URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       RateTheRef
  HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 19412--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: rustyref
       Date: July 23, 2020, 1:37 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Maltese Falcon link ---
       >
       > Reading the above discussion has got me wondering whether
       there is (or should be) a similar structure in place at National
       List Level, to that lower down the pyramid ... specifically,
       from personal experience, at Level 3.
       >
       > At this Level, if any official has not featured in the Top 40%
       of the bandings for three consecutive seasons, then they are in
       the frame for demotion.  This ensures that that those 'scraping
       by' each year, without showing any indication of the talent to
       progress upwards, will not be allowed to 'clog up' the system.
       >
       > It's harsh, but IMO fair
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Problem is you can't do that with full time employees.  Imagine
       if you went to your annual review and you were told that you
       were being dismissed because you'd only been in the top 60% of
       all employees for three years, you'd be straight to HR.
       #Post#: 19422--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: JohnCoyle
       Date: July 24, 2020, 4:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: TVOS link ---
       >
       > [quote author=JohnCoyle link=topic=1641.msg19285#msg19285
       date=1595233950]
       > [quote author=DublinRef link=topic=1641.msg19246#msg19246
       date=1595162395]
       > Welcome DBLTFC, I enjoyed and agreed with a lot of your first
       post.
       >
       > In particular when you say a "job for life" I think this is a
       real issue, of course we need the steady eddies but for me there
       is simply nowhere near enough churn at the national level. I
       know in some countries they operate an automatic
       promotion/demotion system based on the merit table for that
       year, is such a system used at any level in the English game?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       As someone who watches most of my live football at League One
       and (occasionally) League Two levels, it's one of my biggest
       bugbears. There are a number of NL referees whom you know are
       going to produce, at best, an adequate performance and at worst
       are likely to ruin your afternoon. (Anyone who watches football
       at my level will know who I am talking about).
       The age-limit used to deal with a lot of this, especially when
       it became more flexible so that very good referees could have an
       extra season or two. Personally, I think if a NL referee hasn't
       managed to reach SG2 after a certain number of years they should
       stand down from the NL, although for that to work properly you
       would need a greater degree of churn at SG2 and above than
       exists now.
       [/quote]
       Sorry, but I can’t agree with your last point at all.
       There will be a number of NL referees who are in good jobs away
       from refereeing and couldn’t afford to take the risk of losing
       all that for a SG2 contract. Are you saying they should be
       penalised for that?
       It’s an often missed point that those on SG2 had to be available
       and prepared to forego their other careers in order to join this
       list.
       It explains why they aren’t necessarily the next best group of
       referees, but instead are the next best of available referees.
       In my job, I’ve never gone for any form of promotion as I’m
       happy as I am, especially as it leaves me with more free time
       for outside interests than I would have otherwise. Should I have
       been moved aside by now, at age 51?
       Must admit I’ve seen only a few lower league officials who have
       spoiled my afternoon, particularly when they failed to clamp
       down on the spoiling tactics used by the likes of Darren
       Ferguson and Steve Evans. Otherwise it has mainly been players
       who have spoiled my afternoon!
       [/quote]
       Two points really- on SG2 I wouldn't have proceeded as the PGMOL
       chose to do. SG2 should be composed of referees who have a
       decent chance of being promoted to SG1 within five years. Making
       them full-time was a huge error because you ended up with
       referees who were willing to leave full-time jobs outside the
       game rather than the best referees outside SG1. Of those on SG2
       now the vast majority are unlikely to ever reach SG1. Those who
       are tend to be like Jones, England and Brooks who have only
       joined the NL within the last five years or so.
       Secondly, shouldn't the majority of referees who join the NL
       aspire to being SG1 and even FIFA officials? I'd guess if they
       did then we wouldn't have so few referees of genuine
       international calibre. You will always get some referees who
       reach the NL comparatively late in their career. For them, a
       maximum of 10 years on the list should be adequate (and a lot
       more then they would have got in the time of a mandatory
       retirement age). I realise my focus was on the NL, but really
       the problem is the lack of churn from top down.
       #Post#: 19423--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: ajb95
       Date: July 24, 2020, 5:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: JohnCoyle link ---
       >
       > [quote author=TVOS link=topic=1641.msg19288#msg19288
       date=1595234754]
       > [quote author=JohnCoyle link=topic=1641.msg19285#msg19285
       date=1595233950]
       > [quote author=DublinRef link=topic=1641.msg19246#msg19246
       date=1595162395]
       > Welcome DBLTFC, I enjoyed and agreed with a lot of your first
       post.
       >
       > In particular when you say a "job for life" I think this is a
       real issue, of course we need the steady eddies but for me there
       is simply nowhere near enough churn at the national level. I
       know in some countries they operate an automatic
       promotion/demotion system based on the merit table for that
       year, is such a system used at any level in the English game?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       As someone who watches most of my live football at League One
       and (occasionally) League Two levels, it's one of my biggest
       bugbears. There are a number of NL referees whom you know are
       going to produce, at best, an adequate performance and at worst
       are likely to ruin your afternoon. (Anyone who watches football
       at my level will know who I am talking about).
       The age-limit used to deal with a lot of this, especially when
       it became more flexible so that very good referees could have an
       extra season or two. Personally, I think if a NL referee hasn't
       managed to reach SG2 after a certain number of years they should
       stand down from the NL, although for that to work properly you
       would need a greater degree of churn at SG2 and above than
       exists now.
       [/quote]
       Sorry, but I can’t agree with your last point at all.
       There will be a number of NL referees who are in good jobs away
       from refereeing and couldn’t afford to take the risk of losing
       all that for a SG2 contract. Are you saying they should be
       penalised for that?
       It’s an often missed point that those on SG2 had to be available
       and prepared to forego their other careers in order to join this
       list.
       It explains why they aren’t necessarily the next best group of
       referees, but instead are the next best of available referees.
       In my job, I’ve never gone for any form of promotion as I’m
       happy as I am, especially as it leaves me with more free time
       for outside interests than I would have otherwise. Should I have
       been moved aside by now, at age 51?
       Must admit I’ve seen only a few lower league officials who have
       spoiled my afternoon, particularly when they failed to clamp
       down on the spoiling tactics used by the likes of Darren
       Ferguson and Steve Evans. Otherwise it has mainly been players
       who have spoiled my afternoon!
       [/quote]
       Two points really- on SG2 I wouldn't have proceeded as the PGMOL
       chose to do. SG2 should be composed of referees who have a
       decent chance of being promoted to SG1 within five years. Making
       them full-time was a huge error because you ended up with
       referees who were willing to leave full-time jobs outside the
       game rather than the best referees outside SG1. Of those on SG2
       now the vast majority are unlikely to ever reach SG1. Those who
       are tend to be like Jones, England and Brooks who have only
       joined the NL within the last five years or so.
       Secondly, shouldn't the majority of referees who join the NL
       aspire to being SG1 and even FIFA officials? I'd guess if they
       did then we wouldn't have so few referees of genuine
       international calibre. You will always get some referees who
       reach the NL comparatively late in their career. For them, a
       maximum of 10 years on the list should be adequate (and a lot
       more then they would have got in the time of a mandatory
       retirement age). I realise my focus was on the NL, but really
       the problem is the lack of churn from top down.
       [/quote]
       An excellent post and one I wholeheartedly agree with!
       #Post#: 19425--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: TVOS
       Date: July 24, 2020, 7:34 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: JohnCoyle link ---
       >
       > [quote author=TVOS link=topic=1641.msg19288#msg19288
       date=1595234754]
       > [quote author=JohnCoyle link=topic=1641.msg19285#msg19285
       date=1595233950]
       > [quote author=DublinRef link=topic=1641.msg19246#msg19246
       date=1595162395]
       > Welcome DBLTFC, I enjoyed and agreed with a lot of your first
       post.
       >
       > In particular when you say a "job for life" I think this is a
       real issue, of course we need the steady eddies but for me there
       is simply nowhere near enough churn at the national level. I
       know in some countries they operate an automatic
       promotion/demotion system based on the merit table for that
       year, is such a system used at any level in the English game?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       As someone who watches most of my live football at League One
       and (occasionally) League Two levels, it's one of my biggest
       bugbears. There are a number of NL referees whom you know are
       going to produce, at best, an adequate performance and at worst
       are likely to ruin your afternoon. (Anyone who watches football
       at my level will know who I am talking about).
       The age-limit used to deal with a lot of this, especially when
       it became more flexible so that very good referees could have an
       extra season or two. Personally, I think if a NL referee hasn't
       managed to reach SG2 after a certain number of years they should
       stand down from the NL, although for that to work properly you
       would need a greater degree of churn at SG2 and above than
       exists now.
       [/quote]
       Sorry, but I can’t agree with your last point at all.
       There will be a number of NL referees who are in good jobs away
       from refereeing and couldn’t afford to take the risk of losing
       all that for a SG2 contract. Are you saying they should be
       penalised for that?
       It’s an often missed point that those on SG2 had to be available
       and prepared to forego their other careers in order to join this
       list.
       It explains why they aren’t necessarily the next best group of
       referees, but instead are the next best of available referees.
       In my job, I’ve never gone for any form of promotion as I’m
       happy as I am, especially as it leaves me with more free time
       for outside interests than I would have otherwise. Should I have
       been moved aside by now, at age 51?
       Must admit I’ve seen only a few lower league officials who have
       spoiled my afternoon, particularly when they failed to clamp
       down on the spoiling tactics used by the likes of Darren
       Ferguson and Steve Evans. Otherwise it has mainly been players
       who have spoiled my afternoon!
       [/quote]
       Two points really- on SG2 I wouldn't have proceeded as the PGMOL
       chose to do. SG2 should be composed of referees who have a
       decent chance of being promoted to SG1 within five years. Making
       them full-time was a huge error because you ended up with
       referees who were willing to leave full-time jobs outside the
       game rather than the best referees outside SG1. Of those on SG2
       now the vast majority are unlikely to ever reach SG1. Those who
       are tend to be like Jones, England and Brooks who have only
       joined the NL within the last five years or so.
       Secondly, shouldn't the majority of referees who join the NL
       aspire to being SG1 and even FIFA officials? I'd guess if they
       did then we wouldn't have so few referees of genuine
       international calibre. You will always get some referees who
       reach the NL comparatively late in their career. For them, a
       maximum of 10 years on the list should be adequate (and a lot
       more then they would have got in the time of a mandatory
       retirement age). I realise my focus was on the NL, but really
       the problem is the lack of churn from top down.
       [/quote]
       Yes, you have made some very good points there, although some of
       them contradict what you said initially.
       Like I said, it's an oft-missed point that some of those on SG2
       are there because they were 'available', for want of a better
       word, and not because they were 'select'.
       #Post#: 19426--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: DBLTFC
       Date: July 24, 2020, 8:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'd argue if you were only on SG2 because you were "available",
       those who weren't shouldn't be on the NL either.
       Clearly this is an extremely professional sport and it requires
       commitment. Why should PGMOL / EFL put up with officials who
       aren't that when clearly there are those waiting in the wings
       who would love the job.
       How much do officials get paid at each level? If you had the
       following structure, I'd argue you'd have many giving up the day
       job tomorrow...
       SG1 Ref: £200,000 x 20; £75,000 x 40 assistants
       VAR only: £75,000 x 4 for recently retired, VAR only specialists
       SG2 Ref: £120,000 x 18; £45,000 x 36 assistants
       NL List: £75,000 x 35; £25,000 x 70 assistants
       Panel 2A: £35,000 x 20; part time assistants
       =243 professional officials, costing around £17m a season.
       Costing less than £1m per PL club.
       93 referees to cover 58 games + 10 VAR referees each matchday.
       Officials should be more fluid through the divisions; if they
       are good enough accelerate them up. If not drop them down
       #Post#: 19427--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: TVOS
       Date: July 24, 2020, 10:40 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: DBLTFC link ---
       >
       > I'd argue if you were only on SG2 because you were
       "available", those who weren't shouldn't be on the NL either.
       >
       > Clearly this is an extremely professional sport and it
       requires commitment. Why should PGMOL / EFL put up with
       officials who aren't that when clearly there are those waiting
       in the wings who would love the job.
       >
       > How much do officials get paid at each level? If you had the
       following structure, I'd argue you'd have many giving up the day
       job tomorrow...
       >
       > SG1 Ref: £200,000 x 20; £75,000 x 40 assistants
       > VAR only: £75,000 x 4 for recently retired, VAR only
       specialists
       > SG2 Ref: £120,000 x 18; £45,000 x 36 assistants
       > NL List: £75,000 x 35; £25,000 x 70 assistants
       > Panel 2A: £35,000 x 20; part time assistants
       > =243 professional officials, costing around £17m a season.
       Costing less than £1m per PL club.
       > 93 referees to cover 58 games + 10 VAR referees each matchday.
       Officials should be more fluid through the divisions; if they
       are good enough accelerate them up. If not drop them down
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Without knowing each official's individual circumstances, it's a
       bit disingenuous to question the commitment of, say, Trevor
       Kettle over that of Gavin Ward.
       Alternatively, let's take Andy Madley. In his 30s and was a
       teacher for a number of years, during which time he will have
       built up a certain level of professional and personal pension
       contributions.
       It would have been a massive decision for him to take the risk
       of changing all that (in what is a pretty secure position) for a
       SG2 contract (and later SG1).
       That's what I meant by "available", especially as injury or
       fitness could curtail his refereeing career at any time.
       #Post#: 19592--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: DBLTFC
       Date: July 30, 2020, 2:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: TVOS link ---
       >
       > [quote author=DBLTFC link=topic=1641.msg19426#msg19426
       date=1595599142]
       > I'd argue if you were only on SG2 because you were
       "available", those who weren't shouldn't be on the NL either.
       >
       > Clearly this is an extremely professional sport and it
       requires commitment. Why should PGMOL / EFL put up with
       officials who aren't that when clearly there are those waiting
       in the wings who would love the job.
       >
       > How much do officials get paid at each level? If you had the
       following structure, I'd argue you'd have many giving up the day
       job tomorrow...
       >
       > SG1 Ref: £200,000 x 20; £75,000 x 40 assistants
       > VAR only: £75,000 x 4 for recently retired, VAR only
       specialists
       > SG2 Ref: £120,000 x 18; £45,000 x 36 assistants
       > NL List: £75,000 x 35; £25,000 x 70 assistants
       > Panel 2A: £35,000 x 20; part time assistants
       > =243 professional officials, costing around £17m a season.
       Costing less than £1m per PL club.
       > 93 referees to cover 58 games + 10 VAR referees each matchday.
       Officials should be more fluid through the divisions; if they
       are good enough accelerate them up. If not drop them down
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Without knowing each official's individual circumstances, it's a
       bit disingenuous to question the commitment of, say, Trevor
       Kettle over that of Gavin Ward.
       Alternatively, let's take Andy Madley. In his 30s and was a
       teacher for a number of years, during which time he will have
       built up a certain level of professional and personal pension
       contributions.
       It would have been a massive decision for him to take the risk
       of changing all that (in what is a pretty secure position) for a
       SG2 contract (and later SG1).
       That's what I meant by "available", especially as injury or
       fitness could curtail his refereeing career at any time.
       [/quote]
       I didn't mean it that explicitly. I wouldn't question a full
       time refs commitment v a part timer, but if you're working 4-5
       days preceding a match and had a sh!t week with a bad employer,
       it's going to affect your judgement, no?
       I'd argue the benefits certainly outweigh the negatives:
       -Better CPD
       -More emphasis on fitness and physical / mental wellbeing.
       -More contact / training time leading to better decision making.
       -Younger officials coming through seeing it as a real career
       opportunity.
       In regards to short termism, the average job in the UK lasts
       just 4 years these days!
       #Post#: 19595--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: rustyref
       Date: July 30, 2020, 2:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There won't be an expansion of professional referees at the
       current time for two reasons.  Firstly, there is not going to be
       any funding as Covid-19 has left a massive hole in funding even
       for Premier League clubs, less so than at lower levels because
       of the TV money, but it is still massive.  Secondly, for those
       that are lucky to still have jobs after what has happened, are
       they likely to give that security up for a one year contract as
       a professional referee?  Some would of course, but I suspect
       less than usually would as the job market is going to be a mess
       for a review years.
       #Post#: 19598--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Refeering standards in England
   DIR By: TVOS
       Date: July 30, 2020, 4:42 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: DBLTFC link ---
       >
       > [quote author=TVOS link=topic=1641.msg19427#msg19427
       date=1595605243]
       > [quote author=DBLTFC link=topic=1641.msg19426#msg19426
       date=1595599142]
       > I'd argue if you were only on SG2 because you were
       "available", those who weren't shouldn't be on the NL either.
       >
       > Clearly this is an extremely professional sport and it
       requires commitment. Why should PGMOL / EFL put up with
       officials who aren't that when clearly there are those waiting
       in the wings who would love the job.
       >
       > How much do officials get paid at each level? If you had the
       following structure, I'd argue you'd have many giving up the day
       job tomorrow...
       >
       > SG1 Ref: £200,000 x 20; £75,000 x 40 assistants
       > VAR only: £75,000 x 4 for recently retired, VAR only
       specialists
       > SG2 Ref: £120,000 x 18; £45,000 x 36 assistants
       > NL List: £75,000 x 35; £25,000 x 70 assistants
       > Panel 2A: £35,000 x 20; part time assistants
       > =243 professional officials, costing around £17m a season.
       Costing less than £1m per PL club.
       > 93 referees to cover 58 games + 10 VAR referees each matchday.
       Officials should be more fluid through the divisions; if they
       are good enough accelerate them up. If not drop them down
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Without knowing each official's individual circumstances, it's a
       bit disingenuous to question the commitment of, say, Trevor
       Kettle over that of Gavin Ward.
       Alternatively, let's take Andy Madley. In his 30s and was a
       teacher for a number of years, during which time he will have
       built up a certain level of professional and personal pension
       contributions.
       It would have been a massive decision for him to take the risk
       of changing all that (in what is a pretty secure position) for a
       SG2 contract (and later SG1).
       That's what I meant by "available", especially as injury or
       fitness could curtail his refereeing career at any time.
       [/quote]
       I didn't mean it that explicitly. I wouldn't question a full
       time refs commitment v a part timer, but if you're working 4-5
       days preceding a match and had a sh!t week with a bad employer,
       it's going to affect your judgement, no?
       I'd argue the benefits certainly outweigh the negatives:
       -Better CPD
       -More emphasis on fitness and physical / mental wellbeing.
       -More contact / training time leading to better decision making.
       -Younger officials coming through seeing it as a real career
       opportunity.
       In regards to short termism, the average job in the UK lasts
       just 4 years these days!
       [/quote]
       That's nothing like what your original post implied.
       *****************************************************
       Page 3 of 3
   DIR Previous Page