|
| | Guidance for Marking Referees
Back
to main Club Guidance Menu
All
AFC clubs are required to adhere to the Football Association marking scheme with marks from 1-100, which
was introduced in 2006.
The
mark awarded by a club must be based on the referee’s overall
performance, It is most important that the mark is awarded fairly and not based
upon isolated incidents or previous games. The referee’s performance should be
determined by the table below which should act as a guide for the overall mark
which should fall within the mark range for each standard of performance.
|
Mark
Range |
Comment |
| 91-100 |
The
referee was extremely accurate in decision making and very successfully
controlled the game using management and communication skills to create
an environment of fair play, adding real value to the game. |
| 81-90 |
The
referee was very accurate in decision making and successfully controlled
the game using management and communication skills to create an
environment of fair play. |
| 71
- 80 |
The
referee was accurate in decision making and controlled the game well,
communicating with the players, making a positive contribution towards
fair play. |
| 61-70 |
The
referee was reasonably accurate in decision making, controlled the game
quite well and communicated with players, establishing a reasonable
degree of fair play. |
| 51-60 |
The
referee had some shortcomings in the level of accuracy of decision
making and control, with only limited success in communicating with the
players resulting in variable fair play. |
| 50
and below |
The
referee had significant shortcomings in the level of accuracy of
decision making and control with poor communication with the players
which resulted in low levels of fair play |
Notes
 | Using
a scale of up to 100 allows greater flexibility for clubs to
distinguish between
different refereeing performances more accurately.
|
| A
mark within each mark range can be given to reflect the referee’s
performance e.g. a mark of 79 indicates a somewhat better performance than a
mark of 71.
|
| A
mark between 71 and 80 represents the standard of refereeing expected.
|
| When
a mark of 50 or less is awarded, an explanation must be provided to the
League or Competition by completing the appropriate box on the marking form.
It must include comments which could help improve the referee’s future
performances. Even where a referee has significant shortcomings there
will have been some positive aspects which should be given credit; extremely
low marks (below 20) should be very rare.
|
How
to Decide on the Referee’s Mark
The
following questions focus on the key areas of a referee’s performance. They
are intended as an "aide memoire", are not necessarily comprehensive
and need not be answered individually. It is, however, worth considering them
before committing yourself to a mark for the referee.
CONTROL
AND DECISION MAKING
| How
well did the referee control the game?
|
| Were
the players’ actions recognized correctly?
|
| Were
the Laws applied correctly?
|
| Were
all incidents dealt with efficiently/effectively?
|
| Were
all the appropriate sanctions applied correctly?
|
| Was
the referee always within reasonable distance of incidents?
|
| Was
the referee well positioned to make critical decisions, especially in and
around the penalty area?
|
| Did
the referee understand the players’ positional intentions and keep out of
the way accordingly?
|
| Did
the referee demonstrate alertness and concentration throughout the game?
|
| Did
the referee apply the use of the advantage to suit the mood and temperature
of the game?
|
| Was
the referee aware of the players’ attitude to advantage?
|
| Did
the referee use the assistants effectively?
|
| Did
the officials work as a team, and did the referee lead and manage them to
the benefit of the game?
|
COMMUNICATION
AND PLAYER MANAGEMENT
| How
well did the referee communicate with the players during the game?
|
| Did
the referee’s level of involvement/profile suit this particular game?
|
| Did
the referee understand the players’ problems on the day – e.g. difficult
ground/weather conditions?
|
| Did
the referee respond to the changing pattern of play/mood of players?
|
| Did
the referee demonstrate empathy for the game, allowing it to develop in
accordance with the tempo of the game?
|
| Was
the referee pro-active in controlling of the game?
|
| Was
the referee’s authority asserted firmly without being officious?
|
| Was
the referee confident and quick thinking?
|
| Did
the referee appear unflustered and unhurried when making critical decisions?
|
| Did
the referee permit undue questioning of decisions?
|
| Did
the referee deal effectively with players crowding around after
decisions/incidents?
|
| Was
effective player management in evidence?
|
| Was
the referee’s body language confident and open at all times?
|
| Did
the pace of the game, the crowd or player pressure affect the referee
negatively?
|
Final
Thoughts
| Always
try to be objective when marking. You may not obtain the most objective view
by marking immediately after the game.
|
| Judge
the performance over the whole game. Don’t be too influenced by one
particular incident.
|
| Don’t
mark the referee down unfairly because your team was unlucky and lost the
game or some disciplinary action was taken against your players.
|
|
