Referee Quality

yeah referees at all levels seem to have that problem. You have to go down to get a free kick. Is why a lot of players 'dive' because they're unfairly at a disadvantage if they don't. 

Agree that if most/all players knew the rules and played accordingly it would be super.

But let's face it, then we wouldn't really need referees, would we?

I think my point remains. Rules enforced uniformly across the whole region (including booking players) = better football = potentially more $ for CF to continue to train referees = players thinking about it twice before breaking the rules.

Assuming players will never know all (or even half) of the LotG, continued referee training & support is key as others have said – especially around consistency. It’s obviously a thankless task (that costs them time & money) and are bound to get things wrong sometimes despite best efforts.

Some lower un-reffed games are pretty hard to watch – just because you feel so bad for the sub/injured player/dad/sister/pet/etc in the middle with the whistle!

With the lack of games this weekend though, you’ll probably see refs down beyond Cap 5 again...

Yeah down to Cap 6 this weekend with the lack of higher up games

This will never happen. Football is a game refereed by real people in real time and Laws are somewhat open to interpretation. Even at the very highest levels of the game, there are complaints about consistency.

We have been talking to the refs at CF about a combined Fever/CF project to help people understand the referee's plight a little more.  

Hopefully it comes off and can help with some of this.

But there is a huge difference between the level of consistency at present and what could be achieved in due time. No one expects EPL type refs in cap 3 for sure, but things could certainly improve. Anyway, it looks like we may have hit a cul de sac in terms of the discussion.

Still, some great points being raised over the past couple of weeks.

Edit

Obviously, the laws can't be applied 100% consistently but anyone who has played knows that consistency can definitely be improved. Different referees have wildly different interpretations at the amateur level  whereas at the professional level the interpretations are only somewhat different.

Isn't that exactly the same issues with the players? Why would it be any different for referees, and more to the point - why should it expected to be?

So much this.

There are plenty of instances where referees (and I'm guilty of this) see incidents that would be fouls (especially in the penalty area) but don't call them unless the player goes down.

Talking to others, our conclusion was one of the biggest deterrents to diving would be referees gutsy enough to call award penalties when the player keeps his feet. This should encourage players to stay on their feet if they know they're not going to be 'punished' for not going down.

Not saying this is an overnight fix, but I reckon, it'd be significant.

This thread has been an interesting one in many respects and I have paid particular attention to it such as my bias.

Most folk come back to the same thing that 'this needs to happen so that referees get better.' They have all the ideas to improve the quality of referees and its been a catch cry for so many years that if their ideas were the actual solution, it would have been integrated by now and referees would not be a talking point. Unfortunately refereeing is no different than any other business in terms of mechanics and the way it works. Refereeing follows the dynamics of pretty much every business because of one simple thing - the tendancies of human nature and thats the stone cold truth.

Think about your own place of work or if you like, any place of work. There are those folk that do menial tasks and they are just thankless. Some have done them forever and are happy with that, some do them because they wont be anything more than they are and some do them because they have just started the job and its new for them. The same applies in refereeing. Some referees are at lower divisions because they enjoy it and prefer that, some are there because they don't have the competency to be any better and some have only just started. In most cases, just like a business, you need 'bread and butter' employees that turn up, do a job and go home. They do it to varying degress of competency but they do it (the ticketing booth at Centre City carpark in New Plymouth has had the same guy there for 25 odd years - bugger that). Not everyone is overly grctious of the guy doing the job but the day he does not turn up and open the factory roller doors at 6 am, everyone is losing their mind about it. Some teams are the 1st to moan when they don't get a ref but when they do, they abuse the hell out of him.

Think about the new sales rep thats just started or promoted from a different department. He is ambitious, young, full of drive, wants to impress, bit cock a hoop, thinks he has all the answers, has talent and potential, but some of the older hands and those that have been in the industry for years write the new guy off to begin with as being 'yup, another one'. There are referees like that as well. Young, dynamic, have shown through performance at lower levels that they can perform and have risen to a new level where they are playing with the big boys. They may lack experience but they are wanting to get out there and just do it because they know it all! They will make mistakes, take some almighty lumps and grow from it. They'll have some older/better/more experienced players going 'Jesus where did we find this guy, is this your 1st game?' They'll also pick the wrong incidents to weigh into but eventually, they will 'get it' (if they don't progress further and rise to the next level)

Think about a meeting where you have sat in on. It could be a quarterly sales meeting. It could be a community board. It could be an executive meeting of a club. An idea/position statement/problem is tabled and every single person has a different idea on it and they will not agree with your way of seeing it. Why is there not consistency of thought? Because everyone is different, just like referees. I've issued 2 red cards in a World Cup qualifier that at the time, I was absolutely certain I was correct. (I believe if you search this board, you will find Patricks comments on it too) The reality however was different. "But its obvious!!" they cried. When I saw the replay from my room 3 hours later, yes, it was obviously wrong. Consistency of anything is only as absolute as human nature allows and like you and I can sit side by side and differing opinions on what flavour icecream is better (French Vanilla by the way) we can also look at the same incident on a field, the same discussion document and the same anything, and see it differently. Search this forum on players over the years. Some think this player is a gold standard, others think he is a honking flock of geese. Yet we are all looking at the same evidence... funny how consistency of thought (and ultimately decision) works.

Would you walk in to your shop/warehouse floor and utterly berate an employee for making a mistake? Would you openly stand in front of a colleague and tell him that if he does not see this issue your way, you are going to knock his block off? I reckon I have about 4-5 mistakes in a game I can make whether it be a throw in the wrong way or missing a foul or missing a card or something. 4-5. I think players commit a lot more but you wont hear me running about going 'Did you really mean for that shot to go for a throw in or up in row Z?' Referees make a mistake and its news for a few years - ask Wayne Barnes. A goal keeper lets in a howler on Tuesday night and by Thursday, its fish and chip wrapper yet this game is not about the referee (as I hear so often).

Think about the level you are playing. The referee you have is directly correlatable to it. If you are in Cap 6, you will have a referee for that level. If you are in Mainland Premier, you will have a referee for that level (not taking into account promotion of referees, injury, breaks and real world stuff like families or jobs) You think you are crash hot footballer, well I can tell you, I think the same about myself as a referee. Teams are unlikely to know the exact stage of a referees development cycle (unless they are in their 50s then its a little obvious) because no referee that is new to the art, or new to that level after being promoted because of previous peformance is going to walk onto the field and go 'right o boys, my 1st game today (or at this level) go easy on me' Every referee is different. The flip side is, if you want better referees in the games you are involved in, why don't you get better as a footballer and rise up the levels to where the 'good' ones are. After all, referees, like players, have ambitions. They don't want to look back at 40 and think 'Jesus I've had 25 years of reffing 22 old guys at Cap 6 having a whinge and a hack - what fun!' Some of them want World Cups, they want Chatham Cup finals, they want everything they can dream of having and they are only restrained by their ability to perform so chances are high if they have that ability, they wont be hanging around in the level you are at. They want to rise up the grade and referee better football Why can't you get better as a footballer and rise up?

I hear the 'you shouldn't tolerate that abuse ref, just card them' and then I have 9 yellow cards for dissent and am accused of ruining/killing the game and 'its not about you ref'.
I hear the 'you only gave them the free kick cause he went down.' and in some cases, yeah - cause I believe it or not, I want you to stay on your feet, I want to play advantage for your team so you can create goals and I play my part in facilitating that.
I hear the 'you have to stop this diving nonsense ref' from players that are the 1st to moan when someone else goes down easily yet they do it themselves without thought.
I hear the 'you have to stop this holding in the penalty area at corners' and then we are giving away cheap penalties that are game changers but thats our fault.
Ultimately, the respect for the game and the officials must come voluntarily from the players. Why can't the above 4 points be enacted by the players voluntarily? From there, things will improve dramatically whereby there wont be the consistent 'bugger that being a ref, I couldn't handle the abuse'. Then you have a larger talent pool to select from and the quality is theorectically better. Hence the respect program and it only requires everyone to take it seriously. If you have a larger pool of candidates to select for an opening at your work, in theory, you should have a better calibre of candidate.

We are responsible for educating and training ourselves just like players are, but if you are expecting someone to do extra training over and above what they do (some do heaps and some do none) then ask yourself if you are prepared to do the same. After all, we are all participants in the same game so everyone should be held to the standard which is directly correlatable to the level they are at.

I leave you with this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle and it applies to refereeing as well.

Edit

the player who ran into the ref was finally found not guilty so was able to play yesterday but our club are still being assholes they have put a 1,000 dollar good behaviour bond on our team so if any off our players do anything wrong the team gets a fine of a grand.anyone ever heard of this before it is not as though we are an overly aggressive team and we do not start fights we just play footy and if the other teams want to play hard we will do the same.

yesterday was my second game of the season as i was crook for most of the year and have come right lately so got back into it. i get the ball yesterday and some dickhead came straight through me with a two footed slide tackle from behind took my legs out and spun me up into the air and crashed flat on my back and then he got the ball. the ref only gives a yellow i was under the belief this should be a straight red as it was dangerous and aggressive also fudgeed me up for the rest of the game. if that had been one of our players i can guarantee you it would of been red

1: why is it a conspiracy that your player would have been sent off but theirs was not. What inference are you putting on the referee here? What was the point in making that statement other to detract from the credibility of your point in general.

2: does not matter if the tackle is from behind, side or front, if it endangers your safety (which is different from having a complete disregard for your safety), that player goes. The propensity for injury is higher for a tackle from behind but that's it.

3: as it was from behind as you say, you are unlikely to have full optics of the tackle so how are you placed to describe it? What are you basing it on? Was this what someone told you or from a video clip?

4: you never mentioned the force and speed used, if the player was airborne or lacking control in making the tackle and point of contact (low or high) - all key criteria

5: if a referee has the colour orange in his head (unsure if yellow or red) FIFA have changed their coaching as of two years ago that you go down to a yellow as opposed to previously where you went up to a red.

1. for several seasons some of our players have been red carded reasonably harshly when a yellow would have been enough and in those same games players from the other team did similar tackles  and either got yellows or nothing. i am not saying it is a conspiracy but when it happens over and over again you have to think how it looks to the players.

2. having felt the force of the tackle on the back of my ankles/leg i would say complete disregard for my safety.

3. this is correct spectators and players from both teams said they felt i was lucky not to get a broken ankle or worse.

4. alright the force of the tackle was enough to take my legs out forward up to about my shoulder height and me landing on the back of my neck and back knocking the wind out of me and hurting a hell of alot, it also fudgeed me up for the rest of the game and still have very sore neck and back today. i weigh about 95 kg and am about 6 foot tall so i would say he used excessive force to move my frame so much.

5. i am telling you now the ref should never have had orange in his head for this it was straight red all the way to the shed. i have played football for 44 years and have never been hit as hard as i got hit on saturday. if he had broken my ankle would the ref still of only given yellow it was pretty much assault on the football field.

Wanganui sounds a fun place to play footy.

It sure is. You get to play on Wembley

it usually is pretty good, the main problem with the local league is there is such a range of ages in there, teenagers straight from school to up and coming players trying to make it into one of the travelling teams right through to us older guys up to some in there 60,s so it is a strange league really with some strong teams that could play western premiership some teams that are social that just want to play football and do not train a few serious ones that want to win at all cost and a few rubbish ones that lose most of there games throw them all together and you have the wanganui local league.

put the following in the West Ham thread from the game on Saturday - would be interested to see what any referees think about time wasting

I have seen players booked for timewasting, but generally in the 90th minute. I think that the options the referees have is to either book the players as soon as they start it, or play 12 minutes added time. It is frustrating when they do neither.

Time wasting is a funny one. It's rare you see time wasting before the 65th min. I have not seen this game so have no comments specific to it.

If you give a card for time wasting around then when it first happens, you've got to be prepared to follow through with a sanction if others do it - if you don't, you've just shot yourself in the foot and your authority is gone. You then also take a risk that there is enough time left in the game that the player does something to warrant a further caution. Then a player has been sent off where one of the offences is kinda minor (you really want to save cards for big things like tackles and cynical play) A card for time wasting does dilute the effect of the card especially when a poor tackle can earn you the same sanction. You also don't want to find that you have been the cause of one team having 10 men.

If you give a card for time wasting in the 85+ min, what is that going to achieve? Is it going to change player behaviour and what players are doing when there is so little time left? They will take it and largely not care.

I think in the 1st instance, managing the players is the best tool cause you are keeping the cards down and being proactive but if the hint is not taken and it's blatantly obvious, then you caution.

It's a fine line issuing a yellow card between ensuring that it stops players doing it further but not in so much as effecting a potential send off for a 2nd yellow.

Hope that helps.

I understand what you are saying about soft cards and trying to keep the card count down, and I have been on the end of a few (what I would consider) soft ones over the years. I was once sent off down in Nelson when I got the first booking for being on the end of the wall when it hadn't retreated the full 10 yards (long lost rule from the early 90s), and then a second yellow about 4 minutes later when I swore (not overly loudly) when I sliced a cross out for a goal kick. Even the Nelson fans could not believe that I hadn't sworn at the ref when I left the field. I was also sent off in a Hilton Petone game for swearing at Greenie when he was on the same team as me - straight red card. I just assumed that as everyone else swore at Greenie, I would be allowed to as well.

I just think that some of the timewasting is so blatant it needs something more than the ref acknowleding it, but not actually doing anything about it. There is always going to be an element of it in any game where an underdog is winning/drawing, or a team is under the cosh. That is professionalism, and I would be annoyed if the team I was supporting was running off to get the ball to take set pieces when they are a goal up with 15 minutes to go. The issue I have is when it starts so early, the ref can do something - they could stop everything, go and talk to the captain and the manager and explain the situation that if there is any blatant timewasting between now and the end of the game, the person responsible will be carded. There can then be no complaints when it happens. Alternatively, play 12 minutes of injury time.

Just do something.

I kind of think that when referees say "I don't want to make the game about me by sending someone off for soft cards" or "I don't want to ruin the game by getting into card trouble early" etc that in their attempt to not make the game about them, they inadvertently do so. 

It's the players behaviour which dictates whether they get a yellow, or sent off, not the referees. If they timewaste, whether it be in the first half or in injury time - it should be a yellow (perhaps after a general warning). If they make a bad tackle worthy of a yellow, it should receive one. 

Your posts, while well intentioned (as FM said, I can see where you're coming from), confirms to me that in overthinking things like that, referees inadvertently become inconsistent - which frustrates players and fans. 

[/quote]

play 12 minutes of injury time.

[/quote]

In all fairness, this is the actual answer. No one (hopefully) really wants another player sent off, esp for "soft" yellows. So if they waste time, just add on the actual time wasted. Simple answer really

sometimes (specifically when it is really, really cold) I would prefer the timewasting stopped at source than have to sit around for another 12 minutes.

Had an enraging incident in the weekend. Cup Final, my current team v my old team, We show up and have 3 point control and are just like ok looks good to have officials even if only 1 of them is over 18 (one lineman), Ref is still in high school from memory or has just finished.

Any way playing the game and the craziest thing happens we are up 2-0 we get a goal that ricochets back into the field of play from the support post, Ref says no goal play on, their centre backs both turn to the ref and said in honesty ref it went in, ref just responded I have called no goal play on.

Game ends 2-2 (After our keeper dislocated his shoulder at the end of the 1st half and I had to jump in goal), We lose in extra time 4-3. To kick us in the nuts even more two goals were from players offside (One in regular time One in extra time). The Linesman on that side was calling nothing to the point that the ref was calling the offsides even when there was no flag up.

Also got my first ever Yellow card whoop whoop for a Challenge in the first half on a striker (I thought the Yellow card was a bit harsh but accepted it, The striker was in disbelief as he thought it was an amazing challenge)

The frustration is real!!