Refereeing

Competition Regional Competitions
1

First of all let me start off by saying that I referee soccer myself and know how tough refereeing can be and that I have a lot of respect for referees. So how can we help referees who are obviously trying to do a good job do it. Here are my suggestions:

  1. Give the referees an “Advice to Referees Page” which not only describes the rules but their appropriate interpretations, applications, and proper positioning and mechanics.
  2. Standardize their procedures between regionals.
  3. Have new referees spend a year as field reset to understand the flow of matches and how things work on the field.
  4. Create a test that’s available to both referees and teams.

To put in some perspective, here is the training that grade 8 (competitive youth games) referees have to go through in Wisconsin soccer:

  1. Attend a 16 hour entry level clinic their first year.
  2. Attend a 5 hour recertification clinic every year.
  3. Score a 75% or higher on a written test.
  4. Referee at least 8 games a year.
  5. Be at least 14 years old.

The recourses that they have are:

  1. The Laws of the Game
  2. USSF Advice to Referees
  3. USSF Guide to Procedures
  4. USSF directives
  5. USSF Week in Recview (something that talks about issues in refereeing and how a referee can work through them)
  6. FIFA teaching materials

My intent in this thread is not to praise or chastise referees but to find ways to make them better as both the teams and the referees would benefit.

2

FRC referees have:

–Written test (not sure of passing score, but for inspectors, 90% was passing).
–Weekly conference calls with other refs, including the one ref who is on the GDC (Aidan Browne).
–There is at least one complete, up-to-date rulebook somewhere in the arena area–if the FTA doesn’t have one, the Head Ref doesn’t have one, and the Lead Inspector doesn’t have one (and one of those three has to have one somewhere), some team member probably does. I can’t think of a soccer game where I’ve seen the soccer resources you listed immediately available.
–6 or 7 referees, most of whom are veteran refs.
–Means to contact FRC HQ quickly if something goes haywire. (And I’m willing to bet that most soccer refs don’t have the means to contact their federation’s HQ in a hurry during the game…)
–A challenge/question box, for cases where interpretation is needed or the ref is flat out wrong according to the rulebook (it’s happened).

The one thing that soccer refs have that FRC refs don’t: They always have the same game, with whatever minor tweaks are applicable for the play level. FRC refs learn a brand new game every year. Oh, and to learn it, the head refs go to FIRST HQ to learn it right from the designers. (As do some other folks who learn other aspects.)

It’s great that you want to make reffing better, but when you look at the resources available to the refs, what could you add to make it better? Instant replay? (BTW, I’m well aware of the technological and logistical challenges on that.)

I can only recall 4 major officiating blunders in my time in FIRST, and 3 of them weren’t the ref’s fault; the 4th was a combination of factors compounding a simple mistake.

3

I’m a friend of an FRC ref (Hi Rizzo) and I’m impressed with the work that they do during build season and in the weeks in between each week (something about the GDC changing/tweeking the rules). Going to two events and five off season contests the refs have always been great. In a game that is super fast for 3 minutes and at the end can be won or lost in an inch to be a ref is a scary rule.

In talking to other refs it’s pretty clear that they spend a lot of time talking to each other about what happens each week.

I produce a number of VEX events, it’s the same thing. We stick with a common set of Refs. They are good event 1 match 1, they are amazing at event 5 match 60. At our events I run the drivers meeting. I tell the roboteer drivers that the head ref has the final call. And in the event the ref makes a bad call, they should come and see me and I will confirm that the head ref makes the final call and I back the ref.

In the last 5 years, I’ve had three parents question calls, two kids that were forced by their mentor, and a single mentor. The two kids took the call with gracious professionalism, the mentor had a blinding flash of the obvious. The parents were harder, two understood the rules and were happy. The last person wanted to argue. I opted to refund her money and she and her team decided to go home.

On the other hand in 5 years I’ve run over 1000 matches and they all fly well. The refs know their job, are good, fair and follow the rules. In FRC land you can ask, they will all explain the rule, the call, how not to do it again and a thanks for coming to play this week.

Short digression on the inspectors. Same thing, rules driven, want to see the details. Train one roboeer on the inspection process. Have the paper docs ready. Walk the inspector through the robot, handing paper has you go. Preguess their questions. Have the rules and you responses ready. Don’t be fat, have sharp edges, crap flowing across the robot.

Bottom line we are all volunteers and we do it as much as a professional
job as we can do. But with 3 min games, it’s lots harder than you expect.

I’ve been a ref, a judge and a queuer. Getting robots in queue is the worst job.

Oh wait, the hardest job is signing all those people up to help for a 10 hour day for “free lunch”. Lets do training for our Hanna and Rita, your Kim and the Jenny clones everywhere.

4

I don’t think I’m violating any referee confidences by responding here. One other difference between FRC refs and soccer refs (of which I am both) is the training structure. The FRC head ref (Aidan) trains the event head refs; they in turn train the rest of the refs at the event.

Been there, done that, more or less. Aidan prepares several presentations for conference calls.

  1. Standardize their procedures between regionals.
    Again, a qualified, being done. Just as there are some soccer refs who have their own ideas and refuse to change, there are a few FRC refs who have a more difficult time accepting that their interpretation of the rules when they first read them were flawed. There is a private forum for head ref correspondance, in which interpretations and procedures are thrashed out, with direction from Aidan.
  1. Have new referees spend a year as field reset to understand the flow of matches and how things work on the field.
    Most refs earn their stripes by working in other jobs. I personally was a queuer (from which I believe you get a better perspective than field reset), pit admin, and lead queuer before becoming a referee.
  1. Create a test that’s available to both referees and teams.

All referees have to pass a test on the rules and their interpretation in scenarios. While you can take the test more than once, you get a different selection of questions each time you take the test.

This doesn’t make a perfect referee, any more than the USSF classes make a perfect soccer referee. A good referee has to do more than just study for the test. Referees have to stay on top of all the rules and team updates. Sometimes people do miss things. Unfortunately sometimes referees don’t study enough and cannot apply the rules correctly. We all feel the pain when that happens; none of us like it. But of all the referees I’ve met, I can’t say that I ever met one who didn’t want to try to strive for perfection - or at least moving closer to perfection.

5

The only time there are problems with refereeing is when FIRST creates a game that puts a massive burden on them. Like 2005 or 2008, where there exist multiple ways for major penalties to be racked up, which require split second decision making from up to half the field away.

When FIRST makes simple games, we don’t complain about refereeing (on the whole). It’s that simple, in my opinion.

6

Most if not all work hard and want nothing but the best for all the teams. My son used to help ref and they endure a very long day on thier feet and make tough decisions. They put countless hours into it that you don’t see.

In the 11 years that I have been doing this, I have really only had 1 major issue with a ref. 10 or 11 yrs ago we were in Epcot and we were on the main field outside. Right after the match started a ref answered a cell phone while right next to our robot. Needless to say our robot shut down. They refused to restart or replay the match. Sadly our teammate was in 1st place and because we lost, they lost thier rank.

Refs are an awesome group who are very dedicated to making sure that the game runs smoothly and fair.

7

Soccer has 17 well established laws of the game.
It also has 7 cautionable and 7 send off offenses.

Remind me again, how many rules do each FRC game have?

The GDC creates a new game every year, and all referees have to learn it. You don’t have to re-learn soccer every year. What FRC referees do in the amount of time they do it, while having outside commitments is remarkable.

Major props to you guys.

8

One major difference between soccer and FRC is the idea that all FRC matches should be officiated exactly the same way. In soccer everyone that plays, coaches, watches or officiates knows thats each referee is different and will call the game differently from the last official. The soccer rule book (FIFA Laws of the Game) is filled with statements like “in the opinion of the referee…”, and these give the refs the ability to apply common sense to a situation and make an appropriate decision. There is very little that is black and white about officiating a soccer game; was that a push or not, was the player tripped or did they slip on the ball, did the ball hit the ball hit their hand or body? In my opinion the fact that each referee can call a game differently is one of the best aspects of soccer, it forces the players and coaches to adapt to the game, to change their play to best match the opponents and the ref. You could have one ref that’s very strict and one that a lot looser, and both are correct.

Without question soccer has a manly European influence and the rules show this, however, FIRST seems to be following the path of the largely American sports like Football and Baseball where a new rule must be created for every nuance of the game. by comparison the youth football rule book is 7 to 8 times thicker than the Laws of the Game.

The sports model is nice but I say take a page from industries’ rulebook. In industry there is no rule book because the rules are always changing, people and companies have to react to whats going on around them right now not what they want to be happening or was was going on last month or last week. Give the referee’s the flexibility to call matches the way they see fit, there’s no reason that a match played in one regional has to be officiated the same as a match in another regional.

Danny B

9

Which leads to the one and only actual major refereeing blunder I know of. At one event (to remain nameless), the refs incorrectly scored a particular item. When this was brought to their attention, instead of correcting the score as the normal response is, they replayed the match. The “wrong” team won the event as a direct result of that replay. FIRST corrected by giving the finalists spots at the Championship.

That’s why the refs have to call the game the same way every week, unless the rules change. If they aren’t called the same regional to regional, week to week, field to field, who’s to decide which rule call is correct?

Heck, we already have enough trouble with the following exchange that is heard on Thursdays after Week 1:
“I’m sorry guys, but I can’t let you compete with that.”
“But it passed at the Magnolia Regional!”
“They just missed it. Team X has a similar, but legal design–you may want to talk to them. But the rules are clear: As it is now, your robot will not pass inspection.”
“But…”

I’ve had a robot that I failed that passed with that component at a preseason scrimmage. Now, preseason scrimmages may or may not have certified inspectors, but regionals do. After one or two of the above exchange with a mentor, I called for the lead inspector. The team had to rebuild that part correctly.

10

I think you need as much consistency throughout events as possible. When each ref is given significant latitude to make calls, its just not fair, as Eric pointed out).

It is worse yet when freedom affects individual matches. A perfect example of this was at regional this year. There was one ref who was responsible for watching a quarter of the field on the blue alliance scoring zone. The ref called atleast one penatly each match. Since mostly blue alliance robots were in that zone (to score), the blue alliance almost always had more penalties than the red alliance. Plenty of matchs were decided by penalties. Myself and a couple of other scouts quickly noticed this ref constantly waive his flag and were going to tell our drivers to simply avoid the portion of the field that ref watched (it was worth taking the extra couple of seconds to go to the other goal than getting a penalty). Thankfully, someone noticed this ref call a disproportional amount of penalties and switched him to watching the driver station. I believe most his calls were correct, but the ref was calling every minor penalty while the other refs were giving teams the benefit of the doubt.

11

But thats exactly what you do in sports, you play to the refs. If they are calling it tight you have to be extra careful, if they’re looser then you have extra latitude. This all works on the idea that each ref is consistent it their own calls, if so then its fair to all the teams at that event and those are the only teams your competing against.

If the refs are different in the next regional then you have to change your play, simple as that.

Danny

12

That is something that you can account for. Refs are trained so that they are consistent from game to game, and so that they are consistent within reason between ref crews. It’s impossible to make every call exactly the same, but if one ref calls a second defending robot offsides if it’s on top of the bump and another calls it when it hits the ground on the offense side, you do have a problem.

I’ve been known to tell a soccer opponent after a game that they’d need to tone down rough play their next game–the ref crew was loose. The crew for their next game–against us at our home field–and the refs that did our home games as a general rule did not like rough play. A week later, they picked up a few yellow cards.

What you were originally saying was apparently, let’s let the call I’ve already mentioned actually happen between different events. That’s not the way the rules are written, and not the way they need to be called.

There’s a spotlight that says something like “The problem was too many penalties with too much room for judgment.” I don’t remember which year that was after, but I can think of two years where that applies: 2005 (loading zone) and 2008 (line crossing). The more room for judgment calls, the less the game is liked, primarily because of the penalties.

13

Danny,
We can’t allow refs flexibility nor can we allow inspectors flexibility. The people involved have a lot invested in this competition. The sponsors are not likely to shell out as much and have their name on a robot that can lose at the whim of an official. Mentors are less likely to spend all the hours they currently work on the robot if they know there are unknown variables in the refs and inspections. Students are less likely to take ownership of a robot if they know their hard work can be circumvented by an official. I know many refs and know they work very hard because they have to make hard decisions. I know most inspectors and I can guarantee you that we train to make inspections as consistent across the country as possible. I don’t want a team to end up at Championships with a faulty robot and have to tell them that the previous inspectors missed something huge. And yes, every year I get the same rant from teams who passed at previous events. Inspectors have to defend the rules as they were last edited. Many teams stop looking at the rules after week one or two and never look at the Team Updates. Those teams will be surprised when a specific item has been ruled illegal or when a game strategy has been ruled as legal in the last update. There were 20 Team Updates last year.

Imagine if you will a 2009 game where inspectors didn’t inspect the trailer hitch, or a game like 2010 where refs didn’t watch how many robots were in an end zone.

14

The only time I’ve really seen incidents at competitions be it offseason or official, was when a referee was making calls that simply were not correct based on the rule book. I will admit I don’t watch a tremendous amount of soccer, but I’ve certainly watched my fair share and there are problems with that game as well. Offsides for example is tough to call and at times a huge swing in a game if its descoring what was a legitimate goal.

The point is, no system is perfect, so FIRST shouldn’t try to duplicate a pro sports model. We can adopt many of the same techniques, but we should also try to correct the inefficiencies with pro sports as well.

All that being said, the refs do a great job right now, and anything we get on top of what they do already is gravy in my opinion.

-Brando

15

FIRST Competition champions should be determined by the robots and the teams that drive and build them. They should not be determined by the officials.
The best way to achieve this is to have a comprehensive and complete set of rules that can be followed to the letter by referees and participants alike.

16

So if I’m understanding you all correctly your saying that you want an all encompassing rule book with no ambiguity, right?

Just for grins lets do some math:
last year there were just sort of 1100 matches in week 1
with 5 weeks of regionals thats 5500 matches total, add in the Championship and the total is 6651.

Say for discussion that the refs had to make 10 decisions on a given robot in a given match, or 60 total per match
60*6151=369060

I for one don’t want a rule book that covers 370,000 situations and what the appropriated ruling is, do you?

I feel that the referee crew does a great job, my point is that a rule book that covers all situations can not exist, and that more rules and regulations are not the answer.

17

We recognize that the rule book cannot cover every single situation. That is *NOT *what comprehensive and complete means!

However, as bitter experience has taught a lot of long-time forum members, having a loose rulebook may not always be an advantage. Just the other day, I ran across the following thread on a rule that was very open to interpretation, which is what you seem to be advocating: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3661

For the record, there are about 3 other threads on that topic. Two of the 4 are moderated, either due to extreme emotion either way or desire to preventing said emotion from degenerating.

A comprehensive and complete rulebook does not cover every situation, as not every situation is foreseeable. A comprehensive and complete rulebook lays down the rules as they are to be called, and some guidelines on what would likely be called in a hypothetical situation (say, high contact between robots). It is loose enough that the referees can give grace in situations they are not sure about (ball under robot, after Week 1), but tight enough that if a robot breaks a rule, it gets called (contact with a robot contacting its own tower). The advantage of the FRC rulebook is that it is flexible, allowing for game-affecting unforeseen situations to be dealt with quickly (reference the ball-under-robot rule and the seeding bonus).

You don’t have to cover every situation, but you do have to give the referees enough guidance to make the right call at the right time, keep the calls consistent throughout an event, and call the game the same between events within a certain margin. Calling a solidly built arm breaking off due to very agressive defense not a penalty at all (not to mention a 10-point and robot modification almost intentional tip when there isn’t a 10-pointer in the rulebook for that), and then calling accidental high hit/tip a disable/DQ, at two different events, is not cool. (After this happened, the head refs had to get training before being allowed to head ref. I’m pretty certain that both head refs involved are still reffing/head reffing.) But calling a pin over when the pinned robot moves off what it’s being pinned off of versus calling it over when the pinning robot finishes backing up the requisite distance from the spot of the original pin is within tolerance, at least for me.

18

Link should be http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36614

19

Guys,
Referee training and actions have changed quite a bit since 2005 as have inspections. We should not reference these old threads when discussing issues under the new rules and methods.

20

Al, this is understood. The reason that that thread was brought up was as a reason that the refereeing methods have changed, and as an example of the disadvantages that a “loose” rulebook that is very open to interpretation can have. There is a poster that seems to be advocating that sort of rulebook; knowing what has happened when that sort of rulebook is used can be very helpful.