Let's hear it for the Refs !

[Basel A]

Refs must be pretty thin-skinned, because no one is attacking them personally. No names are named. We could name names - there are refs here in Michigan that I like and those I don't, based on their track records - but we choose not to name the refs, but rather identify just the poor calls and the mistakes. And let me tell you, there are far more mistakes than get posted about on Chief Delphi (missed crossings for days). If FTAs or Lead Queuers screwed up as much as the refs, they'd be run out of town.

I don't like it when good but tough calls are questioned. I'm talking about the situations where neither decision is great. The Newton SF non-replay is a good example. Referees need to make tough calls and questioning them doesn't make it any easier. But the truly bad calls? What can I say, they were bad.

[Carolyn_Grace]

Re-posting from this thread: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=148072

Why do you believe that ChiefDelphi is the place for constructive criticism for referees?

My opinion is there are many other more official ways to handle a poor reffing situation (because, yes, they do exist. Yes, they need to be addressed.)

Here are some suggestions:

1. Question Box at the event. This is the quickest and most official method of questioning a referee.

2. Talking to the Volunteer Coordinator in person about your concerns. Usually the VCs contact information can be found on the event website. As a VC myself, this is extremely great information to know. Sure, I may ask if you want to ref yourself, or if you know of anyone who will (I'm always trying to recruit everyone around me anyway), but I'll listen, I'll note your concerns, and I may reassign the guilty ref to a different position at the next event IF POSSIBLE.

3. Talking to the Head Ref about your concerns. The HR won't be able to explain much about a call after the event is over, but they can listen to your concerns and take them into account for the future.

4. Talking to the Event Coordinator about your concerns. (similar to the VC).

If you absolutely must address it via social media or ChiefDelphi, then don't simply say, "The reffing is poor. This call was wrong." Because that isn't constructive criticism at all. It's acting like a backseat driver. If you truly believe that CD is the media to use and the way to make change, then suggest a solution to go along with your criticism. Otherwise it's not CONSTRUCTIVE, and it's just complaining and whining.

[FrankJ]

Keep in mind when using the question box that there is very little time between matches. You are going to get one chance to ask your question. Think through your question. Ask a clear question to get a clear answer. You are not going to get time for many follow up questions. If it is a rule question it doesn't hurt to have a copy of the rule available. Be tactful. Don't come across as if you know the rules better than the referee. (Even if you think you do ) Keep in mind the referee's call is stressed and under time constraints. Don't confuse a curt answer for a lack of caring. Even if you think the answer is wrong, it is the answer and the head referee is final, except it with GP. In the end the some total is more than one bad call.

After every event a survey is sent out by First. I think it goes to the primary mentor, but it is meant to be filled out by everybody. It is meant to be filled out by every body.

[Jbkerns]

Another ref chiming in. As my first year as a referee it was definitely interesting to be on the other side of the table. I was a driver when I was a student, and now I occasionally drive coach (depending on the season). This year I happened to be both a ref and drive coach.

It is understandable that people won't go out of their way to post positive opinions. That takes effort and motivation that you lack when compared to when you are angry about something. I'm not surprised that the number of posts that are criticizing referees outnumber the posts thanking us by a large margin. But, I will shout out the teams and mentors at CHS district events. Going off of the posts here, you ALL showed us love that was scarce in other places. Unlike some of the posters here, I was thanked numerous times while wearing the zebra stripes, and drive teams were all awesome to work with.

We are all human. Referees are trained for their roles, but that doesn't make them immune to messing up. It will happen. I refereed something like 247 matches over the season. To think that I didn't make a mistake in one of those matches would be foolish. Not only that, but it is my first year reffing. I know I made mistakes, and I learned from them.

Overall, the reactions here on the forums are expected. The only thing that I have issue with the jump between complaining about some calls, and calling all reffing this year bad. Yes, specific instances may have been questionable. Yes, people have the right to complain about us. But, when you look at the sheer amount of matches that went on, and then compare the amount of calls that are complained about, it paints a VERY big difference on how "bad" reffing was this year.

And again, shout outs to the teams at the events I reffed at. You were the definition of Gracious Professionals, and made my day with your comments.

[maxnz]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

Keep in mind when using the question box that there is very little time between matches. You are going to get one chance to ask your question. Think through your question. Ask a clear question to get a clear answer. You are not going to get time for many follow up questions. If it is a rule question it doesn't hurt to have a copy of the rule available. Be tactful. Don't come across as if you know the rules better than the referee. (Even if you think you do ).

I will admit that as the rule expert for the team, I had the whole game manual (all but section 1) printed out booklet style, separated by section, and folded in my back pockets for the whole regional (I had been going over the rules quite a bit the week before, so I had the game rules somewhat memorized already). And it did come in handy a few times (mainly when we needed to look up a rule and my iPad with the manual downloaded on it was back in the pit and we were qued for a match).

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by maxnz

I will admit that as the rule expert for the team, I had the whole game manual (all but section 1) printed out booklet style, separated by section, and folded in my back pockets for the whole regional (I had been going over the rules quite a bit the week before, so I had the game rules somewhat memorized already). And it did come in handy a few times (mainly when we needed to look up a rule and my iPad with the manual downloaded on it was back in the pit and we were qued for a match).

The refs at KC did this too, along with pulling up the q&a occasionally on my phone.

[Collin Stiers]

I want to say that I think the refs I interacted with this season were truly wonderful and hard working, reffing this game is a really hard job, things move fast and there are a lot of robots and actions to track. Often when making a call at the end of the match refs have to rely on their memory to look back, which is imperfect, and they have to make the best calls they can. There can be cases where there is no "right" or "wrong" call, it all depends on how a specific event is remembered and interpreted.

Given all that I think that refs work very hard make the best calls they can in a high speed game, and I think they did a wonderful job.

There were many times this season I used the question box to talk to the head ref, and they could have gotten annoyed at my repeated visits, but instead I felt that they really valued what I was saying and took it into consideration, and they gave me an open and honest explanation of their call. I think this interaction helped the all of us better understand the factors involved and helped the refs to make better calls, and me to avoid penalties and drive better

One final thing, it seems like we only ever hear about the refs when people think they screwed up, perhaps we should do more to recognize the refs who do good, so with that in mind, three cheers to the refs who volunteered in the chesapeake district, great job guys.

[Michael Corsetto]

Being critical of referee quality and thankful for referee volunteerism are not mutually exclusive.

I have good relationships with many people on the volunteer reffing crews for all of our local FRC events. I make a point of thanking them for volunteering for this thankless job, usually with a hand shake and a "thank you for volunteering your time."

Most of the issues I see in FRC reffing come down to training (and sometimes game design). This is similar to the primary issues I see with FRC inspecting. I typically send my concerns to FIRST HQ, as I already have with some of my observations from CMP 2016, in hopes that training will improve in the coming years.

Big thanks to all the event volunteers, referees included.

-Mike

[Richard Wallace]

I volunteered as a referee at two district events this year, for the same reason EricH gave -- a VC asked me to, because they were short handed. So after the robots were all inspected, I put on stripes.

BTW, the referee certification process is harder and more time consuming (for me) that the one for robot inspectors. Also, inspecting naturally includes time for reflecting on decisions, while refereeing emphatically does not. I am much more comfortable as an inspector.

Carolyn Grace made the most important points in this thread, I think, when she wrote about all of the avenues available for provide constructive feedback for volunteers. VCs want and seek this feedback, and getting it helps them make future events better. Getting that feedback is actually part of their job, and not an interruption.

If I make an error as a volunteer, I hope someone like Mike Corsetto will come let me know. Let the VC know also, but I want to correct my problem ASAP.

[Michael Corsetto]

Originally Posted by Richard Wallace

If I make an error as a volunteer, I hope someone like Mike Corsetto will come let me know. Let the VC know also, but I want to correct my problem ASAP.

Richard,

This sort of approach is very admirable.

My favorite Key Volunteers have this same approach. I've had many positive, constructive conversations with Head Refs and LRI's regarding rule interpretations. Not necessarily regarding any specific match (this is not my place), but regarding rules in general and how teams can expect these key individuals to make calls. Often, I find that I might be aware of a Q/A or something else that this individual is not aware of, and we work together to improve the overall event experience.

On the flip side, I have less respect for KV's who hide behind their role and refuse input from participants at the event (through appropriate avenues, of course).

-Mike

[Roboshant]

This game was a very hard game for refs, and their hard work and simple graciousness for volunteering should be commended. Compared to last year, where most of the reffing could be done after the completion of the match, this year is very fast moving with many game objectives and elements.

I can definitely sympathize with referring under these conditions, especially for lesser experienced refs, as I myself have reffed for games with much less complexity in VEX. Competitors also need to understand the fact that refs are not perfect, and most likely will not be able to remember what happened 54 seconds into the game in the opposite corner of the field. No matter how trained, refs will not become superhuman omniscient beings. The total amount of mistakes they make in relation to the total amount of matches is probably less than the amount we make in our daily lives.

Now let's face it, we need to something to eliminate bad calls. The problem is it can be very hard, even for trained refs, to do this. I believe this is where video review comes in. I would love to see how video review, with obvious regulation, would work on reducing the pressure on refs as well as the reduction of bad calls.

Let's hear it for the Refs!!! Thank You!

[jvriezen]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Refs must be pretty thin-skinned, because no one is attacking them personally. No names are named.

I disagree. Indeed I don't recall any 'names being named' but the ref is usually in the video. The ref (if following CD) knows the name, the entire reffing crew at the event knows who you are talking about, the ref's team's(and former teams') members know who you are talking about, many volunteers at the event knows who you are talking about, and so forth. They are being attacked personally. Would you say "The driver of team #### really messed up and it cost us the match"-- no because that would be attacking them personally, even though you did not name them.

Would you be willing to sit down with the ref and say "I think you made the wrong call, I'm going to post a video of the match on CD and state my arguments so hundreds of people can also make judgments about your call, many of whom will post in agreement with me."

If I have a co-worker who is screwing up, I don't blast an email to the whole company describing the situation in enough detail to identify the person, but avoiding naming names. I go through proper channels, which for FRC as was stated partially in the OP and re-iterated in another post is the question box, the VC, and the regional director, and then HQ (though I hope very little would rise to that level)

Perhaps FIRST should formalize a referee 'complaint' system that codifies this. Head Ref would still have final say on the field, but the complaint system would help sort out the more qualified refs for advancement to head ref positions and DCMP and CMP roles. Unfortunately, it is likely such a system will have its own disadvantages.

The biggest unintended (and mostly hidden) consequence of these public airings (and I have personal knowledge of this occurring) is that many people who would otherwise volunteer to be a ref don't even start, and others who have ref'd stop doing so, especially at DCMP and CMP events where the stakes are greater.