Post history

History for zonknz

Central League

Back to topic

Current version

Posted June 22, 2017 04:08 · last edited June 22, 2017 04:10

Smithy wrote:

What referees in Wellington need to face up to is that there is a perception of a lack of openness. A closing of the ranks any time a question is asked.

Club's right now do ask questions - and they do get answers. Central League teams file referee feedback on every game. I understand olympic supplied the (non public youtube) video to the Wellington Ref's with a 'please explain'. They got an answer.

My view is that it demonstrated one of the banes of the Referee's life; poor understanding of the laws from spectators, players and team officials.

I agree game video could be an aid, but not with a fixed pool of assessor resources. Video would increase the assessor burden, which would probably mean less assessments of match officials over time, and video is not infallible either- the simple fact is that referee positioning and the reading of play is one of the most important skills to develop. The simple fact is that the detail of an incident is often masked to the camera, and that they are no silver bullet.

A referee must rule on what they, or there assistants can see in play. (TBH, i'd rather we spent the money on more/better comms sets that videoing).

I'm sure there are terrible referee's out there who harbour grudges and the like - I've not had the misfortunet of working with one - they are mostly people acting with intergrity, doing something they love, and would just like a thank you, rather than a slagging off.

As the old adage goes- a striker will miss 10 chances, convert 1, and be a hero. A referee makes 10 great calls, and misses one, and they are corrupt villain.

Previous versions

2 versions
Unknown editor edited June 22, 2017 04:10
Smithy wrote:

What referees in Wellington need to face up to is that there is a perception of a lack of openness. A closing of the ranks any time a question is asked.

[/quote]

Club's right now do ask questions - and they do get answers. Central League teams file referee feedback on every game. I understad olympic supplied the video to the Wellington Ref's with a 'please explain'. They got an answer.

What the Olympic video above demonstrated, I thought quite clearly, is that open assessment of referees can work both ways. It can highlight errors but also put down unjustified criticism. That last bit is a function not in the least bit served by assessors. Video enables referees to actually engage with coaches and players about decisions, in possession of the cold hard facts of the video. 

My view is that it demonstrated one of the banes of the Referee's life; poor understanding of the laws from spectators, players and team officials.

[quote]

The assessor system is also fairly poor as a system of feedback. One man or woman who may or may not be tired, hungry, cold, friends with the referee, not friends with the coach, etc and so on watches the game and tells you if you did a good job or not. Video allows for that review to be moderated by a wider group. Video allows for a deeper and repeated analysis. 

And of course it makes a difference whether you're watching yourself or some FIFA resource. You might learn a lot about golf swings in the abstract watching YouTube, but a video of your golf swing enables personal improvement in a whole new way.

Seems like a no brainer to me if referees want to change the conversation about their performance. That's a bit "if" though.

I agree game video could be an aid, but not with a fixed pool of assessor resources. Video would increase the assessor burden, which would probably mean less assessments of match officials over time, and video is not infallible either- the simple fact is that referee positioning and the reading of play is one of the most important skills to develop. The simple fact is that the detail of an incident is often masked to the camera, and that they are no silver bullet.

A referee must rule on what they, or there assistants can see in play. (TBH, i'd rather we spent the money on more/better comms sets that videoing).

I'm sure there are terrible referee's out there who harbour grudges and the like - I've not had the misfortunet of working with one - they are mostly people acting with intergrity, doing something they love, and would just like a thank you, rather than a slagging off.

As the old adage goes- a striker will miss 10 chances, convert 1, and be a hero. A referee makes 10 great calls, and misses one, and they are corrupt villain.

Unknown editor edited June 22, 2017 04:09
Smithy wrote:

What referees in Wellington need to face up to is that there is a perception of a lack of openness. A closing of the ranks any time a question is asked.

[/quote]

Club's right now do ask questions - and they do get answers. Central League teams file referee feedback on every game. I understad olympic supplied the video to the Wellington Ref's with a 'please explain'. They got an answer.

Smithy wrote:

What the Olympic video above demonstrated, I thought quite clearly, is that open assessment of referees can work both ways. It can highlight errors but also put down unjustified criticism. That last bit is a function not in the least bit served by assessors. Video enables referees to actually engage with coaches and players about decisions, in possession of the cold hard facts of the video. 

My view is that it demonstrated one of the banes of the Referee's life; poor understanding of the laws from spectators, players and team officials.

[quote=Smithy]

The assessor system is also fairly poor as a system of feedback. One man or woman who may or may not be tired, hungry, cold, friends with the referee, not friends with the coach, etc and so on watches the game and tells you if you did a good job or not. Video allows for that review to be moderated by a wider group. Video allows for a deeper and repeated analysis. 

And of course it makes a difference whether you're watching yourself or some FIFA resource. You might learn a lot about golf swings in the abstract watching YouTube, but a video of your golf swing enables personal improvement in a whole new way.

Seems like a no brainer to me if referees want to change the conversation about their performance. That's a bit "if" though.

I agree game video could be an aid, but not with a fixed pool of assessor resources. Video would increase the assessor burden, which would probably mean less assessments of match officials over time, and video is not infallible either- the simple fact is that referee positioning and the reading of play is one of the most important skills to develop. The simple fact is that the detail of an incident is often masked to the camera, and that they are no silver bullet.

A referee must rule on what they, or there assistants can see in play. (TBH, i'd rather we spent the money on more/better comms sets that videoing).

I'm sure there are terrible referee's out there who harbour grudges and the like - I've not had the misfortunet of working with one - they are mostly people acting with intergrity, doing something they love, and would just like a thank you, rather than a slagging off.

As the old adage goes- a striker will miss 10 chances, convert 1, and be a hero. A referee makes 10 great calls, and misses one, and they are corrupt villain.