SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums SCHSSCA Officiating Evaluations???

I agree with rating officials, but how are you going to rate them on offsides when 90% of the time they can't be in position to call it in the two man system. As a coach I gave up on the offsides trap after the third game last season because three different sets of officials had never been in position to call it. Are the officials in SC trained in preventive refereeing or just to go straight to the card? Overall my main concern is for the safety of the boys/girls who are playing.

I think all the posts state an important fact. Too often players are put at risk by officials that do not have a proper knowledge of the game and quite honestly not the proper level of professionalism. Evaluating officials is an animal that can provide accurate information or biased garbage. The integrity of the coaches that are doing the evaluating is as important as the officials treating the importance of their job. Too often the only evaluation that one can receive is one that is based on the negative.

On the other hand about officials' certification, I agree too that they needs to be a better system in training the HS officials. Currently there are officials that don't have USSF background and are officiating HS games. These officials need better training rather than "taking a test" each year.

One last note, each region should strive to work towards a three person referring system. Positioning would not be such a problem and there would be a better way to evaluate how a match goes, based on the only whistle in the middle. There needs to be a better job of bringing people into the reffing world so that there is not a short coming of officials and administrators have to understand the importance of funding three officials.

Personally as a ref, and my first year as a high school ref, I can honestly say I hate the two man system. There are times that you can't possibly see everything that needs to be seen, and you know it, but you try to do your best. The two man system puts the refs at a disadvantage, and makes them look bad. As for rating refs, I can go along with that, as long as the refs can rate the coaches. There are too many times that the problems on the field come directly from the antoganist relationship that the coach has with the ref. It gives the kids the impression that the ref doesn't know what he/she is doing. This may be the case sometimes, but it can get out of hand, and sometimes it may even begin to interrupt with the flow of the game.

I understand that there needs to be some sort of rating system in place. But this needs to start with the offical training. I believe that all officials need to be USSF certified. I also believe that we need to have refs that can keep up with the play. These refs that are too out of shape should not be on the field, it makes us all look bad. I started to ref this past year because of the poor officiating. Hopefully we can all improve and make the game that much better.

As long as the two-man system is used, there will be less than satisfactory officiating. To evaluate a ref in a two-man system isn't fair to the one who may be on the ball, while the other is the real problem. Yet, like it or not, most evaluators (coaches?) would evaluate them both as a team, with our without meaning to. USSF is the only way to go; its system allows for the center ref to overrule, for all the right reasons, a bad or frivolous call by an AR (linesman). ... As a certified USSF ref, and a high school ref (my area is in short supply, so I help out), I would welcome any evaluation of any game I would do. Just don't pair me up with a clueless newcomer (or clueless "veteran" ref) and evaluate us both as one. For those who think you can be objective and keep things separate, sorry, but I don't think you all can. Most coaches aren't qualified to evaluate objectively (most also will disagree with this, I'm sure), especially after a loss.

Why can't we have a 3-man system? I've heard the assignors say that there are not enough. I've heard coaches say there isn't money to pay them for it.

Personally I feel both excuses are lame. How can basketball have 3 officials for 10 players on a 90' court and soccer have 2 officials for 22 players on a 120 yard field? Doesn't make any sense.

I agree, it would be nice to have a rating system for refs and coaches. If used properly, it will help create some understanding on both sides of the fence. Keep in mind you have different levels of referees. New and old and too old. You also have some blind refs. Let's not forget get the coaches. Some of the high schools are finally hiring soccer coaches and not just someone to watch the kids. I have seen a big turn around in a lot of the coaches behavior towards players and referees. We still have some work to do, but it's getting better. That's my ten cents worth, maybe it's worth a nickel.

I think us the players would love to have 3 refs. But the problem is the money to pay them, for are school at lest.

That's it, keep on bashing the refs!
The referees are hired to enforce the laws of the game AS WRITTEN, not the way the coaches and parents want them to be selectively enforced. If you want the games called differently, work to get the rules changed.
This whole dialog about the coaches evaluating the refs is a crock. What qualifications do most coaches have to assess the referees? Why aren't the coaches required to demonstrate their knowledge of the game just like the referees are? Most coaches demonstrate their LACK of knowledge of the rules every time they complain about a call. If you really care about improving the officiating, spend the money to implement the three person system, and utilize a trained, unbiased assessment program similar to USSF. Now, how do you get enough referees to go to a three person system? Here's a suggestion- How about the coaches show some respect and patience for the majority of good referees who are doing their best to provide a safe, fair environment for today's youth to participate in the sport. We have absolutely no interest in the outcome of the game, other than trying to keep it as safe and fair as possible. Did you ever think we may be decent human beings that really don't deserve the abuse we get from coaches, parents, and eventually from the players who are following those two role models?
Keep abusing the referees, and the good ones will continue to burn out and quit, and you will continue to have a shortage of good, experienced referees. If you really care about the quality of 'your' sport, why don't you take a closer look at just how poorly you treat one imortant aspect of it.

In regards to the comments made by a "fan", I don't think the intent is to ref bash. Would you consider that this line of discussion is a natural evolution of the program? I agree with your perpectives concerning coaches, players and parents and respect for the rererees. There still remains room for growth for all involved. I also concur that the primary function of the officiator is to enforce the rules and protect the players. There does appear to be an agenda with some referees to enforce certain infractions with extreme prejudice while tolerating others as "part of the game". There are far more good refs than bad from my perspective. I would just like to see more consistancy.

Well said, Coach Brown.
I believe moving towards a 3 ref system, with USSF trained referees and NEUTRAL assessors, would improve the referee situation and provide the consistency we all are looking for. As a referee I don't like working the 2 man system with inconsistent referees either. My biggest concern with the proposed evaluation system is coaches having inappropriate influence over referees. That would not improve the situation at all.