Referees

Cobra_Kai wrote:I want to get defensive about silentparent's 'third-world' and 'urine' comments, but I actually did piss on a few white boys in my youth.  

I wonder if this post will be ridiculed as much as SPs? For some reason I doubt it will.

Seven wrote:

Cobra_Kai wrote:I want to get defensive about silentparent's 'third-world' and 'urine' comments, but I actually did piss on a few white boys in my youth.  

I wonder if this post will be ridiculed as much as SPs? For some reason I doubt it will.

probably not and since i merely posted facts, i could care less about the squishy PC responses...

As North Texas Soccer coaches we need to step up and do something about the referee situation, especially in PPL. To see girls yesterday being carted off the field, unconscious with major inuries is never a good thing for a parent or coach to see. The games can still be aggressive and physical but they have to be kept under control. I would never want to have one of my players injured to the point that it can affect them in the future. Soccer is a beautiful game and if managed correctly can be a great epxerience and opportunity for all players involved. Let's take some action.

Yankee63 you are exactly right! There is a big difference between aggressive and physical or just plain dirty. I watched a coach in lake highlands telling his players to take a girl out, the ref heard him and told him to stop twice but didnt eject him. Im starting to think a lot of refs are blind in one eye. Soccer is a physical sport but the intentional shoves in the back and elbows to the face, come on man!

We had 2 referees this weekend in Oklahoma that I thought did an outstanding job.  They even brought cards and actually used them.
Maybe we should start importing them from Oklahoma

What do you propose?

I was at my obligatory LHGCL "meet-the-ref" meeting this weekend.

The trainer (also a ref trainer) posed the following question to the girls - "if a girl comes up behind you and is playing physical, do you want me to call a foul, or do you just want to play soccer?"

A dad spoke up and said "what do you expect them to say, of course they want to play soccer, but they are tired of being pushed, tripped, and punched by girls not playing the ball."  He was admonished by the trainer.

The correct answer is . . . if it is a foul, call it.  This isn't a democracy.  We aren't going to vote on which fouls to call.  Of course the girls want to play - without being abused.  But there is some clearly physical play that is not being called so that "we can just let them play soccer."

The U11 Commissioner did say that they changed the ref's procedure for yellow cards creating less paperwork, and have seen a corresponding increase in yellow cards.  Hopefully this will help.  I believe he also said that a red was given in a U11 D3 game this weekend.

Too many games where girls get away with obvious and dangerous fouls away from the ball (and obvious physical plays where the offender is not playing the ball, but just running someone over or laying a football block).  Saw a game last year where a girl got clothes-lined away from the ball and behind the ref's back.  I asked the asst ref why he didn't call it.  He said it wasn't his job - the head ref had directed the assistants that he would call all fouls.

What do I propose. When you hear a coach telling a player to take a girl out or run over her, kick his butt out! When you see a girl take two hands and push a girl in the back call a foul. A smaller player can push and lean all over a bigger player but as soon as its returned youll hear a whistle. I tell my dd to play aggressive and to use her body but she isn't dirty about it. The good refs know the difference and the bad ones let it get out of hand.

All of this mirrors my experience.

Great points.

I have always said - my pet peeves are refs who:

1)  don't call foot lifting on a throw-in.  This is an obvious foul.

2)  don't get back on the sidelines to appropriately call offside.  Not saying getting back is easy - especially as the girls get older and faster - but clearly a few asst refs who are not able (or willing) to get back quickly.

3)  don't call obvious fouls - fouls away from the ball, two-handed shoves in the back, tripping with no play on the ball, etc.

I understand that when two girls are being physical as they vie for the ball, it can be difficult to determine when a foul should be called.  (that is when both girls are actually attempting to play the ball)  Unfortunately, that seems to be the defense - "it's hard in those situations and the call is in the referee's discretion."

Let's start with OBVIOUS and easy-to-call fouls.  But it's the "let's let them just play and not interfere with the game" mentality that results in more dangerous play as the game progresses.  Let the refs send the message early that this garbage will not be allowed.

I had to add from LHGCL meeting:

They addressed throw-ins - I have never heard a parent question a spinning ball, but that is what they focused on.  Didn't address lifting the foot - and I see that not called all the time.

They had a demonstration on offside - how difficult it is as a parent "sitting in a lounge chair 30 feet away" to make a proper offside call.  However, given the number of parents on the sidelines, most games have a parent directly in-line to see if a player was offside.  Never addressed assistant referees who are 15-20 feet down the line and completely out of position to make a call (until it was raised).

"Spinning ball" assertion is common rec parent phenominum. This is the perfect illustration of the perceptions and misinformation that flows through the spectator ranks. A spinning ball on a throw is caused by one hand exerting a different force on the ball than the other or the ball leaving one hand an instant before the other. It is highly improbable for an imperfect human to intentionally and predictably throw a soccer ball without any rotation. Many spectators will also complain that the player "stepped on the line", which is legal, or that the "foot came up" when any part of the shoe touching a blade of grass is ok and if an instant replay is needed to judge it, it is not going to be called.

The problem with most spectators judging offside is that they are not watching the game the same way as the A/R. Spectators typically follow the ball - they see a through-ball kicked, look up and see a player that they assume was in an offside position when the ball was kicked. The properly positioned A/R is watching the players' positions and the striking of the ball. Yes, on some instances with a spread but crowded back line, an out-of-position A/R 10 yards up the field may not be able to make a correct decision. Yes, an unfit or inattentive A/R is problematic in this case. I have heard parents screaming that an A/R should go back to class for making offside calls where the player in an offside position came back onside to play the ball. Point is that in most instances the spectators' perceptions are wrong.

This weekend I actually heard a parent tell her husband that offside should not have been called because Lil Susie was offside, but she came back on to get the ball.
And no,.. it wasn't my wife. My DD'S are never offside.

No disrespect but I could care less about spinning balls or offsides. The topic brought up was by yankee63 and the refs not controlling the game. Offsides isn't going to end a players career or put them in the hospital. Refs need to start calling the dirty play, not aggressive or physical, but dirty.

Wired wrote:What do I propose. When you hear a coach telling a player to take a girl out or run over her, kick his butt out! When you see a girl take two hands and push a girl in the back call a foul. A smaller player can push and lean all over a bigger player but as soon as its returned youll hear a whistle. I tell my dd to play aggressive and to use her body but she isn't dirty about it. The good refs know the difference and the bad ones let it get out of hand.

I concur with this. Especially throwing the coach out, heck even the parent out when they say the same thing.

Also, if a player (I've seen it twice and both times no call was made) is standing ground and consequently falls backwards and the opposing players has their arm up - that player more than likely stiff armed the defender. These athletes are usually to strong to fall backwards by themselves, in my opinion.

upper95 wrote:"
The problem with most spectators judging offside is that they are not watching the game the same way as the A/R.  Spectators typically follow the ball - they see a through-ball kicked, look up and see a player that they assume was in an offside position when the ball was kicked.  The properly positioned A/R is watching the players' positions and the striking of the ball.  Yes, on some instances with a spread but crowded back line, an out-of-position A/R 10 yards up the field may not be able to make a correct decision.  Yes, an unfit or inattentive A/R is problematic in this case.  I have heard parents screaming that an A/R should go back to class for making offside calls where the player in an offside position came back onside to play the ball.  Point is that in most instances the spectators' perceptions are wrong.

This is such a hard one, especially with the new "tweaked" rules on offside.

I had a game that about killed me this weekend (00 boys) that featured one team that played a high line and another with three forwards trying to make runs that were sometimes very close. The back line of the team that played an offside trap would look over at me to see my position and step up accordingly. Many times at least one of the opposing team's forwards would be in a slightly offside position when the through ball was played and took off running with the other forward who received the ball. It was a footrace to the goal with the offside forward usually not receiving the ball. People were convinced that it was an offside offense, but the fact was the forward in the offside position, even running, was NOT involved in active play. I only had to call back one goal for the offside forward never resetting when a close ranged shot was taken, parried by the keeper and subsequently buried. This involved a TON of running on my part, but it is what you have to do. Fortunately, when I explained the "participating in active play" to the parents, they were OK with it. I think one of the reasons that they were OK, was that they actually saw a 40+ year old man chasing 15yo boys while in position. I was dying at the end, but it is part of the job.

I do agree with some of the parents here in the sense that I reffed with two questionably in shape referees who were over 60yo. I'm not knocking the older refs by any means, but there comes a point when the 15-19yo boys, makes it hard for the "center circle" refs to stay in line with these kids on a full sprint.

I'm sure this will probably cause a lot of backlash from my fellow refs, but explaining and understanding both sides, I believe, is a good start.

Wired wrote:No disrespect but I could care less about spinning balls or offsides. The topic brought up was by yankee63 and the refs not controlling the game. Offsides isn't going to end a players career or put them in the hospital. Refs need to start calling the dirty play, not aggressive or physical, but dirty.

For clarity, the topic was brought up by 97mom, and it was about refs not speaking English, flirting, and not paying attention. But don't let me stop you... grind that axe away.

I should have been more specific, the topic that was brought up today by yankee63 at 9:34am. I still dont care about offsides. But great point about nothing futbollove.

Wired wrote:No disrespect but I could care less about spinning balls or offsides. The topic brought up was by yankee63 and the refs not controlling the game. Offsides isn't going to end a players career or put them in the hospital. Refs need to start calling the dirty play, not aggressive or physical, but dirty.

I agree with needing to take control of "dirty play", but on the flip side, parents have no idea what an "advantage" call is.

Again, this weekend, I brought the girls (98G) and the coach over to give them pre-game instructions and asked if they knew what the advantage rule was, since I use my voice a lot. Half of the girls had no idea, so the coach explained it to them right there. One of the ways to minimize retaliation is for kids to know that the ref saw the foul and something was being done to address it by "playing advantage". Parents usually have ZERO clue what it is, even when they see my arms raised.

Believe it or not, most teams, boys and girls, start off wanting to play soccer rather than rugby. At the outset of games, there may be one or two players who have to be addressed immediately, but it is not common for the ENTIRE team to come out swinging. It's usually dealt with early and can be resolved.

One of the other things to established before the game starts, is to ask the kids to point out one of the kids (or captains) to calmly approach me and let me know if there is something off the ball that neither myself, nor my ARs are spotting. This gives me a chance to let both me and my ARs know to play closer attention to that particular player. This also minimizes retaliation, since the kids know that they can calmly approach the ref and that we are now watching out for a particular player.

These are just a few of the things I do that have seemed to work out the best for me to keep soccer being played rather than hockey!

Coach&Ref wrote:

Wired wrote:No disrespect but I could care less about spinning balls or offsides. The topic brought up was by yankee63 and the refs not controlling the game. Offsides isn't going to end a players career or put them in the hospital. Refs need to start calling the dirty play, not aggressive or physical, but dirty.

I agree with needing to take control of "dirty play", but on the flip side, parents have no idea what an "advantage" call is.

Again, this weekend, I brought the girls (98G) and the coach over to give them pre-game instructions and asked if they knew what the advantage rule was, since I use my voice a lot. Half of the girls had no idea, so the coach explained it to them right there. One of the ways to minimize retaliation is for kids to know that the ref saw the foul and something was being done to address it by "playing advantage". Parents usually have ZERO clue what it is, even when they see my arms raised.

Believe it or not, most teams, boys and girls, start off wanting to play soccer rather than rugby. At the outset of games, there may be one or two players who have to be addressed immediately, but it is not common for the ENTIRE team to come out swinging. It's usually dealt with early and can be resolved.

One of the other things to established before the game starts, is to ask the kids to point out one of the kids (or captains) to calmly approach me and let me know if there is something off the ball that neither myself, nor my ARs are spotting. This gives me a chance to let both me and my ARs know to play closer attention to that particular player. This also minimizes retaliation, since the kids know that they can calmly approach the ref and that we are now watching out for a particular player.

These are just a few of the things I do that have seemed to work out the best for me to keep soccer being played rather than hockey!

In my opinion, it is more accurate to state "If it is dealt with early it can be resolved."

Problem is - it's not usually dealt with early.

Can't a referee allow playing advantage and still issue a yellow for dangerous play?

soccerisfun wrote:

In my opinion, it is more accurate to state "If it is dealt with early it can be resolved."

Problem is - it's not usually dealt with early.

Can't a referee allow playing advantage and still issue a yellow for dangerous play?

ABSOLUTELY!

If the ref deems it as simply a foul, not worthy of a card, yet would have been a free kick if advantage never materialized, then no. However, if the foul was careless, reckless and done in a dangerous manner, he will take note of the player's number while playing advantage and as soon as there is a dead ball situation, he should go back and issue the card.

Wired wrote:I should have been more specific, the topic that was brought up today by yankee63 at 9:34am. I still dont care about offsides. But great point about nothing futbollove.

Anytime. I'll be here all week.

Question for you coach&ref  Why in the situation you desribe is the offside player not called as they spread across the field.  Is the GK supposed to know the second player is offside and only play the one with the ball?  What if fearing a pass across they stray away from the near post a half step and get beat there?  I would argue the other player has made an impact without touching the ball.  

The other one that used to drive me crazy is when the offside forward barrelling after a through ball is not called because they had not touched it yet even though they ended up colliding full speed with the keeper.  I understand in the pros not calling this but in Youth why not eliminate the need for potential injury? Love to hear your responses.

Hard Practice wrote:Question for you coach&ref  Why in the situation you desribe is the offside player not called as they spread across the field.  Is the GK supposed to know the second player is offside and only play the one with the ball?  What if fearing a pass across they stray away from the near post a half step and get beat there?  I would argue the other player has made an impact without touching the ball.  

The other one that used to drive me crazy is when the offside forward barrelling after a through ball is not called because they had not touched it yet even though they ended up colliding full speed with the keeper.  I understand in the pros not calling this but in Youth why not eliminate the need for potential injury?  Love to hear your responses.

Good questions HP.

The new things that referees have to watch for is that "involved in active play" definition. The player in the offside position does not have to touch the ball to be considered to be involved. If the AR thinks he is making a play for the ball, attempting to stop a defender from making a play, interfering with the keeper in some fashion, etc. then he can be guilty of an offside infraction.

in the situation I described, the forwards in the offside position never interfered with either the defender or the keeper, even though they were barreling down the pitch. As far as what the keeper is taught to do, I would think it would just be to be concerned with the ball and hope the ARs get it right! If anyone barrels into the keeper like you mentioned, that would have to be dealt with according to the situation, no matter what the original position of the player was.

Hard Practice wrote:Question for you coach&ref  Why in the situation you desribe is the offside player not called as they spread across the field.  Is the GK supposed to know the second player is offside and only play the one with the ball?  What if fearing a pass across they stray away from the near post a half step and get beat there?  I would argue the other player has made an impact without touching the ball.  

The other one that used to drive me crazy is when the offside forward barrelling after a through ball is not called because they had not touched it yet even though they ended up colliding full speed with the keeper.  I understand in the pros not calling this but in Youth why not eliminate the need for potential injury?  Love to hear your responses.

You are exactly right. Both those scenarios could be called offside. In C&R's calls this weekend he mentioned a forward took off running towards goal from an offside position. This is a slippery slope. Offside requires A) involvement and B) position. If this forward was in an offside position when ball was played, B is satisfied. Involvement requires the AR consider two concepts, A) gaining an advantage from the position OR B) interfering with play OR an opponent. Any forward in an offside position running towards the ball is interfering with an opponent IF he challenges for the ball or causes a defender to react/move to his movement towards the ball. HE DOES NOT HAVE TO TOUCH THE BALL to be interfering with play from an offside position and thus be offside. If the second forward in C&R's scenario in any way caused a defender to react to him running towards the ball, flag should've been popped as soon as he interfered with opponent...whether he touched it or not.

Experienced forwards who know they are in an offside position, and spot a teammate might have a chance at a ball, KNOW a good ref will call it and will typically STOP running and make no further movement towards ball to clearly signal they are not involved in play. Any forward who obstructs a keeper while he is an offside position is definitely offside per this same interpretation of the law...interfering with an opponent. So both the scenarios you describe should be called in either youth games or pros.

Hater, I think I hit the send button just a fraction before you did! Spot on though. Probably, better explaining than I did.

Coach&Ref wrote:Hater, I think I hit the send button just a fraction before you did! Spot on though. Probably, better explaining than I did.

It's Hata...not hater. Only my frienemies call me hater.