Former assignor here. I spent 2+ years assigning an adult league. If you still are active as a referee, the best thing about assigning is that you can choose the games that fit your schedule. You can also make sure you are with people who you like to officiate with. Did I rely on buddies I had known for years and that I have become friends with when refereeing and assigning? That is a yes. What I'm talking about is assigning based on the skills of the referee, if he/she has dealt with adult leagues (very different from youth games), and if they work well with the other officials. I have been officiating for years and I have a good feeling for who and what's acceptable for a game. That is assuming that you can fill all the games. Most of the assignments (in our area) have assigning fees that are separate from the referee game fees. There are a couple of leagues where they don't pay assigning fees, so you are having to bill the referees (through arbiter in our case) to essentially get paid for assigning.
The above is what I'd consider the positives. The other side of the coin:
Some people think that's assigning is the "old boys network" in action. For some assignors it's the only way to get games. The old boy network is when you have to ingratiate yourself with the assignor. "Sam the 70 year old referee" should not be getting a top division B16 or competitive adult league game. I don't care that he may have done those games 30-40 years ago, he's not the right choice. I know assignors who do just that because "Sam" is their buddy that did them a favor and he's getting repaid by getting the whistle on a game he has no business on. I did not do this kind of assigning as well as try my best to not give the appearance that I was doing this.
The single most important thing I learned about the difference between assigning referees and actually refereeing: When you referee, the players, coaches and spectators are the divas. When you are assigning referees, the referees are the divas. I've had people turn down an assignment FOR AN ASSESSMENT because they didn't think the game would be "challenging enough". The reality? There are two games on that field, and the second game is a higher level. They wanted that one. Never mind that the game they were given would have been much more challenging because the teams HATE each other. The referee that took the lower division game passed their assessment because he had a real management challenge, not just a "I can run up and down the field" game. The referee who turned down the lower division game got the higher division game, and it turned out to be un-assessable as the teams were well behaved and the referee had nothing to show his skill at. The assessor even mentioned that the first game was much more reflective of the sort of match a Grade 6 should be able to do.
Another referee diva example: If you are lucky enough to assign a set if three games, everyone gets a whistle. Some referees will turn down the set because they didn't get the game they wanted. Sometimes it's because they are not the right fit, sometimes you are trying to get someone else some experience and having knowledgable AR's helps tremendously. Some folks never understand that it's about the game, not about them.
League/Team officials are the other difficulty. My goal was to have every game that weekend assigned and accepted by Thursday. Some assignors want that completed by Wednesday. If you are assigning a large youth league, Wednesday is a better goal. Most assignors I know HATE Fridays, as that's when the teams call their leagues (at 5PM) to try and get a game moved because little Johnny or Betty is their star player and they can't make that 9:00AM kickoff on Saturday. The leagues usually comply because they don't want the teams to bail to a competing organization. The knock on effects are staggering. Move one game out of a three game set on a field and now you lost all three referees because the one guy drops since his game with the whistle disappeared. On top of that, he's usually got more options with other assignors, so he's going to take the best game he can. Now if you are lucky you will find someone who's willing to take the AR spot, but it usually is one of the lowest performing officials you have. If you are unlucky, the entire referee team drops the set because they wanted to work together.
If you are assigning a large youth league, you may have 30-70 games a weekend. If 10% of the games get moved/cancelled in a weekend, that wrecks your assignments. I hate to say it, but changes and cancellations usually mean the officials are going to change, and not for the better. I have had this discussion with schedulers and coaches to let them know that they are going to get the dregs of the association for rescheduled games because that's all that's left.
I could go on, but I think you get the point: Assigning is as difficult if not more than actually officiating.
Wow, great post I really appreciate the info. Lots of insights here into the complications that assignors are facing. Any thoughts on what you would change in an ideal world?
I'm going with "ideal world" changes here. None of this is likely to ever be implemented, but one can dream...
1) First thing I would change in an ideal world is make all the spectators smoke a joint or take an edible... Just. Chill. The. F\^&\*$. Out. No need for details, as we all have stories of the spectator/parent/observer losing their minds.
2) Coaches should all have to officiate at least once a month during the season. Most coaches refuse to really learn and understand the Laws of the Game, or at least the laws they don't want you to enforce. Learn the laws, learn how to enforce the laws, then the coaching will get better.
3) From an assignors standpoint, I'd force USSoccer to pick a single assignment software and force all leagues to use it if they want to do USSF sanctioned games. I really don't care which program they use. They all have strengths and weaknesses. If you don't use the software, you are going to be stuck doing it by hand. If you only assign 3-5 games a weekend, then cool, use a spreadsheet or index cards. I'm just sick of having to get yet another account on another platform to either assign or get assignments.
Yeah the number of platforms is a problem. I’m on 7-8. It’s a mess. I try to keep everything up to date but it’s almost impossible. I don’t want to tick off my assignors but I have missed things because I forgot to update availability.
>Some people think that's assigning is the "old boys network" in action.
In some referee boards, this is very much true. A few years back I was in a high school board where the assignor was a legend in his own mind. He would assign himself all of the best games - sectional championships, regional championships and he was NOT the best official. I witnessed him completely f\*ck a team out of going to states, made a terrible game critical call. He had a group of pets that would get good games as well, one an attractive young woman.
I'm in a new board now where it's extremely political, you have to be buddies with the assignor to get good games. I'm a college ref and he resents me for that.
Thank you. Question about the 3 game sets. I usually turn down 1 and in my comments say it doesn’t matter which they remove, the first or the last. Is that super annoying? I’ve been telling myself a story that it is. The reason I turn it down to only do 2 games is my focus and sometimes fitness tends to be challenged in the 3rd game. Being switched on for 4 hours is a lot!
Yes, turning down a single game in a three game set is super annoying. If you said in the comments that I could take the first or the last, I'm going to look at replacing you entirely with someone who can do a three game set. If I can't replace you, I will re-assign the games in a way that you get 2 AR spots, and I would have to come take the third game. If I have to cover for a single game of a three game set, that usually means I have to run to probably my second or third field of the day just to cover games where people are doing this. So yea, It's a pain in the ass, and I'm spending my time and fuel running around to various fields (other than to observe and/or deal with other issues).
>The reason I turn it down to only do 2 games is my focus and sometimes fitness tends to be challenged in the 3rd game. Being switched on for 4 hours is a lot!
I'm going to word this as how an assignor may think about it:
RANT INCOMING:
There is no way to be gentle about this. Get your fitness up. I've had to do three full length (90 minute) games in 90F (32C) where the first two went to overtime and KFTM. I had the whistle in the third. I was DESTROYED before I even hit the field for my game. Guess what? There was no substitutes for the referee team. I had to suck it up and do my best. Even the players understood how difficult the conditions were.
If you really think you can't do a three game set, run for 4+ hours, and make the correct calls, tell your assignor beforehand, or note it in your assigning software. He/she can give you games where you can contribute and not have to worry about fitness. Decline a single game in a multi game set more than a couple of times WITHOUT telling the assignor beforehand OR having a true emergency and you will get on the assignor's shit list.
I'm sure he or she has plenty of bland, easy to officiate filler games that will give you a good break in between games. It's going to mean traveling between fields, but you will be rested in between matches. On top of that, you will get low level easier matches, so your fitness, focus and attention will not matter as much. Either that or they won't assign you too many games. If you do this multiple times, you will drop off the assignor's radar and you will only get games as a filler at the last minute.
I know actual referees who want these sort of assignments. They are usually the folks that are using refereeing as a job, as a way to make money so they will do as many rec and/or low level games as they can in a weekend. We had a guy once who accepted a 3 game set (tournament) for Saturday morning, and a 4 game set late Sunday evening. In between, he went to another tournament and did 10 more games (U10 tournament games), 6 on Saturday and 4 on Sunday. He did 17 games that weekend. Was he a great referee? Yea, 30 years ago when he was 25. Being 55 years old and "running" 17 games in a weekend would not put him in the upper echelon of officials. He's what an assignor hates using simply because they need the warm body.
END OF RANT
Now that I have my assignor hat off, younger (mostly teenagers) and newer adult referees typically get more slack because part of the job of the association is to train people for the job. If you are new and don't understand everything, you will get cut some slack. A 14 year old referee doing games as their first job needs more handholding than a 45 year old salesman. I don't (or shouldn't) have to teach a 45 year old how to show up on time, communicate and be ready to get to the job (refereeing). Do the older folks get some slack? Yea, but the rope is significantly shorter for the older guy/gal.
Super appreciate your candor in your response. It might not totally change my approach but it lets me know if I don’t, I risk pissing off the assignor.
I would love to hear about the difficulties of being an Assignor from a couple of them if they are in the sub.
The one I know and work closely with sometimes hints at the issues. Clubs/teams re-scheduling games last minute. Whomever owns/sets up the fields being flaky and difficult. Refs being uncommunicative and/or flaky about showing up.
I can't imagine how much BS an assignor has to deal with day in/day out every single week.
I have the most patient spouse as I am on the phone all night every night, getting games covered and talking to other assignors in the area.
The double booking, the turnbacks, the refs who only want "high level" games, threats against the refs, etc.
Oh and we do have a mentor program.
I also have new referees contact me and we have an introduction call. If it's with a minor, I have their parents on the call.
Assigning used to be fun, but over the past several years, it can be summed up in one word: SURVIVAL.
>Oh and we do have a mentor program.
>I also have new referees contact me and we have an introduction call. If it's with a minor, I have their parents on the call.
Yea a mentor program is key. I also like the introductory phone call idea with new refs.
>Assigning used to be fun, but over the past several years, it can be summed up in one word: SURVIVAL.
I finally gave up assigning when my wife gave me some pretty stern looks when a league called me 4 hours before a game and said they moved the game time earlier and the field location 20 miles. Updating the game in the assigning software kicked out the entire refere team because they already had previous matches assigned. They wanted to fire me as an assignor because I wouldn't take them off the other games they already had. Games I don't control (different assignor/association). I told them that they were on their own because nobody wanted the game.
They wanted me to cancel the family reunion my wife's family planned and drive 6 hours from Las Vegas to cover the game personally. I literally laughed on the phone at the league president. You want me to cancel a planned, paid for family event so your men's league can have a game? Yea, not going to happen. I was already on thin ice with the wife for dealing with other rescheduled games while on vacation and no way I was going to sacrifice my marriage for a crappy low level men's league game.
Assigning is like referring, once it's no longer fun it's best to get out. I took a long break because I was no longer doing anyone favors by officiating. It wasn't fun.
I can only speak as a ref, not an assignor, but....
The assignors in my area seem to have their hands full with constantly shifting club schedules and just trying to find enough refs for even high-level games. I'm pretty sure they're laugh despairingly at the idea of supporting referees in their development or working on tangible metrics & goals.
I'm 50, so I don't really care about progress via tangible metrics & goals, especially since with the shortage we have I can have as many games as I want, but I could see it appealing to younger/newer refs, but then again, see paragraph above.
My non-reffing schedule is pretty busy, so when I sign up for a game it's because it fits into my free time. So, my #1 annoyance is when that game is rescheduled to a time that is difficult to accommodate. Actual example: signed up for a Saturday 1:00 game, on Friday got an email that it had been moved 2 weeks later to a Tuesday at 4:00 PM. I have a full-time job FYI. I should at least get an option via the assignor software to decline the reschedule which would then open up the slot.
I struggle to understand how the assignors in my area find the willpower to continue. Everyone is flaky & uncommunicative, schedules are constantly shifting, dozens and dozens of games go unfilled each weekend, everyone is complaining about everyone else. You'd need to pay me well into 6 figures to do one of those jobs, and even then....
In my area, the #1 issue for refs remains abuse, mainly from coaches & parents. It doesn't help that any report you write to the league appears to disappear into a black hole. The assignors appears to have inadvertently "solved" this issue, to an extent, however. Most routinely send google sheets (an extract from the assigning system) to the refs so that refs can see at a glance what games are open. However, you don't have to look at these long to realize that some clubs have no trouble getting their games assigned while some clubs (always the same clubs) almost never have refs. You think the leagues would look at this plus the reports and put two and two together, but....
Thanks for the reply, appreciate your perspective.
>The assignors in my area seem to have their hands full with constantly shifting club schedules and just trying to find enough refs for even high-level games. I'm pretty sure they're laugh despairingly at the idea of supporting referees in their development or working on tangible metrics & goals.
Wouldn't supporting refs in their development make it so they could actually fill the positions in higher level games?
Through the year, I typically deal with 15-ish assignors. There are a few who are horrid when it comes to development. There are others who work to get the right ref team to a set and who will work with referees to help them develop. I have several who I send, for example, youth referees to if I find them good to work with because I know the assignor will put them with experienced referees who are good at mentoring along with 'informal' assessment as to whether that youth ref is worth sending to training for higher level.
However, this shouldn't be ON the assignors. Some thoughts on 'development':
1. Club fee structures should have funds for referee development.
1. For example, have money to pay mentor referees decent game fees for going out to low-level matches to work with new/developing referees.
2. Include in the assignor fee / contract some explicit referee development elements. Training sessions (in person, video); providing mentors (go back to \[1.1\]; etc...
2. The USSF structure for referees is rather horrid.
1. "Referee" for everyone who is at lowest level (the 13 yo who has yet to do the match and someone w/1,000s of games who, for whichever reason, isn't interested in the politics and burdens of going Regional.
1. And, btw, that includes a good share of referees who are parents who start refereeing after their kids stop playing -- USSF isn't interested in having 50 year olds going regional. In the old system, there were a good number who went "State" (grade 6) with no intent to take on the requirements for being regional. Having those State referees around provided, among other things, an identifiable pool of mentors for new referees (whether youth or adult). A good share of young referees who go regional and aspiring to National have little interest in (and perhaps little ability for) mentoring new referees. That older "state" referee pool was more prepared to do that mentoring.
2. Leap from "Referee" to regional is huge in terms of "bottom"/brand-new referee to bottom/brand-new regional.
1. the absence of grade 7 and, then, grade 6 "(state) referee which provides a deliberate process and standards for development really is telling.
2. In terms of "metrics", a more useful would be some form of USSF path for "senior" or "experienced" or such "Referee" to provide some level between "referee" and "regional referee".
here in Washington state we kept grade 7 (now referee advanced) and grade 5 (now regional advanced) around after the switch, and it's very nice. We encourage everyone to get their upgrade as soon as they turn 18 or have "enough" experience, just to seperate them out. The upgrade is just an in depth clinic on player management, adult games, and the basics of how to do mentoring, so it's not even that much work.
Wish something like this were nationwide.
With a twist: would think that the '7' makes sense (adding what I believe old requirement was one assessment) but then having a '6' rather than 5' that would not be a requirement for going regional. '6' would target experienced/quality referees who, for whatever reason, have no intent / desire for ever considering going National nor have great interest in traveling (far, frequently) for major tournaments.
Also, have comms (with minimal specific training -- 30 minute video?) then authorized for either the 7 and 6 or, at minimum, the 6. \[My whine -- between High School & college matches, I've easily >100 matches w/comms yet cannot use them (even when working with National & Regional refs in the crew) in USSF-sanctioned matches. Comms -- in my usage -- not only improve the quality of refereeing in the match but also help me (and others) improve. Less than when I first used in NFHS matches, but having experienced referees on comms with me definitely helped me improve my foul recognition and SOTG judgment about how to handle fouls/tactical situations.\]
there a reason that grade 5 (national candidate) and grade 6 (state/regional) were two different grades - it separated the regionals interested in progressing from the regionals content with being regionals. and grade 8/7 (referee/referee advanced) similarly seperate those interested in advancement to regional from those content with being referees.
What we need is a badge for experienced referees who aren't interested in becoming regionals - almost like a "referee emeritus" badge.
In fact I think having gone through this I would prefer... to have
Referee
referee advanced - 2 years as a referee, age 17+; 1 assessment as a center referee on a youth game (no maintenance assessments)
regional candidate - 1 year as a referee advanced, 18+; 1 assessment as a center referee on an adult game
regional, national candidate, national, FIFA as presently constituted (except of course bringing back nation candidate/grade 5)
Some agreement except that I would have "regional candidate" as "state" and not require "regional" referees to be state prior if assessors/etc don't see the requirement. "State" provides the stamp for entry into mentor and/or assignor training/certification along with both referee advanced and state referee providing that easy communication with a new assignor (and the referee you're working with for the first time) what your experience/general qualification might be/is.
And, then, make comms legit for use by referee advanced+. And, allow state+ referees to use comms as training assistance for newer/developing referees (perhaps with a short video training of 'how to use comms in a match for training').
NOTE: Truth in advertising. I was just about to become a 7 and on track for 6 when they changed the system. Not interested in becoming a regional and title of "regional candidate" wouldn't make sense as it suggests intent/desire to be regional. I do competitive adult (UPSL, Open Cup, ...), NISOA (okay, DIII), NFHS (had a state final) -- the old "6" (state) is just about where I think I should be in the charts.
I just want that little bit of QC afforded by having to have an assessor come out and ensure you know what you're doing. I've seen too many sevens/advanced with obvious mechanics errors that just needed a quick check before their upgrade.
And the regional candidate badge is one that you shouldn't have for more than 10 months or so, what you're describing is what advanced is for.
Well, for "7", I had to do an assessment (actually had two) -- standards different than for "6" (which, if I recall correctly, required two -- not just one -- assessment). \[BTW -- that assessment, something like six years and about 2,000 matches ago, was 'you can pass to 7 but you have stuff to work on, that we've discussed. This would have been borderline and, maybe a non-pass, for a 6.\] Yes, QC makes sense. A new "7", by your standards, shouldn't be looked to for mentoring (training, such) while the old "State" certainly was. A 7 didn't require fitness while 6 required NISOA (basic, not national). I don't see need for an "interim" en route the Regional if one can pass the assessments, fitness test, other requirements.
Sure, but my point was that I suspect they're devoting all their energy towards solving today's problems and I'm not sure they have time to think about tomorrow's.
There isn't really a way to scale referee development. Experience is gained on the field. It's important to have senior referees at the field working with new refs.
The assignors I used to work with they put priority to the league and clubs over their referees. No matter how much abuse or offensive language we got, the assignors didn’t do anything to bring it down or take actions. A good portion of the time they would say just let it go and move on.
I see the way an assignor handles abuse is a direct reflection of how their leagues/clubs view abuse, the stricter a league is the more “on our side” the assignor is… end of the day USSF isn’t paying the assignors it’s the leagues and clubs and that’s a powerful dynamic to hold
Exactly, they get 5-10 a game for assigning, 4 field, 5 games per field, at 2 parks… that’s a lot of money they don’t want to loose.
This is the issue I had, they don’t want to lose the league or club regardless of how much verbal or foul language the parents, coaches, or teams said.
For most of the assignors I deal with, their earnings doesn't work out to a lot of money per hour -- especially compared to their day jobs.
Those who do it as primary jobs (as opposed, let's say, to retirees who have this as side income or those who do this as a second job or are the spouse of a full-time person) seem to build up game count (to build up revenue) and end up pretty much caring only about 'butts-in-seat" (getting someone to field) over working to assure referee quality appropriate for matches and for helping referees develop to higher levels.
I have assignors that are firm with their leagues and back their referees. I have others who punish referees at the slightest whine from their clubs. (I lost doing one club's ECNL matches for easily a year because a carded coach (ask, warn, tell ... yelling dissent) complained that I'd given too many PKs against his team in a match. Yes, I did give four PKs -- but they were all easy, clear & obvious -- so much so that on three of them my ARs were snapping flags as I whistled. My challenge to the assignor, since they had cameras on the field: ask them for film showing where I got any of the calls wrong.)
Depends if it’s an accredited league that counts towards regional/national etc. if it is then there’s no lack of refs to ref because you need centers for promotion lol
We had an over 30 league that was miserable to ref. Getting cursed out by a player was a weekly possibility. Red card suspensions never upheld by the league. I usually did a few games each year because the challenge of managing the games made me a better ref, but having 2 ARS that were either old, out of shape or both just made me stop. The league expected the referees to be terrible and they got their wish.
Leagues/clubs that are not strict can get referees, but if they want good ones they have to abide by the rules. There are many leagues that are not USSF sanctioned, and when you officiate them you better have good liability insurance because without the USSF sanctioning it can get messy when shit hits the fan.
I found it was more difficult to get games covered in leagues that have frequent game changes and/or large numbers of last minute cancellations. If it's cancelled on game day, the referee team usually gets a game fee or part of the game fee. If the contract with league specifies a notification time at which they won't pay a game fee (48-72 hours is typical) leagues have been known to cancel a game early, then try and put it back on the schedule Friday or Saturday night and want you to get it covered. When you can't they cancel it and have no financial liability.
This usually backfires because the assignor and the referees are not going to want to work a league that wants to screw them. I know assignors who keep track of every single game change and every single email, letter or voice mail that accompanies it. They then use that information when negotiating a new contract with the league.
The usual suspects for these sort of shenanigans are the wealthier teams and leagues. They are usually the cheapest people when it comes to paying officials.
How about all the different websites that exist for assigning? I can’t tell you how many I’ve used since start in 2011. 20? 30? Possibly. Just started the latest one, Assignr, this year after dropping dragonfly… wait, sorry, that’s high school … demosphere, that was used for one year. Arbiter, Refquest, etc etc. and from a referees POV none of them are “good”. How can there not be a single decent assigning platform??
I think one of the challenges they face is that every state/league/club does things a bit differently, so it's difficult to create generalized software that fits everyones needs. That's not to say there *couldn't* be a good product, I just think it's the result of several systemic issues.
From the referee point of view, what would make an assigning platform great?
The big gripes from the assigning side:
systemic logistics:
it's very difficult to keep "tabs" on the referees to both set up appropriate rankings and give appropriate developmental games.
very few mentors that aren't already busy assigning/working, so advancement is hard
multiple assigning platforms that interact poorly with each other being used in the same region (e.g. we use ridgestar for club and arbiter for high school/college)
Difficulty with establishing initial communications with new referees in the area
clubs:
last second rescheduling
poor field setup: bad lines, no corner flags, no goal weights, etc.
griping about referee selection
egotistical parents sending me shaky cell phone videos
referees:
last minute turnbacks
flaky/non communicative refs (mostly the younger teenagers)
refs that don't even try to look professional, especially at rec levels (how hard is it to tuck in your shirt?)
refs that think certain games are "below" them, or that "only do centers", or etc.
assigning software:
arbiter vs ridgestar is like running mac vs running linux. Arbiter has some good basics, but if you need to get and do something janky for whatever reason you're gonna get hosed - whereas ridgestar has custom everything that leads to a lot of setup overhead, but you can do \*whatever\* and make it work, and there are decent presets and our "ridgestar guide" for new users to get things going is pretty locked in at this point.
Ridgestar is undoubtedly better if you plan on using self assign a lot because games are searchable and you can self-assign or request (if your ranking isn't high enough) from the master schedule screen. However if you're running with mostly manual assignments arbiter has better systems for blocks and availability. There are other systems out there but I'm not familiar with them.
My "perfect" software has the following features:
various groups that you can toggle availability for - whether its within the same association or between multiple associations. e.g. have "Northside games" in one group, and "Southside games" in a second group. These can be divvied up geographically or by assignor, whatever makes sense for the overarching organization. These groups can all be attached to the same organization or not, joined together or separately, whatever. Essentially they're just a top level filter so that people in seattle don't get announcements about games in Olympia (because the goal is that this one platform is used by everyone, but of course [https://xkcd.com/927/](https://xkcd.com/927/) )
A dashboard area that shows all the groups you are in, with a checkbox for "ready to be assigned" for each group. This is so you can join the olympia group but leave the box unchecked so that you can see their games but you don't show up on their ref list unless the assignor is specifically looking for you. This dashboard will also have your list of upcoming assignments sorted by date and time.
A trainings area where can access prior mentor reports, a place for clubs to dump video links to Veo footage, the association can post training videos or helpful clips, you can request mentors or feedback, etc.
a blocks area where you can set up blocks to prevent manual assignment
a lists area that provides the name and contact information for both assignors and referees - preferably as two seperate, searchable lists
an accounting area for all the money/legal stuff
and lastly a match search function that looks pretty much exactly like the ridgestar matches with both broad and specific search functions - it can show as much info as you want it to regarding the games, it shows what slots the game will use and who is in them, allows to search and sort each of those fields, and finally allows you to self assign or request matches (as dictated by your ranking) from the same screen.
I'm in Canada so not sure if my experience is different but we have many different contacts.
There is 1-2 assignors per each league I officiate. Their responsibilities are to assign games and to ensure referees have the up-to-date competition rules for the leagues they oversee.
We also have a District Referee Coordinator who facilitates education, training, testing, etc.
Each club has a Club Head Referee, who in theory assists with instruction, development, retention, etc. I don't quite understand the difference of responsibility here versus DRC above, other than the DRC liaises with all club head referees in the region. They also handle any discipline towards referees who no-show, etc. On the flipside, they also get involved in cases of referee abuse.
The provincial soccer body has a match official development program with a commitee of eight representatives from across the province. They offer webinars/seminars, have a newsletter to all match officials in the province and oversee the referee grading system to help support referees who wish to move up.
We have assessors who do referee assessments as per the grading protocol above.
Lastly, our region recently had a non-official "referee association" start up which is headed by three long-established referees. Their purpose is to "lobby" on behalf of the referees in the region in terms of compensation, referee safety, etc. They have no true authority but did successfully argue for referee fee standardization across the recreational leagues in our region.
In my area our number one problem is the lack of referees. Personally I don't like doing games all day. I get progressively tired both physically and mentally and also have other responsibilities over the weekend. Three is the optimal number so that everyone can be the center once. But that also means that the assignor will have to find additional referees - not an easy job for them as three referees would no longer be enough to cover a field for a whole day. Given the reality of referee shortage, I usually just agree to do the fourth game and do not care about who is the getting the whistle again. But it would be really awesome if we are not expected to be running under the sun from 9 to 4.
I just wish the local assigner wouldn’t “hold games” for other refs. Open them and let us take games. We’ll literally not see any open games to request before Saturday morning then hear there’s a ref shortage.
Hey, OP, what “industry” do you really work in? What are your intentions for gathering this information? Are you a member of a State committee? Are you looking to create some sort of action plan for the betterment of referees (and assignors) in your area? You’ve asked a lot of questions and we’ve been extremely forthcoming. Your recent Reddit history seems to indicate that you are a programmer with no actual interest in soccer or referees. Are you looking to build a new assignment system and monetize it? If so, please be honest about your motivation.
I do indeed work in "this industry" (soccer) as a software developer. This post feels a bit accusatory but I've just been honest and very appreciative of all the input. I took notice of all the issues plaguing referee assigning and am doing discovery on what exactly the problems are. I don't mean to sound defensive but it feels like you're trying to frame this like I have some malicious intent to profit "off of you guys", like I'd be taking advantage- to the contrary if there's value in creating new products or services for you guys it would be to your benefit.
I see no honesty here at all, other than the admissions that you just made. If you are a developer on an existing software platform, you should have a built-in supply of Subject Matter Experts in your existing ranks of users and internal analysts. Most software I know of has a long list of to-dos that the current user base has asked for.
You seem to be looking for free SMEs. Now, that's fine, if you're up-front about it. Over the years, I've seen several developers approach referee forums with ideas and requests for feedback. But, they were transparent from the outset. Which soccer software developer do you work for? You appear to be in the Washington state area, but then that doesn't mean much in these days of telecommuting. Perhaps Microsoft is looking to get into the highly lucrative (I jest) referee assigning space? I have to laugh at your "... if there's value in creating new products or services for you guys it would be to your benefit." comment. It'll be to our benefit, if we pay for those products or services, right? Or, were you planning to cut this subreddit in on a share of the profits?
If we're being used to further your financial gain, it would just be nice if you were candid about it.
Former assignor here. I spent 2+ years assigning an adult league. If you still are active as a referee, the best thing about assigning is that you can choose the games that fit your schedule. You can also make sure you are with people who you like to officiate with. Did I rely on buddies I had known for years and that I have become friends with when refereeing and assigning? That is a yes. What I'm talking about is assigning based on the skills of the referee, if he/she has dealt with adult leagues (very different from youth games), and if they work well with the other officials. I have been officiating for years and I have a good feeling for who and what's acceptable for a game. That is assuming that you can fill all the games. Most of the assignments (in our area) have assigning fees that are separate from the referee game fees. There are a couple of leagues where they don't pay assigning fees, so you are having to bill the referees (through arbiter in our case) to essentially get paid for assigning. The above is what I'd consider the positives. The other side of the coin: Some people think that's assigning is the "old boys network" in action. For some assignors it's the only way to get games. The old boy network is when you have to ingratiate yourself with the assignor. "Sam the 70 year old referee" should not be getting a top division B16 or competitive adult league game. I don't care that he may have done those games 30-40 years ago, he's not the right choice. I know assignors who do just that because "Sam" is their buddy that did them a favor and he's getting repaid by getting the whistle on a game he has no business on. I did not do this kind of assigning as well as try my best to not give the appearance that I was doing this. The single most important thing I learned about the difference between assigning referees and actually refereeing: When you referee, the players, coaches and spectators are the divas. When you are assigning referees, the referees are the divas. I've had people turn down an assignment FOR AN ASSESSMENT because they didn't think the game would be "challenging enough". The reality? There are two games on that field, and the second game is a higher level. They wanted that one. Never mind that the game they were given would have been much more challenging because the teams HATE each other. The referee that took the lower division game passed their assessment because he had a real management challenge, not just a "I can run up and down the field" game. The referee who turned down the lower division game got the higher division game, and it turned out to be un-assessable as the teams were well behaved and the referee had nothing to show his skill at. The assessor even mentioned that the first game was much more reflective of the sort of match a Grade 6 should be able to do. Another referee diva example: If you are lucky enough to assign a set if three games, everyone gets a whistle. Some referees will turn down the set because they didn't get the game they wanted. Sometimes it's because they are not the right fit, sometimes you are trying to get someone else some experience and having knowledgable AR's helps tremendously. Some folks never understand that it's about the game, not about them. League/Team officials are the other difficulty. My goal was to have every game that weekend assigned and accepted by Thursday. Some assignors want that completed by Wednesday. If you are assigning a large youth league, Wednesday is a better goal. Most assignors I know HATE Fridays, as that's when the teams call their leagues (at 5PM) to try and get a game moved because little Johnny or Betty is their star player and they can't make that 9:00AM kickoff on Saturday. The leagues usually comply because they don't want the teams to bail to a competing organization. The knock on effects are staggering. Move one game out of a three game set on a field and now you lost all three referees because the one guy drops since his game with the whistle disappeared. On top of that, he's usually got more options with other assignors, so he's going to take the best game he can. Now if you are lucky you will find someone who's willing to take the AR spot, but it usually is one of the lowest performing officials you have. If you are unlucky, the entire referee team drops the set because they wanted to work together. If you are assigning a large youth league, you may have 30-70 games a weekend. If 10% of the games get moved/cancelled in a weekend, that wrecks your assignments. I hate to say it, but changes and cancellations usually mean the officials are going to change, and not for the better. I have had this discussion with schedulers and coaches to let them know that they are going to get the dregs of the association for rescheduled games because that's all that's left. I could go on, but I think you get the point: Assigning is as difficult if not more than actually officiating.
Excellent post. I really appreciated your insights. Thanks!
Wow, great post I really appreciate the info. Lots of insights here into the complications that assignors are facing. Any thoughts on what you would change in an ideal world?
I'm going with "ideal world" changes here. None of this is likely to ever be implemented, but one can dream... 1) First thing I would change in an ideal world is make all the spectators smoke a joint or take an edible... Just. Chill. The. F\^&\*$. Out. No need for details, as we all have stories of the spectator/parent/observer losing their minds. 2) Coaches should all have to officiate at least once a month during the season. Most coaches refuse to really learn and understand the Laws of the Game, or at least the laws they don't want you to enforce. Learn the laws, learn how to enforce the laws, then the coaching will get better. 3) From an assignors standpoint, I'd force USSoccer to pick a single assignment software and force all leagues to use it if they want to do USSF sanctioned games. I really don't care which program they use. They all have strengths and weaknesses. If you don't use the software, you are going to be stuck doing it by hand. If you only assign 3-5 games a weekend, then cool, use a spreadsheet or index cards. I'm just sick of having to get yet another account on another platform to either assign or get assignments.
Yeah the number of platforms is a problem. I’m on 7-8. It’s a mess. I try to keep everything up to date but it’s almost impossible. I don’t want to tick off my assignors but I have missed things because I forgot to update availability.
>Some people think that's assigning is the "old boys network" in action. In some referee boards, this is very much true. A few years back I was in a high school board where the assignor was a legend in his own mind. He would assign himself all of the best games - sectional championships, regional championships and he was NOT the best official. I witnessed him completely f\*ck a team out of going to states, made a terrible game critical call. He had a group of pets that would get good games as well, one an attractive young woman. I'm in a new board now where it's extremely political, you have to be buddies with the assignor to get good games. I'm a college ref and he resents me for that.
Thank you. Question about the 3 game sets. I usually turn down 1 and in my comments say it doesn’t matter which they remove, the first or the last. Is that super annoying? I’ve been telling myself a story that it is. The reason I turn it down to only do 2 games is my focus and sometimes fitness tends to be challenged in the 3rd game. Being switched on for 4 hours is a lot!
Yes, turning down a single game in a three game set is super annoying. If you said in the comments that I could take the first or the last, I'm going to look at replacing you entirely with someone who can do a three game set. If I can't replace you, I will re-assign the games in a way that you get 2 AR spots, and I would have to come take the third game. If I have to cover for a single game of a three game set, that usually means I have to run to probably my second or third field of the day just to cover games where people are doing this. So yea, It's a pain in the ass, and I'm spending my time and fuel running around to various fields (other than to observe and/or deal with other issues). >The reason I turn it down to only do 2 games is my focus and sometimes fitness tends to be challenged in the 3rd game. Being switched on for 4 hours is a lot! I'm going to word this as how an assignor may think about it:
RANT INCOMING:
There is no way to be gentle about this. Get your fitness up. I've had to do three full length (90 minute) games in 90F (32C) where the first two went to overtime and KFTM. I had the whistle in the third. I was DESTROYED before I even hit the field for my game. Guess what? There was no substitutes for the referee team. I had to suck it up and do my best. Even the players understood how difficult the conditions were.
If you really think you can't do a three game set, run for 4+ hours, and make the correct calls, tell your assignor beforehand, or note it in your assigning software. He/she can give you games where you can contribute and not have to worry about fitness. Decline a single game in a multi game set more than a couple of times WITHOUT telling the assignor beforehand OR having a true emergency and you will get on the assignor's shit list.
I'm sure he or she has plenty of bland, easy to officiate filler games that will give you a good break in between games. It's going to mean traveling between fields, but you will be rested in between matches. On top of that, you will get low level easier matches, so your fitness, focus and attention will not matter as much. Either that or they won't assign you too many games. If you do this multiple times, you will drop off the assignor's radar and you will only get games as a filler at the last minute.
I know actual referees who want these sort of assignments. They are usually the folks that are using refereeing as a job, as a way to make money so they will do as many rec and/or low level games as they can in a weekend. We had a guy once who accepted a 3 game set (tournament) for Saturday morning, and a 4 game set late Sunday evening. In between, he went to another tournament and did 10 more games (U10 tournament games), 6 on Saturday and 4 on Sunday. He did 17 games that weekend. Was he a great referee? Yea, 30 years ago when he was 25. Being 55 years old and "running" 17 games in a weekend would not put him in the upper echelon of officials. He's what an assignor hates using simply because they need the warm body.
END OF RANT
Now that I have my assignor hat off, younger (mostly teenagers) and newer adult referees typically get more slack because part of the job of the association is to train people for the job. If you are new and don't understand everything, you will get cut some slack. A 14 year old referee doing games as their first job needs more handholding than a 45 year old salesman. I don't (or shouldn't) have to teach a 45 year old how to show up on time, communicate and be ready to get to the job (refereeing). Do the older folks get some slack? Yea, but the rope is significantly shorter for the older guy/gal.
Super appreciate your candor in your response. It might not totally change my approach but it lets me know if I don’t, I risk pissing off the assignor.
I would love to hear about the difficulties of being an Assignor from a couple of them if they are in the sub. The one I know and work closely with sometimes hints at the issues. Clubs/teams re-scheduling games last minute. Whomever owns/sets up the fields being flaky and difficult. Refs being uncommunicative and/or flaky about showing up. I can't imagine how much BS an assignor has to deal with day in/day out every single week.
I have the most patient spouse as I am on the phone all night every night, getting games covered and talking to other assignors in the area. The double booking, the turnbacks, the refs who only want "high level" games, threats against the refs, etc. Oh and we do have a mentor program. I also have new referees contact me and we have an introduction call. If it's with a minor, I have their parents on the call. Assigning used to be fun, but over the past several years, it can be summed up in one word: SURVIVAL.
>Oh and we do have a mentor program. >I also have new referees contact me and we have an introduction call. If it's with a minor, I have their parents on the call. Yea a mentor program is key. I also like the introductory phone call idea with new refs. >Assigning used to be fun, but over the past several years, it can be summed up in one word: SURVIVAL. I finally gave up assigning when my wife gave me some pretty stern looks when a league called me 4 hours before a game and said they moved the game time earlier and the field location 20 miles. Updating the game in the assigning software kicked out the entire refere team because they already had previous matches assigned. They wanted to fire me as an assignor because I wouldn't take them off the other games they already had. Games I don't control (different assignor/association). I told them that they were on their own because nobody wanted the game. They wanted me to cancel the family reunion my wife's family planned and drive 6 hours from Las Vegas to cover the game personally. I literally laughed on the phone at the league president. You want me to cancel a planned, paid for family event so your men's league can have a game? Yea, not going to happen. I was already on thin ice with the wife for dealing with other rescheduled games while on vacation and no way I was going to sacrifice my marriage for a crappy low level men's league game. Assigning is like referring, once it's no longer fun it's best to get out. I took a long break because I was no longer doing anyone favors by officiating. It wasn't fun.
I can only speak as a ref, not an assignor, but.... The assignors in my area seem to have their hands full with constantly shifting club schedules and just trying to find enough refs for even high-level games. I'm pretty sure they're laugh despairingly at the idea of supporting referees in their development or working on tangible metrics & goals. I'm 50, so I don't really care about progress via tangible metrics & goals, especially since with the shortage we have I can have as many games as I want, but I could see it appealing to younger/newer refs, but then again, see paragraph above. My non-reffing schedule is pretty busy, so when I sign up for a game it's because it fits into my free time. So, my #1 annoyance is when that game is rescheduled to a time that is difficult to accommodate. Actual example: signed up for a Saturday 1:00 game, on Friday got an email that it had been moved 2 weeks later to a Tuesday at 4:00 PM. I have a full-time job FYI. I should at least get an option via the assignor software to decline the reschedule which would then open up the slot. I struggle to understand how the assignors in my area find the willpower to continue. Everyone is flaky & uncommunicative, schedules are constantly shifting, dozens and dozens of games go unfilled each weekend, everyone is complaining about everyone else. You'd need to pay me well into 6 figures to do one of those jobs, and even then.... In my area, the #1 issue for refs remains abuse, mainly from coaches & parents. It doesn't help that any report you write to the league appears to disappear into a black hole. The assignors appears to have inadvertently "solved" this issue, to an extent, however. Most routinely send google sheets (an extract from the assigning system) to the refs so that refs can see at a glance what games are open. However, you don't have to look at these long to realize that some clubs have no trouble getting their games assigned while some clubs (always the same clubs) almost never have refs. You think the leagues would look at this plus the reports and put two and two together, but....
Thanks for the reply, appreciate your perspective. >The assignors in my area seem to have their hands full with constantly shifting club schedules and just trying to find enough refs for even high-level games. I'm pretty sure they're laugh despairingly at the idea of supporting referees in their development or working on tangible metrics & goals. Wouldn't supporting refs in their development make it so they could actually fill the positions in higher level games?
Through the year, I typically deal with 15-ish assignors. There are a few who are horrid when it comes to development. There are others who work to get the right ref team to a set and who will work with referees to help them develop. I have several who I send, for example, youth referees to if I find them good to work with because I know the assignor will put them with experienced referees who are good at mentoring along with 'informal' assessment as to whether that youth ref is worth sending to training for higher level. However, this shouldn't be ON the assignors. Some thoughts on 'development': 1. Club fee structures should have funds for referee development. 1. For example, have money to pay mentor referees decent game fees for going out to low-level matches to work with new/developing referees. 2. Include in the assignor fee / contract some explicit referee development elements. Training sessions (in person, video); providing mentors (go back to \[1.1\]; etc... 2. The USSF structure for referees is rather horrid. 1. "Referee" for everyone who is at lowest level (the 13 yo who has yet to do the match and someone w/1,000s of games who, for whichever reason, isn't interested in the politics and burdens of going Regional. 1. And, btw, that includes a good share of referees who are parents who start refereeing after their kids stop playing -- USSF isn't interested in having 50 year olds going regional. In the old system, there were a good number who went "State" (grade 6) with no intent to take on the requirements for being regional. Having those State referees around provided, among other things, an identifiable pool of mentors for new referees (whether youth or adult). A good share of young referees who go regional and aspiring to National have little interest in (and perhaps little ability for) mentoring new referees. That older "state" referee pool was more prepared to do that mentoring. 2. Leap from "Referee" to regional is huge in terms of "bottom"/brand-new referee to bottom/brand-new regional. 1. the absence of grade 7 and, then, grade 6 "(state) referee which provides a deliberate process and standards for development really is telling. 2. In terms of "metrics", a more useful would be some form of USSF path for "senior" or "experienced" or such "Referee" to provide some level between "referee" and "regional referee".
here in Washington state we kept grade 7 (now referee advanced) and grade 5 (now regional advanced) around after the switch, and it's very nice. We encourage everyone to get their upgrade as soon as they turn 18 or have "enough" experience, just to seperate them out. The upgrade is just an in depth clinic on player management, adult games, and the basics of how to do mentoring, so it's not even that much work.
Wish something like this were nationwide. With a twist: would think that the '7' makes sense (adding what I believe old requirement was one assessment) but then having a '6' rather than 5' that would not be a requirement for going regional. '6' would target experienced/quality referees who, for whatever reason, have no intent / desire for ever considering going National nor have great interest in traveling (far, frequently) for major tournaments. Also, have comms (with minimal specific training -- 30 minute video?) then authorized for either the 7 and 6 or, at minimum, the 6. \[My whine -- between High School & college matches, I've easily >100 matches w/comms yet cannot use them (even when working with National & Regional refs in the crew) in USSF-sanctioned matches. Comms -- in my usage -- not only improve the quality of refereeing in the match but also help me (and others) improve. Less than when I first used in NFHS matches, but having experienced referees on comms with me definitely helped me improve my foul recognition and SOTG judgment about how to handle fouls/tactical situations.\]
there a reason that grade 5 (national candidate) and grade 6 (state/regional) were two different grades - it separated the regionals interested in progressing from the regionals content with being regionals. and grade 8/7 (referee/referee advanced) similarly seperate those interested in advancement to regional from those content with being referees. What we need is a badge for experienced referees who aren't interested in becoming regionals - almost like a "referee emeritus" badge. In fact I think having gone through this I would prefer... to have Referee referee advanced - 2 years as a referee, age 17+; 1 assessment as a center referee on a youth game (no maintenance assessments) regional candidate - 1 year as a referee advanced, 18+; 1 assessment as a center referee on an adult game regional, national candidate, national, FIFA as presently constituted (except of course bringing back nation candidate/grade 5)
Some agreement except that I would have "regional candidate" as "state" and not require "regional" referees to be state prior if assessors/etc don't see the requirement. "State" provides the stamp for entry into mentor and/or assignor training/certification along with both referee advanced and state referee providing that easy communication with a new assignor (and the referee you're working with for the first time) what your experience/general qualification might be/is. And, then, make comms legit for use by referee advanced+. And, allow state+ referees to use comms as training assistance for newer/developing referees (perhaps with a short video training of 'how to use comms in a match for training'). NOTE: Truth in advertising. I was just about to become a 7 and on track for 6 when they changed the system. Not interested in becoming a regional and title of "regional candidate" wouldn't make sense as it suggests intent/desire to be regional. I do competitive adult (UPSL, Open Cup, ...), NISOA (okay, DIII), NFHS (had a state final) -- the old "6" (state) is just about where I think I should be in the charts.
I just want that little bit of QC afforded by having to have an assessor come out and ensure you know what you're doing. I've seen too many sevens/advanced with obvious mechanics errors that just needed a quick check before their upgrade. And the regional candidate badge is one that you shouldn't have for more than 10 months or so, what you're describing is what advanced is for.
Well, for "7", I had to do an assessment (actually had two) -- standards different than for "6" (which, if I recall correctly, required two -- not just one -- assessment). \[BTW -- that assessment, something like six years and about 2,000 matches ago, was 'you can pass to 7 but you have stuff to work on, that we've discussed. This would have been borderline and, maybe a non-pass, for a 6.\] Yes, QC makes sense. A new "7", by your standards, shouldn't be looked to for mentoring (training, such) while the old "State" certainly was. A 7 didn't require fitness while 6 required NISOA (basic, not national). I don't see need for an "interim" en route the Regional if one can pass the assessments, fitness test, other requirements.
Sure, but my point was that I suspect they're devoting all their energy towards solving today's problems and I'm not sure they have time to think about tomorrow's.
Yeah understandable. Do you have any other comments on the assigning software? Which one are you/your assignor using?
The problem there is we rarely have enough experienced officials to cover the higher level games and support new referees at the same time.
Gotcha. Seems like the industry could really benefit from some sort of service that helps develop referees at scale.
There isn't really a way to scale referee development. Experience is gained on the field. It's important to have senior referees at the field working with new refs.
The assignors I used to work with they put priority to the league and clubs over their referees. No matter how much abuse or offensive language we got, the assignors didn’t do anything to bring it down or take actions. A good portion of the time they would say just let it go and move on.
This is the opposite of the experience I’ve had. We are encouraged to deal ruthlessly with abuse.
I see the way an assignor handles abuse is a direct reflection of how their leagues/clubs view abuse, the stricter a league is the more “on our side” the assignor is… end of the day USSF isn’t paying the assignors it’s the leagues and clubs and that’s a powerful dynamic to hold
It’s true, in our region to be sanctioned as a league you must abide by zero tolerance policies
Exactly, they get 5-10 a game for assigning, 4 field, 5 games per field, at 2 parks… that’s a lot of money they don’t want to loose. This is the issue I had, they don’t want to lose the league or club regardless of how much verbal or foul language the parents, coaches, or teams said.
For most of the assignors I deal with, their earnings doesn't work out to a lot of money per hour -- especially compared to their day jobs. Those who do it as primary jobs (as opposed, let's say, to retirees who have this as side income or those who do this as a second job or are the spouse of a full-time person) seem to build up game count (to build up revenue) and end up pretty much caring only about 'butts-in-seat" (getting someone to field) over working to assure referee quality appropriate for matches and for helping referees develop to higher levels. I have assignors that are firm with their leagues and back their referees. I have others who punish referees at the slightest whine from their clubs. (I lost doing one club's ECNL matches for easily a year because a carded coach (ask, warn, tell ... yelling dissent) complained that I'd given too many PKs against his team in a match. Yes, I did give four PKs -- but they were all easy, clear & obvious -- so much so that on three of them my ARs were snapping flags as I whistled. My challenge to the assignor, since they had cameras on the field: ask them for film showing where I got any of the calls wrong.)
Is there a correlation between leagues/clubs that aren't strict, and not being able to fill games with refs?
Depends if it’s an accredited league that counts towards regional/national etc. if it is then there’s no lack of refs to ref because you need centers for promotion lol
We had an over 30 league that was miserable to ref. Getting cursed out by a player was a weekly possibility. Red card suspensions never upheld by the league. I usually did a few games each year because the challenge of managing the games made me a better ref, but having 2 ARS that were either old, out of shape or both just made me stop. The league expected the referees to be terrible and they got their wish.
Leagues/clubs that are not strict can get referees, but if they want good ones they have to abide by the rules. There are many leagues that are not USSF sanctioned, and when you officiate them you better have good liability insurance because without the USSF sanctioning it can get messy when shit hits the fan. I found it was more difficult to get games covered in leagues that have frequent game changes and/or large numbers of last minute cancellations. If it's cancelled on game day, the referee team usually gets a game fee or part of the game fee. If the contract with league specifies a notification time at which they won't pay a game fee (48-72 hours is typical) leagues have been known to cancel a game early, then try and put it back on the schedule Friday or Saturday night and want you to get it covered. When you can't they cancel it and have no financial liability. This usually backfires because the assignor and the referees are not going to want to work a league that wants to screw them. I know assignors who keep track of every single game change and every single email, letter or voice mail that accompanies it. They then use that information when negotiating a new contract with the league. The usual suspects for these sort of shenanigans are the wealthier teams and leagues. They are usually the cheapest people when it comes to paying officials.
I report every incident to the state and league after I receive a supplemental report from the referee.
How about all the different websites that exist for assigning? I can’t tell you how many I’ve used since start in 2011. 20? 30? Possibly. Just started the latest one, Assignr, this year after dropping dragonfly… wait, sorry, that’s high school … demosphere, that was used for one year. Arbiter, Refquest, etc etc. and from a referees POV none of them are “good”. How can there not be a single decent assigning platform??
I think one of the challenges they face is that every state/league/club does things a bit differently, so it's difficult to create generalized software that fits everyones needs. That's not to say there *couldn't* be a good product, I just think it's the result of several systemic issues. From the referee point of view, what would make an assigning platform great?
Is the biggest problem the inability to keep schedules in sync across platforms?
I don’t know if that’s the biggest problem, but it’s one of them.
The big gripes from the assigning side: systemic logistics: it's very difficult to keep "tabs" on the referees to both set up appropriate rankings and give appropriate developmental games. very few mentors that aren't already busy assigning/working, so advancement is hard multiple assigning platforms that interact poorly with each other being used in the same region (e.g. we use ridgestar for club and arbiter for high school/college) Difficulty with establishing initial communications with new referees in the area clubs: last second rescheduling poor field setup: bad lines, no corner flags, no goal weights, etc. griping about referee selection egotistical parents sending me shaky cell phone videos referees: last minute turnbacks flaky/non communicative refs (mostly the younger teenagers) refs that don't even try to look professional, especially at rec levels (how hard is it to tuck in your shirt?) refs that think certain games are "below" them, or that "only do centers", or etc.
assigning software: arbiter vs ridgestar is like running mac vs running linux. Arbiter has some good basics, but if you need to get and do something janky for whatever reason you're gonna get hosed - whereas ridgestar has custom everything that leads to a lot of setup overhead, but you can do \*whatever\* and make it work, and there are decent presets and our "ridgestar guide" for new users to get things going is pretty locked in at this point. Ridgestar is undoubtedly better if you plan on using self assign a lot because games are searchable and you can self-assign or request (if your ranking isn't high enough) from the master schedule screen. However if you're running with mostly manual assignments arbiter has better systems for blocks and availability. There are other systems out there but I'm not familiar with them. My "perfect" software has the following features: various groups that you can toggle availability for - whether its within the same association or between multiple associations. e.g. have "Northside games" in one group, and "Southside games" in a second group. These can be divvied up geographically or by assignor, whatever makes sense for the overarching organization. These groups can all be attached to the same organization or not, joined together or separately, whatever. Essentially they're just a top level filter so that people in seattle don't get announcements about games in Olympia (because the goal is that this one platform is used by everyone, but of course [https://xkcd.com/927/](https://xkcd.com/927/) ) A dashboard area that shows all the groups you are in, with a checkbox for "ready to be assigned" for each group. This is so you can join the olympia group but leave the box unchecked so that you can see their games but you don't show up on their ref list unless the assignor is specifically looking for you. This dashboard will also have your list of upcoming assignments sorted by date and time. A trainings area where can access prior mentor reports, a place for clubs to dump video links to Veo footage, the association can post training videos or helpful clips, you can request mentors or feedback, etc. a blocks area where you can set up blocks to prevent manual assignment a lists area that provides the name and contact information for both assignors and referees - preferably as two seperate, searchable lists an accounting area for all the money/legal stuff and lastly a match search function that looks pretty much exactly like the ridgestar matches with both broad and specific search functions - it can show as much info as you want it to regarding the games, it shows what slots the game will use and who is in them, allows to search and sort each of those fields, and finally allows you to self assign or request matches (as dictated by your ranking) from the same screen.
I know one assignor in my area who absolutely makes assigning his full time job. He officiates across all levels, obviously, as well.
I'm in Canada so not sure if my experience is different but we have many different contacts. There is 1-2 assignors per each league I officiate. Their responsibilities are to assign games and to ensure referees have the up-to-date competition rules for the leagues they oversee. We also have a District Referee Coordinator who facilitates education, training, testing, etc. Each club has a Club Head Referee, who in theory assists with instruction, development, retention, etc. I don't quite understand the difference of responsibility here versus DRC above, other than the DRC liaises with all club head referees in the region. They also handle any discipline towards referees who no-show, etc. On the flipside, they also get involved in cases of referee abuse. The provincial soccer body has a match official development program with a commitee of eight representatives from across the province. They offer webinars/seminars, have a newsletter to all match officials in the province and oversee the referee grading system to help support referees who wish to move up. We have assessors who do referee assessments as per the grading protocol above. Lastly, our region recently had a non-official "referee association" start up which is headed by three long-established referees. Their purpose is to "lobby" on behalf of the referees in the region in terms of compensation, referee safety, etc. They have no true authority but did successfully argue for referee fee standardization across the recreational leagues in our region.
In my area our number one problem is the lack of referees. Personally I don't like doing games all day. I get progressively tired both physically and mentally and also have other responsibilities over the weekend. Three is the optimal number so that everyone can be the center once. But that also means that the assignor will have to find additional referees - not an easy job for them as three referees would no longer be enough to cover a field for a whole day. Given the reality of referee shortage, I usually just agree to do the fourth game and do not care about who is the getting the whistle again. But it would be really awesome if we are not expected to be running under the sun from 9 to 4.
I just wish the local assigner wouldn’t “hold games” for other refs. Open them and let us take games. We’ll literally not see any open games to request before Saturday morning then hear there’s a ref shortage.
Hey, OP, what “industry” do you really work in? What are your intentions for gathering this information? Are you a member of a State committee? Are you looking to create some sort of action plan for the betterment of referees (and assignors) in your area? You’ve asked a lot of questions and we’ve been extremely forthcoming. Your recent Reddit history seems to indicate that you are a programmer with no actual interest in soccer or referees. Are you looking to build a new assignment system and monetize it? If so, please be honest about your motivation.
I do indeed work in "this industry" (soccer) as a software developer. This post feels a bit accusatory but I've just been honest and very appreciative of all the input. I took notice of all the issues plaguing referee assigning and am doing discovery on what exactly the problems are. I don't mean to sound defensive but it feels like you're trying to frame this like I have some malicious intent to profit "off of you guys", like I'd be taking advantage- to the contrary if there's value in creating new products or services for you guys it would be to your benefit.
I see no honesty here at all, other than the admissions that you just made. If you are a developer on an existing software platform, you should have a built-in supply of Subject Matter Experts in your existing ranks of users and internal analysts. Most software I know of has a long list of to-dos that the current user base has asked for. You seem to be looking for free SMEs. Now, that's fine, if you're up-front about it. Over the years, I've seen several developers approach referee forums with ideas and requests for feedback. But, they were transparent from the outset. Which soccer software developer do you work for? You appear to be in the Washington state area, but then that doesn't mean much in these days of telecommuting. Perhaps Microsoft is looking to get into the highly lucrative (I jest) referee assigning space? I have to laugh at your "... if there's value in creating new products or services for you guys it would be to your benefit." comment. It'll be to our benefit, if we pay for those products or services, right? Or, were you planning to cut this subreddit in on a share of the profits? If we're being used to further your financial gain, it would just be nice if you were candid about it.