RefBlog

When you feel like you're calling on acid

Although my games last week were pretty tame, I did have one problem, and I have absolutely no idea on how to fix it. I had a consistent problem where a couple times each game, people just looked at me like my out-of-bounds calls were just totally whacked. This are short-sided games, only one official, so in the event of close calls I'm not 100% sure of, wait an extra second to observe body languages - but just the ones that I'm also unsure of, and much of that is because there are more important things for me to watch that who touched the ball last.

But when I am sure, I call it; and a couple times each game, I was getting stares from both teams. From an officiating standpoint, I can't afford to let it get to me, because all too often I have to make a crucial call, and I can't be doubting myself, or trying to please both teams. People may think refs are obstinate, and maybe we are, but too many people try to take advantage of situations like that. For example, the first game that night, after one of those calls were I see it one way, and every player on the pitch sees it another, another ball went clearly off an orange player's foot, some two minutes later - I'm standing off the touch, no danger of distraction by the rest of the play, and see it right in front of my eyes - but the player decides to use it to make a federal case, mumbling and groaning all the way to his bench (I didn't card him or even talk to him, it would have made the situation worse - he went on his own).

Whatever the hell rugby did for their referees, I will gladly donate money so that it happens in soccer.

On my third game, in what was probably the most competitive of the night (for the first half, anyway); I had a ball that I would bet money was saved by the keeper and went over the goal-line for a corner kick - still would - and got the equivalent of "what have you been smoking?" Fortunately for me, both teams had had me before, and had been reasonably happy with my performance in prior weeks, so I was able to diffuse the situation with by quipping to the keeper, "Hey, maybe it's the acid I took before the game, but I swear to God that I saw it go off your fingertips." His response was, "Man, I told you to stop doing that!" and the game went on. I will never - EVER - say this in front of teams that don't know me (let alone sanctioned matches!), but it diffused the situation enough that people figured out that in the grand scheme (unless they scored), it was a minor thing.

I think I had that happen once before (a series of calls that both teams found absurd); but what can you do but trust your eyes and judgment?

30 November '03 - 00:35 - theref - default| - § ¶

Media Quickies

Here's a bunch of interesting articles concerning soccer referees from a recent search (and a bit of my own editorial comment, of course):

Let's start with the typical, from the "It's not MY fault I spat on a player - it's the league officials" department. What the player, suspended for a year actually said was, "I contend that it is the leaders of the league who are the real problem." Way to stick up for yourself, man! Now pardon me while I puke after arriving at the hearing, just like I did at the game, drunk.

More of a typical let's blame the referee for the game outcome type-of-story, but it's interesting to note one thing: If you life in the US (I can't speak for the rest of North America), you're used to, even at the lowest levels of soccer, having three certified refs on the pitch - it's a rare occasion where club lines have to be used - but not in Europe. It's odd that in a country where the sport is much more popular with the adults, games commonly have just one official. They can bitch and moan about the line call but without an AR, there's no way to be definitive about it (this is something I intone to my unaffiliated players each and every week - although they still forget). Just think if we had to deal with that here - at least their fans have an inkling of the game.

It used to be "no blood no foul" - but now even when there is one, it's a bad call. Gotta love how Alex Close butchers this article. First, he gets the "I badly need to learn grammer award" or the alternative, "I write for simplistic morons award" for having 23 paragraphs, 15 of which consisted of only one sentance. Then he gives us these gems (in seperate paragraphs, of course): "He awarded OSU a penalty kick for a borderline foul against senior forward Alan Gordon." Hey Alex? Who's the subject of this sentance - while I know this will actually increase the number of one sentance paragraphs (we'll save that for another lession, junior), learn to use the semicolon! Here's the followup: "After the penalty -- which resulted in a injury to Gordon's head -- Gordon was ordered off the field by Barone because he was bleeding." Normally we would conclude that Alex is referring to after the penalty was called, but not the taking of the penalty kick, but his lack of grammatical skills makes it unsure. But let's cut to the chase, Alex: which body part on a human being is going to cause a bleeding head-wound unless it's done with such force as to be a foul? Answer that one, you dummy (preferably in one paragraph).

This is actually a pretty tame article; it's askiing refs not to be corrupt (always a good thing), and to give as much effort to the lower levels as the high levels (also a good thing). What struck me was the title given to the referees, the Knights of Whistle. I love it! I have no idea if that term is a formal title for the referee's association in Ghana (I found no other references on it in Google), but I'd like to adopt it myself. See, I can be positive in these, too! :)

More positive stuff, but it has to do with Rugby. If you haven't watched Rugby - watch it. You don't have to understand it, just soak in the gritty brutality, then be amazed at how well behaved everyone is. This first article is the more poignant of the two; a lement on how ugly the game of soccer has become. The second is more straight-forward: what can soccer learn from rugby - the answer is "a lot". Let's hope it goes beyond the recognition of a few UEFA officials.

28 November '03 - 14:18 - theref - default| - § ¶

In Praise of Gino D'ippolito

I really wanted to do a full biography of Gino D'ippolito, but there's precious little published on the internet about him; nothing on Usenet, on the web there are box scores, and one singular article that was more about hip replacement surgery than his illustrious careet; even any biographical details on

SocRef. So we're stuck with my limited memory of what I've seen of him on the pitch, which is totally inadequate for what I'd ilke to do.



When I was a boy in the 1980s, Gino D'ippolito was not my friend. I didn't know he was a FIFA referee, I didn't know he refed Pele's final professional game. I didn't know he's been reffing from god knows when. I just knew he was commonly reffing the MISL games I watched, and that refs sucked. I would yell at him, heckle him, despise him. I remembered his name just as well as any of the players on that team that I followed so closely; I probably remember him better now than many of those players. My brother, my father and I would all cry out in anguish when we heard the game Gino D'ippolito mentioned during introductions.



About a year before I started reffing myself, I visited my parents in Houston, when they still had their own professional indoor team, and there he was, and it all came flooding back. "Gino D'ippolito, I haven't seen you in fifteen years, and I can't wait to go after you again!" My father was a little more philosophical: "He's lost a few steps, but he's right there when there's a problem, and doesn't take shit from anybody." And that was exactly what we saw; fifteen years after I had last seen him, he was still doing top-flight indoor soccer, and he clearly didnt take crap from the players, but it was also clear that the players respected him; this man had been reffing at a professional and international level for longer than most had been alive.



Soon after I decided to referee myself, my parents decided to have some fun with me, and asked Gino to autograph a program and sent it to me. I didn't think much of it (except for being sheepish), but it's far more important to me now. I've thought back to those MISL games of the 80s, and more recently that single game I saw 15 years later, and the accomplishment of Gino really left a mark. Things change when you referee - you see things totally differently, and once I realized that this ref thing was more than a lark for me, and that I really enjoyed it, I thought about Gino; I thought about the crap I took at games, and I thought about Gino. The man I jeered at became an inspiration.



I don't know if I'll ever get a chance to meet him; there's professional soccer anywhere near me, let alone being lucky enough to have him do one of those games (if he does anymore). But maybe someone who does know him, will have the chance to read this little missive, and be able to pass this along from me.



To Mr. Gino D'ippolito,

I recall seeing you referee many times in the 1980s in the original Major Indoor Soccer League. At the time I was little more than an average fan, cheering my team, and jeering the opponents, which included the referees. As I grew up, and moved around, I remained a soccer fan, and on a family visit, saw you referee indoor again at a Houston Hotshots game some 15 years after I had saw you last. Although it was temped to jeer you again, I was far more impressed with your ability to keep doing what you loved (and with all the turmoil with American soccer, you had to love it), and do it well. Seeing you officiate again was probably that little bit of a push I needed to follow-through on actually starting to referee myself; three years later, I love to ref this game. I want to thank you for being an inspriation, and the person I look up to more than anyone else, as I referee myself.



I hope that hip holds up; I can't tell you what a thrill it would be to be able to shake your hand at some point.



Best regards,

[he gets to know my name - the rest of you, shush] (more)

26 November '03 - 12:03 - theref - default| two comments, already - § ¶

"Did I detect a bit of 'Get these turkeys off the field' with that whistle?"

That was me talking to the other referee last night - we've done a lot of work together (although only one affiliated game, at a high school last year), and get along pretty well. He seemed to have a lot more "action" going on in his games than I did. I had one yellow card for a professional foul, which may or may not have been intentional - but from a player perspective, it was a darn good time to foul. No complaints, everything pretty steady.

The interesting part, and the part that made giddy came when one of the owners of the league came in to help set up (the usual soccer guy is out-of-town), and we talked a bit about what happened. Basically, I said the same thing I mentioned here, except in abbreviated form - they have all seen me ref tough games enough that it was more curiosity than anything else - but I used it to lower the boom: I asked if next session we could finally have suspensions based on card accumulation, and he agreed. Yes!

This should go a long way to keeping things in check; especially those who are masterful at falling just short of red, but doing enough to piss off and provoke the other team. Nothing is finalized yet, but it looks like we'll keep it simple: three yellow cards and you get a one-game suspension. Since the pair of us are likely to be there almost all winter, it makes a good test for the experiment, to see if we'll remember to record all the infractions (should be simple enough to write the names and dates on back of the rosters - which are kept on-site).

It just needs to be said again.... YES!

25 November '03 - 11:52 - theref - default| - § ¶

I don't know a ref who likes this venue

I woke up this morning to my cell phone going off; I lifted my head slightly, then looked at my cat, curled up next to me with a look in her eye that said the same thing that was going through my head: "Who the hell was calling me on Sunday morning?" And, proving that people choose pets after their own behavior, and what is different begins to merge, we both dropped our heads back to the bed with "Who the hell cares" as the final thought before falling back asleep.



Then the phone rang again.



Usually a second phone call means something is important, so I got out of bed and answered the phone - a number I didn't recognize on the caller ID. It was Michael, who's filling in for the regular soccer coordinator who's out-of-town. "Aaron, can you ref this morning? Please say you can. Please say you can."



The fog starts to lift with the thought of soccer. "Ummm, yeah, I think so. I don't think I have anything going on. What time?"



"10:30."



I look at the clock on the microwave, which reads 10:45, meaning it was in reality an hour earlier (and a constant reminder that it's the last clock in my possession that hasn't been updated). I also take a look out the window; snow. At least a good four inches of snow had fallen, and it was still going pretty well. "There's no way I'm going to make 10:30, no matter where it is. I just got up, I hadn't had breakfast," and what I didn't say is that I know the reason why you're hunting for a referee; people around the state may like to see themselves as the next best thing to mountain men, with their SUVs, but the reality is that they're little different than Tennesseans when it comes to the first snowfall of the year (sorry, Tennesseans, one of my boyhood hobbies was watching people going into a panic whenever there was even a hint of snowfall... in Tennessee).



"That's OK, you can start there late."



"No, there's no way I'm going to get there anywhere near for a 10:30; I can start at 11:30."



"OK, I'll find someone for that first one. The games run until 2:30 at the Y, you can park indoors - just sign in at the desk."



Waitamoment... 2:30? Doesn't the MLS Cup start at 2:30? I know I committed to a starting time, but did I for an ending time? No? YES! "I've going to be out by 1:30, I promised to be with my girlfriend before 2:30." Do I feel bad? Nope - I'm bailing them out, and we were planning on watching the MLS Cup together.



"I can work with that. Thanks, man!"



And then it hit me. One little letter pretty much ensured that I had a better than 50/50 chance of having a not-very-fun time. It was the letter "Y".



The group I ref for has three venues they work through during the winter. Two are at college campuses; one is in one of those air-pressure domes and uses AstroTurf (and I had worked there for two years), the other uses the nice synthetic turf (AstroPlay, for those keeping score). The third is the venue that every referee I know that works for this group hates: the gymnasium at the city YMCA. (more)

23 November '03 - 18:26 - theref - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Jinx

You knew it had to happen; after I muse about consistently being able to write on here for five months, I suddenly lose the ability and/or will to write. Nothing much happend on my game on Wednesday; we were so disorganized defensively there wasn't much for the referees (we had TWO!!) do other than signal kickoffs.

I could talk about Freddy Adu - but there's plenty of stuff already being written. What'll be interesting is will the USSF, who has just as much riding on this as the MLS, will override the MLS's strangling of the referees and start issueing cards for reckless and excessively strong challenges.

21 November '03 - 15:52 - theref - default| - § ¶

What I've learned in the last 100 posts

I started this in June, thinking something like, "What the heck. I like the write, I like the vent, I like to say things that I'd get in trouble for if I said it publicly," but I didn't think it would be much more than a lark. While I haven't written every day, I think I've been pretty consistent (much moreso than when I ref!) in getting 3-4 entries in a week, and not only did I get my jollies doing the three things I mentioned above, I think it's helped me visualize myself better, helped my own self-evaluations, helped me get over the bad situaations and problems that are part of the job, and basically made me a happier person and referee.

One thing I don't want to do is gaze at my philosophical navel, so I thought I'd create a short list of things I've learned since starting RefBlog.

* I've learned to be better at talking to boys at games, and how to do it proactively; although the same comments don't work as well with men (and maybe nothing does).

* I've learned that girls and women would rather you be mute: blow the whistle, show the cards, if you have to speak, leave it at one sentance - if they want more, they'll ask you. Assuming otherwise is playing with fire.

* I've learned that you play women's games wide all the way to touch, and men's games more narrow; and because of that, more often than not, you run more in women's games and sprint more in men's.

* I've learned I need to improve my running ability.

* I had my first "real" 4th official assignment, and learned when the coach goes too far and needs to be asked to be quiet.

* I've learned that you really don't want to do the same team twice in a row, especially if there's a controversial call, even if you didn't make it.

* I've learned that if you call 911 on your cell phone, but the situation clears up and you hang up before the call is picked up, the State Patrol will call you anyway (more)

19 November '03 - 13:39 - theref - default| - § ¶

The 100th Entry on Refblog!

The the goal is the score rather than to hack

Last night wasn't terribly difficult. One team decided that they would rather complain to me rather than address their team giving up a two-goal advantage (a shoulder-to-shoulder charge was interpreted as "from behind", and while they stopped to complain to me, the other team scored - yeah, that's a winning tactic). I showed one card for dissent in the last minute just to quiet down the muttering every time I came near; I probably could (should?) have gotten away without it, but made a tactical decision for when the game ended: this is a college football practice facility, so there's few amentites like locker rooms or areas where, if needed, the ref can be seclude himself in - and the table when I report the scores is next to the only servicable door.

I did not feel I was in any danger, but some times when a team is in a complaining mood, it's just better off for me to scuttle away quietly and quickly and let them cool off. It's better for them, it's better for me. I also made sure I was on the opposite side of the bench when I blew the final whistle (a State 5 ref taught me this trick).

Overall, this was a minor incident - and the only one of the night.

I love doing the team in my final game of the night; they are the epidomy of soccer done right: They play hard, run hard, they play physical when they need to, but they don't play dirty and don't whine. Not to mention, they keep me running, which during the indoor season, where the field is smaller and you don't work as many days a week, is great for me! :) I've reffed them twice, and both games the play is so high intensity that there's no time to hack - they're too fast, meaning their opponents have to keep up with them to stay in the game. If they have a weak spot, is that they'll dominate a game for 80% of the time, then just go flat for the remaining 20% and nearly lose the game. I've had them three times already, and they've gone one win, two ties; the first tie came out of a flast first half, when they fell behind 2-0 (they tied it up 2-2 by full time); last night they were up 2-0, then it went to 3-1, before falling flat again for 15 minutes in the second half, giving up two unanswered goals attriubutable to poor defending. The most spectatular was a cross into the penalty area that a defender headed to clear, sending it off his own cross-bar, to a waiting striker. They're probably the most talented team in the league, use their women better than any team (that's the secret to winning co-ed games - too many teams ignore their women), they just don't play for a full 50 minutes.

Because of their speed, I worked harder on that game than any of the others, and probably only called one foul.

18 November '03 - 12:22 - theref - default| - § ¶

Impulsive journalists produce idiots

Gary Fitz says he's an impartial journalist; I say he's a moron who tries to score points with his readers by mixing a legitiamte opinion with cheap shots again referees.

The article is about penalty kicks during the run of play - most certainly a worthy topic to discuss! Penalty kicks have their own unique history in the game; initially thought an abominable thought; how could people commit an intentional foul to deny a goal - it's absurd, it's ungentlemanly, it's happening all the time. Skipping tons of context, it was decided that the special area where the goalkeeper can handle the ball should also be the same place extra penalties are exacted should infringments occur; it's that whole, keep the game simple thing.

But he sets up the article very poorly - it's clear he doesn't care about the game, he's more interested in meeting his deadline rather than proposing solutions like shortening the penalty area, making a separate area for penalty kicks, getting rid of the lot of them. No, he wants to whine.

Slur number one: "Now through the impulsive action of a game official, Sanborn was being given a chance to tie the game." No context, just (in an unquoted portion) a mention that it happened at the edge of the penalty area. If a foul occurs in the penalty area, anywhere in it, it's a PK - that's the rules as it stands, so learn them or shut up.

Ignorant statement number one: (more)

17 November '03 - 11:37 - theref - default| - § ¶

Third in the Rant Series Posted

I've been stewing over this article for a few days now, and I finally put thoughts to keyboard - because of my feelings about it, I've posted it as Rant #3. Click here, or use the link on the right-hand column, to read it.

14 November '03 - 16:56 - theref - default| - § ¶

I'm gaining a sense of humor

Or should I say, I'm gaining a greater sense of humor, or is it arrogance? Maybe it's experience - yeah, that's it. :)

In my final game on Monday night, I couldn't help but smile a few times during the game because, and it usually is these types, one of the players who played the most aggressive kepting giving me "the stare." I think he was trying to psyche me out, but I was so amused (and showing it), I think he tried a different tactic. He came up to me late in the first half, and (rather nicely) said, "if you don't start calling those picks, I'm going to run straight through them." It was rather odd, because I gathered from his style of play that first off, he seemed the type to just go through them; after all, if he's being "picked" and they're not withing playing distance of the ball, he has every right to. But even moreso, I hadn't noticed it, and it's hard to do that type of thing subtlely.

So, I replied to him saying I'd watch out for it, but if they're within playing distance of the ball, they have the right to shield him from it. A few minutes later, I see him, in a battle for the ball, give an opponent a shove. Oppoenent comes up with the ball, so no foul, but I issue another comment to him, that if I'm watching for fouls to be committed against him, I'm just as likely to see fould committed by him. After that, no more stares, no more fouls, just a good game.

In a totally different scenario last night; playing first game in co-ed rec league in the other part of town... and we had a real referee. OK, not that other leagues don't, but I'm probably the only certified (high school and/or USSF) ref doing the games for this unaffiliated league. But we not only had a ref, we had the one of the referee association brass - did a nice job too (good thing!).

13 November '03 - 15:32 - theref - default| - § ¶

There's no hope for these coaches

Interesting article in New Hampsire's The Telegraph (thankfully, not election politics). It has to do with a legitimate issue concerning soccer: yellow card accumulation. There's no real standard when it comes to this type of penalty: in MLS and the A-League, yellow cards have a point value, depending on what it's for, and once you pass a certain threshold, you face a suspension; apparently in New Hampshire high school, it's four yellows and you're out; where I live (at least in High School), there are none - I honestly couldn't tell you what it is for youth-play (there's one adult league here that charges a $10 fine for each yellow card - the money collected pays for the field rental).

The writer of the article lists several points, which I'll endeavor to respond to, and then address what I think is the real issue:

* "They are given completely at the discretion of game officials and can be somewhat arbitrary in nature" - it's kind of hard to argue this, because it is true. Referees issue cards for different reasons, in different game situations - often, if it's not one of the manditory cards, the argument in the ref's head is if the card will "buy" them anything or not - if a good lecture won't gain control, but a card will, you issue the card. You may not like it, but that is the game, and that is our job - especially in a game like soccer, which doesn't have the stoppages like baseball, baseketball, or football.

* His next point is that technical fouls in basketball, or personal fouls in football do not accumulate like in soccer. There's only one responce: Apple and oranges - soccer is supposed to be played by civilied people, not warriors, not thugs, not gangsters who choke their coaches. Although the term has been retired in soccer, I think it's quite indicative that one of the old forms of misconduct was "Ungentlemanly Behavior".

*"Coaches have admitted to instructing players with three yellow cards to intentionally take a fourth late in the regular season." I think here's the issue - I know of coaches that intentionally push the line when they know they can take a "free" yellow card; they teach misconduct, and this is no different. I think is issue should not be, there's a problem with accumulated cards, but instead, there's a problem with coaches teaching unseemly behavior - especially given that he's writing about the high school game!

Still a fine article - because of one sentance and keeps the buck from being passed: "But when a rule like this one costs a team a chance to win a championship, the first place they should look is in the mirror."

Bravo

12 November '03 - 13:24 - theref - default| - § ¶

Pop Goes the Red Card

Week four and we're back in the goove. Yes, the first red card of the season has come out, and I had a feeling I would be pulling it a mere two minutes into the game.



There are three ways, that I can think of right now, where you can tell the red card is a real possiblity. The first is when you know there's a history between the two teams (I was told of a rivlary between a pair of professional teams where, the span of two years, they averaged close to 50 fouls and one red card per game); if the coaches or captains both come up and tell you the teams don't like each other, or, and this is what happened yesterday, less than one minute into the game players are already jawing at each other.



Actually, that happens quite freqently - unless there's something flagrant, a good general chewing out works, something loud enough that everyone hears it. A few minutes later, a blue player trips up a white from behind - I take the gift and issue the yellow card. In normal circumstances, this lays it out very clear that I'm not going to take the garbage that's been displayed in the last 180 seconds - I have established that I will issue cards, and it's now up to the teams to play down to an acceptable level, or take the consequences.



They decided to take the consequences, instead. It became clear that they would rather be in a boxing ring than soccer field, and continued to beat the crap out of each other. OK, it wasn't that bad, I had issues another card in the half (this one to white) - and some of the women on the blue team were trying to get their testosterone-poisoned collegues to get under control, with mixed success. But I came out at halftime knowing that, give the game was tight, that the back pocket was a real possibility.



Indoor's a bit odd - even though there's fewer players than outdoor, there's still less room, so if someone gets on your nerves, that person will always be close enough to be a visual reminder. Add that in co-ed games, guys tend to get much more wacked-out than in men-only games (I'm not the only one to remark on this, too), it can be an interesting situation.



Second half starts out a little calmer, but quickly goes back into the same rhythm as the first (yes, there was a rhythm, sort of like a boxing match). I'm given the opportunity to whistle several otherwise light fouls, in a vain attempt to keep things calm - then a reckless challenge by white that gets a yellow. Less that ten minutes left, it happens: blue has the ball, shoots and is saved, but nto controlled by white's goalkeeper - blue player charges back into the PA, and comes right at the keeper with his cleats exposed, landing on the outer-thigh. Hand in back pocket, pull out red card, order the bastard off the field. One more yellow card for dissent later (goalkeeper, made some choice comments about a very stupid play on a three-line-pass - if you're going to get a dissent card, make sure you actually know what you're talking about).



Strangely enough, I think that game was, despite the send-off, under control. It is very common to get ejections in this league (and not just by me - there's another referee that only half jokes about not having a good night in this league without issuing a red), and I worked very hard to set the tone of what was and was not allowed. Each team had players trying to get their players under control - but sometimes people choose to listen, sometimes they don't. And my back pocket is around for when they don't.

11 November '03 - 09:13 - theref - default| No comments yet - § ¶

More looking at the media

Enough with the silly numbers; I imagine I'll be doing this a lot during the off-season...

I love this article in the Stanford Daily: Confessions of a Soccer Referee. It's done so nicely - it's hard to tell if he's being serious, or merely playing into the expectations of the lay-fan.

One thing in particular stuck in my mind, because, especially with older teams, it's become part of what I say to the captains: "For those of you Computer Science freaks who don’t understand the beautiful game of soccer, let me explain. A soccer referee has three items that help him control the game: his whistle, yellow card and red card." I started this year telling them that indeed, my tools are whistles and plastic, and that if there's going to be a problem with a teammate, they know them better than I, and they can keep things from escalating. I know from experience, and if you don't referee I would be so privileged if you said you knew from reading this site, that those aren't the only weapons (we use speech, screech, and can even go as far as manipulate and lie), but for purposes of helping us in our job, it's a great way to get some help - assuming the troublemaker isn't the captain.

Later, the article just gets's funny, he describes what happens with red cards, and then, "This is why I referee... I want to hand out as many cards as I can." This is great bait - pull those suckers in, thinking they'll finally get confirmation of what every ref is thinking, and then.... nope - we get the real reason. Don't know what it is by now? Read the article.

10 November '03 - 12:03 - theref - default| - § ¶

Competitive players wanting u-little calls

The league I'm reffing in only runs one night a week, on a weeknight, indoors; and since there's only two fields in play in, that means the league can only go through eight games a night - you can do the math about how many bye weeks a team will get, when there's twenty four of them (small hint, eight teams will not be playing in any given week). Some of these are in the "Intermediate-B" bracket, but last week, those teams had the week off, and every game was in the "Compettive" bracket.



It's amazing that teams that have such good players want such lame calls. Biggest whine of the night was about throw-ins. As mentioned countless times before, throw-ins are merely a method of putting the ball into play, and frankly, unless they're doing an overhear bomb (like you see keepers do during the run of play), it isn't necessary to stop the throw; in my last high school game, the National referee in the middle went one step further, saying he didn't want any foul throw calls - he didn't care if the feet were over the line, or anything. Why? Because we have better things to watch out for - it was egregious enough, he'd be in a better position than us, anyway - but overall, it's a pointless stoppage. Indoor, with only one referee, it's much the same - I want to maximize the number of players in my vision, while also being close enough to the play to catch the subtleties - watching for foul throws is a waste of everybodies time.



Apparently this is the new vogue phrase for certain women, beacuse I heard it from two different women on two different teams, both in a whiny tone: "That's not a throw-in." Now repeat at least half-a-dozen times. I learned over the last two years working here, that it's just not worth it to argue these, but to ignore the comments and use my verbal capital for bigger things, like....



Why, or why, don't players understand handling calls? One of the flaws with this league is that they don't hand out rules books. There are some of the house rules available on its web site - but, heck even affiliated games, do not prepared the players (or coaches!) by giving them a copy of the Laws/Rules that they'll be playing by. Ball bounces around a crowd and goes into a player, someone whines for a handball; ball is kicked two feet into another player's arm, someone whines for a handball; someone keeps his arms flat on his sides, but a defelction sends it into that arm, someone whines for a handball. The later actually resulted in a goal - guess what, advantage doesn't play into it.



"But Ref, it went right to his feet!"

"So?"



I used to use the 2002 US-Germany World Cup game where Hugh Dallas declined to whistle a foul, even though it prevented the US from tying up the game. He decided it wasn't deliberate, and therefor no foul. But people's memories are fickle, and while I hold that image dear as a referee (not so much as a fan of the US National Team!), other players forget. I haven't found anything to replace it, and probably won't for some time (it was a gift for the time it was in people's memories).



So a goal comes off of the no-handling call. They appear (before the goal), I say clearly that I don't believe it's a foul (before the goal), and once the goal is scored comes the real moaning and crying. The guy kept is hands firmly on his sides - it is clear he was deliberly avoiding contact, and since in order to make the call, there must be deliberate contact, I decide no foul. So, in the process of doing my job, I now endure repeated insults (not directly, they're not that stupid - or is it they just don't have the balls?), including, "Play illegal - the ref's not calling anything." Nope, just not calling things the way you want it - the way where I make up the rules to fit your shortcomings.

07 November '03 - 09:00 - theref - default| No comments yet - § ¶

True to form, things heat up after three

After two weeks of not handing out cards at the unaffiliated league, I was pretty sure that the streak wouldn't hold. And while the games itself were pretty tame, I still wasn't disappointed and the yellow card came out of my front pocket twice last night.

The first one was pretty interesting, because it brings up something I was told by an instructor with regards to challenges from behind. As you know, FIFA and the USSF have been wanting to clean up challenges from behind quite a bit, and it just hasn't worked out the way they want, and I rather like their solution; the Law itself hasn't changed, it's still possible to tackle from behind and be perfectly legal (it just has to be perfect), reckless it still a yellow card, and endangering the safety of an opponent is still a red card - what is different is how they're teaching it.

Any contact on a challenge from behind is a foul - it is up to the referee to decide if it is trifiling or not, and if it deserves a card.

You see, no change in the laws, but that one little explanation makes things much clearer. Which means when, like last night, that the person says he got the ball first so there shouldn't be a whistle or card (which he recieved), he's full a bunk. Actually, he's full of bunk anyway, because getting the ball first on any challenge does not mean you automatically did not foul (if it was from anywhere other than behind, his challenge would have been just peachy), but it lowers the bar clearly and effecitvely to protect players from behind-the-back challenges. I like it.

The other yellow card I handed out was strange. Many referees say that adult co-ed games are much harder to officiate than games of one gender - mostly because men get that little extra bit of testosterone in their systems when women are that much closer - and you're more likely to have the men stop playing soccer, and start doing impressions of male mountain goats butting heads. That's what happened, in the last game of the night - good, relatively clean, scoreless, but hard-played game, two of the largest guys working on each other, and the striker just lets out a tirade of profanity at the other. No idea what the defender did, but nobody can miss what the other is doing. Was the striker reacting to something? What he trying to bait the defender? No idea. Was there any context I picked up before this happened? If there was, I totally missed it. I booked the striker, and his own players worked on calming him down. Just strange.

05 November '03 - 08:43 - theref - default| - § ¶

Looking at the Media IV: Yes sir, we have an idiot!

I didn't even finish the article when I knew I wanted to write about it; the ignorance displayed by the author is just amazing, and the actions displayed by the people in charge is just saddening.



Here's some of the good/ugly bits:



"Hopkinsville Athletic Director Rick Roberts was busy today, firing off letters to re-establish the credentials of a head coach Russ Guffey, assistant coach Scott Stevens and freshman Alex Hayes. That mail barrage will most likely get them re-instated, but not until after Thursday's regional championship game." Once again, we have the person responsible for the sportsmanship of a team working overtime to reward poor behavrior.



"All three were tossed on the extremely quick whistle of referee Paul Hafer, who reacted harshly to a strong, but not obscene protest put up by the Hoptown sideline over a play near the Hopkinsville penalty box." Three paragraphs in, and already the author is showing massive amount of ignorance. First, coaches, in the NFHS or USSF, do not have the right to protest at a game - their job is to hand out technical information not to yammer on at the referee. He also says it's not obscene - yes, the game was in Kentucky, but it was still October, so my guess is that the author was inside the press box, and didn't hear what was said. "You're a fucking idiot" said softly will get you the same red card as one yelled. And "penalty box" - ugh.



"The drama occurred over a from-the-back tackle by Hayes on a Caldwel player near the penalty box on a breakaway play. If the tackle is made within the penalty box, a red card is automatically placed on the defensive player, which is how Hafer saw the outcome." Bzzzzt! Wrong-o, Mr. Burnside! A red for Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity doesn't have in the Penalty Area, but merely fulfill a small number of requirements - the same ones for FIFA or NFHS matches. Is it frequently inside the area? Yes, but have to be? No. It's clear he's not writing about something he knows.



"'We're obviously happy to get away with a win. We came out here with the objective of beating a much-approved team and we were able to do that,' said Guffey". Apparently they either have speech impediments in Hopkinsville, or no copy-editors (the later has always been my excuse - but then again, I'm not paid to do this).



"Guffey was perplexed over the red cards issued to him, and Stevens, since there weren't any yellow cards issued, or advance warnings." Cuuuuuuuuuz, if it's bad enough, you don't have to?



"'We were just asking why there was a penalty kick and the next thing we knew, two of us were gone,' said Guffey." I admit to not having a ton of experience - but in three years, I've NEVER had a coach just ask that. That's someone launching a pound of baloney at the readers (and to the people who control the suspensions, no doubt), that the author bought, wrapped, and delivered. The reality is, is that the referee will be sending in a report, detailing just what was said - and if it's full of crap, the coaches will be reinstated (in a perfect world, but the reality is he could utter all seven words you can't say on TV and probably get back, since coaches control the NFHS), and the ref will be thrown out on his rear. Then the author can write about that, and I'll write a retraction.

04 November '03 - 10:24 - theref - default| No comments yet - § ¶

Defense by Foul

After my game at the state high school tournament, I spent much of the day with several other referees, and I'm pretty confident that all of them qualify as better than me. :)

Put a bunch of referees together, and two things are likely to happen; the first is war stories. Instead of real discussion, we'll turn back into the old memory box - I sometimes wonder if it's a way for referees to prove their worth, especially to those who we percieve as superior to ourselves. I admit to doing this myself, but I've tried to make a conscious effort on refraining from this (Does the National referee really care about this? No - s/he's got plenty of stories like this or worse) on a regular basis. I don't mean to say that these can't be helpful - I did do this once at the tournament game, but it was with a purpose behind it. No, really! It was in our pregame, and I wanted to illustrate one of the "non-standard" signals an AR did for me that was very helpful, and if he wanted me to do it - he knew of it and was emphatic that yes, he wanted that done if necessary. But with that aside, I was surrounded by referees with gobs more experience, not to mention skill, than I - so for the most part, I kept my mouth shut, tried to digest as much as I could into the old brainbox, and asked questions when I thought appropriate.

The second thing that referees will do is talk about other referees performance. Think about it - we're doing the exact same job as the referees in the MLS, just not at the same level; when we watch on television (or if you're lucky enough, at the stadium), it looks so easy, but of course its not, but you can't help it and critique it anyway. Most of the time, like the war stories above, it's not for their benifit, but for ours. At the tournament, there was critiqueing being done (not formal critiqueing, but critiqueing nonetheless by one of the officials from local USSF organization), and he chose to let me in on his observations in order, not to puff up egos, like is common, to be to help me with my game, and understanding of what's going on. Did I mention earlier that that day just left me so jazzed up over reffing?

During one of the games, he brought to my attention something that he call "Defense by Foul." One of the teams we were watching appeared be, as a team tactic, fouling any player that got near them - not just physical play, but not excessive force, but definate fouling if a player got near them. It seemed to be a grey area not addressed by Persistent Infringement, which seems to be foused on fouls committed against individual players. It brings up questions on how you deal with it; neither the Laws nor the Advice to Referees address it - so technically you either lower the bar way down on what is reckless, or open a can of worms by reinterpreting what is Persistent Infringement. Like much of soccer, there is no definate answer.

03 November '03 - 10:29 - theref - default| - § ¶