviso that they will send people out to watch you and help you improve.

None of us have seen you referee, so it is difficult to give advice other than that. What I can say for certain though is averaging marks as low as you have been can only mean there is something, or more likely multiple things, wrong with how you are refereeing. Out of interest, how many cautions and red cards do you average a game? Reason I ask is many people think that clubs mark referees down for giving out too many cards, but in my experience it is the opposite, they are more likely to mark down for not giving cards as they worry their players aren't being protected.
 
I've already engaged in conversation with RDO and he has identified that I'm lacking in managing players effectively and thinks that because I'm not managing players effectively and inconsistently that this is the reason why clubs are marking me low, I have worked on this for the past two seasons since RDO has identified it. When I do ask for mentoring and coaching, I always get told that there isn't enough mentors to be . I've also been recommended to go to the academies, which I have gone these past two seasons and have learnt a lot. I go and watch games and I see things that go against best practice and they will continue refereeing as normal. Things like shouting at players and managers; center circle referees; referees coming late when the expectation is to come 20 minutes before kick off, but they'll get appointments but just wanted to know why I was singled out. I've gone and ran Step 5 lines so that I can learn from Level 4 referees
Doing all the right things. Have you considered going down the progression route. Whilst RDO. Can't spare mentors if you are in the progression pathway e.g. 7-6 you'll get a couple of games where a match day coach will come and watch with some structured feedback received afterwards.
 
Have you considered taking a step down (sorry not too sure how it works in England) and taking on youth games etc and that might help build confidence up and maybe help. In my first year I have found managing players is easy, the coaches... not so much.
 
Have you considered taking a step down (sorry not too sure how it works in England) and taking on youth games etc and that might help build confidence up and maybe help. In my first year I have found managing players is easy, the coaches... not so much.
Not only have I "stepped down" I've also stepped away when the feelings got extremely intense and saw a therapist. The issue I face now is not one of confidence per se
 
Doing all the right things. Have you considered going down the progression route. Whilst RDO. Can't spare mentors if you are in the progression pathway e.g. 7-6 you'll get a couple of games where a match day coach will come and watch with some structured feedback received afterwards.
Yes and 7 out of 8 reports, I've only been given "minor development points" and the most common development points were
: work on positioning"
"deal with dissent better"
The other report, I got several development points, such as cautioning players without using the stepped approach, ineffective player management, not issuing mandatory cautions, (SPA, but then again I wasn't really aware of what SPA really was) Inconsistent disciplinary.
But as the MDC who wrote the report was actually watching someone else's games, the whole match was not watched and these points were given based on 10 minutes of what they saw. So I didn't feel like it was an accurate representation of the game...
 
Yes and 7 out of 8 reports, I've only been given "minor development points" and the most common development points were
: work on positioning"
"deal with dissent better"
The other report, I got several development points, such as cautioning players without using the stepped approach, ineffective player management, not issuing mandatory cautions, (SPA, but then again I wasn't really aware of what SPA really was) Inconsistent disciplinary.
But as the MDC who wrote the report was actually watching someone else's games, the whole match was not watched and these points were given based on 10 minutes of what they saw. So I didn't feel like it was an accurate representation of the game...
When you say 'deal with dissent better' do you mean that you were too harsh on low level dissent (in the opinion of the coach)? or the other way round? too lenient?
 
When you say 'deal with dissent better' do you mean that you were too harsh on low level dissent (in the opinion of the coach)? or the other way round? too lenient?
In honesty, it started off with being extremely lenient as I would ignore it and do nothing when this was picked up on a couple of times, I went in the completely opposite direction and would sin binned player for raising their voice but didn't do it consistently and was told that it was harsh and inconsistent. This was 2 seasons ago and since then I've completely changed the way I deal with dissent and feel better equipped to manage it efficiently.
 
In honesty, it started off with being extremely lenient as I would ignore it and do nothing when this was picked up on a couple of times, I went in the completely opposite direction and would sin binned player for raising their voice but didn't do it consistently and was told that it was harsh and inconsistent. This was 2 seasons ago and since then I've completely changed the way I deal with dissent and feel better equipped to manage it efficiently.
If the words provided about positioning and dissent were actual quotes and didn’t go on to say much else, then it appears not to be very helpful for development. It should really go on to highlight specific remedies eg how to be better positioned & how to deal with dissent better.
 
Yes and 7 out of 8 reports, I've only been given "minor development points" and the most common development points were
: work on positioning"
"deal with dissent better"
The other report, I got several development points, such as cautioning players without using the stepped approach, ineffective player management, not issuing mandatory cautions, (SPA, but then again I wasn't really aware of what SPA really was) Inconsistent disciplinary.
But as the MDC who wrote the report was actually watching someone else's games, the whole match was not watched and these points were given based on 10 minutes of what they saw. So I didn't feel like it was an accurate representation of the game...
Assuming the accuracy of your time scale, I don't know of ant MDC who would write and submit a report based on such a short time span. The report should reflect the observations made during the entire game.
As DavidObs states, the report should provide remedies and advice, as well as usually timed examples highlighting the incidents which give rise to the development points raised.
Was this MDC appointed through the CFA and officially, or was he there to view the other game and took time out at say half time to view your game. If so I feel that the generation of a report is inappropriate at best.
I very much doubt that the RDO at my CFA would even dream of having an observer / coach / mentor watch two games at the same time.
 
Assuming the accuracy of your time scale, I don't know of ant MDC who would write and submit a report based on such a short time span. The report should reflect the observations made during the entire game.
As DavidObs states, the report should provide remedies and advice, as well as usually timed examples highlighting the incidents which give rise to the development points raised.
Was this MDC appointed through the CFA and officially, or was he there to view the other game and took time out at say half time to view your game. If so I feel that the generation of a report is inappropriate at best.
I very much doubt that the RDO at my CFA would even dream of having an observer / coach / mentor watch two games at the same time.
We sometimes watched more than one games when looking at new referees doing one of their first game, but that should have been discontinued everywhere when MDC's were tasked with watching Level 7>6 and 6>5.
Were you being watched as a potential Level 6, @hungryauthour?
 
Back
Top