Referee Reporting

[Dave Bartlam]

Referee Reporting

In order to improve & streamline the reporting process where a referee is awarded a mark of 60 or less, Club Secretaries are now to complete the "Adverse Referee Report Form" and forward it directly to Ray Brown, Cornwall FA Referee Development Officer at the address on the form. The Trelawny Registration Secretary is to copied in on the e-mail. This form can be found on our News section of the Trelawny Full Time website

 

Referee Marking System

It's very important that the club representatives who mark the referees after the game do so in an un-biased manner and without personal prejudice. The referee marking criteria below (and on the Full Time website) give clear guidance to those marking the referees based on their performance and application of law along with their match control. If your game has contained some moments where your judgment of the referee is based on a particular incident(s), don't mark the ref straight away. Allow yourself the time to cool off before marking; alternatively, get an opinion from others who were at the game

The mark awarded by a club must be based on the Referee’s overall performance. It is most important that the mark is awarded fairly and not based upon isolated incidents or previous games. The table below acts as a guide for the overall mark. 

Club officials should use the full range of marks within each category to help distinguish between different performance levels, e.g. within the 85-76 category a mark of 84 indicates a better performance than a mark of 77 and always look at the game as a whole and not isolated decisions.

100-86 Referee demonstrated very accurate decision-making and controlled the game very well using management and communication skills effectively to add value to the game.

85-76 Referee demonstrated accurate decision-making and controlled the game well using management and communication skills to contribute positively to the game.

75-61 Referee demonstrated reasonably accurate decision-making and despite some shortcomings generally controlled the game well.

Below 61 Referee demonstrated shortcomings in the accuracy of decision-making and control which affected the game.

When a mark of 60 or lower is awarded, a report must be sent to the Registration Secretary who shall retain a copy and forward the report to the County Referee Development Officer. The purpose of this is to assist Referees to improve their performance levels, so the comments should be as helpful as possible.

How To Decide On The Referee's Mark

1. Control And Decision Making
• How well did the Referee control the game?
• Were the players’ actions recognized correctly?
• Were the Laws applied correctly?
• Were all incidents dealt with efficiently/effectively?
• Were all the appropriate sanctions applied correctly?
• Was the Referee always within reasonable distance of incidents?
• Was the Referee well positioned to make critical decisions, especially in and around the penalty area?
• Did the Referee understand the players’ positional intentions and keep out of the way accordingly?
• Did the Referee demonstrate alertness and concentration throughout the game?
• Did the Referee apply the use of the advantage to suit the mood and temperature of the game?
• Was the Referee aware of the players’ attitude to advantage?
• Did the Referee use the assistants effectively?
• Did the officials work as a team, and did the Referee lead and manage them to the benefit of the game?

2. Communication And Player Management

• How well did the Referee communicate with the players during the game? 
• Did the Referee’s Level of involvement/profile suit this particular game?
• Did the Referee understand the players’ problems on the day e.g. difficult ground/weather conditions? 
• Did the Referee respond to the changing pattern of play/mood of players?
• Did the Referee demonstrate empathy for the game, allowing it to develop in accordance with the tempo of the game?
• Was the Referee pro-active in controlling of the game?
• Was the Referee’s authority asserted firmly without being officious?
• Was the Referee confident and quick thinking?
• Did the Referee appear unflustered and unhurried when making critical decisions?
• Did the Referee permit undue questioning of decisions?
• Did the Referee deal effectively with players crowding around after decisions/ incidents? 
• Was effective player management in evidence?
• Was the Referee’s body language confident and open at all times?
• Did the pace of the game, the crowd, player pressure affect the Referee negatively?

3. Final thoughts

• Always try to be objective when marking. You may not obtain the most objective view by marking immediately after the game.

• Judge the performance over the whole game. Don’t be too influenced by one particular incident.

• Don’t mark the referee down unfairly because your team was unlucky and lost the game or some disciplinary action was taken against your players