Survival Techniques I Ve Learned Over the Years

Survival Techniques I’ve Learned Over the Years

Observations and Suggestions for Both New and Seasoned Referees

Gil Weber

National Referee Emeritus

State Assessor

Instructor

Lifetime Member, USSF National Program for Referee Development

Contributing Author, Advice to Referees and numerous other USSF referee education and training programs

Maintaining Composure and Authority When You Don’t Know

Who Committed That Nasty Foul2

Managing Games When the Teams Play Diametrically Opposing Styles5

Misreading the Players’ Intentions8

Time Wasting: What Can and Should You Do About It?10

Dealing with Persistent Infringement and Tag-Team Fouling13

Assessing the Game From Hell15

“Game” Calls vs “Book” Calls21

Bending or Breaking the Laws?24

Why I Get So Many Assignments27

Pre-Game Instructions29

A Tale of Two 8s37

Slow Card? Fast Card?40

Maintaining Composure and Authority When You Don’t Know Who Committed That Nasty Foul

Gil's First Rule of Holes has always served me well in those situations where I am uncertain.

"When you're in a hole, stop digging!"

Situation: I was refereeing a boys high school game, 2-man referee system. Very competitive. It was approximately 10 minutes from full time and the home team was leading 2-0.

A home team attacker dribbled along the touchline approximately 20 yards away from me. The ball deflected off a defender and went into touch. As the ball left the field the attacker received a late challenge from a different defender and was knocked onto the running track that surrounded the soccer field. He was lying flat on his face.

As you might imagine the crowd, home team players, and bench were screaming for a card. But I was in a hole, as I'll explain.

The worst part of the 2-man system for high school is that the referee must position him/herself to watch (simultaneously) the 2nd-to-last defender for offside, the touchline for ball off the field, the play near the ball for fouls and misconduct, and players elsewhere else on the field for misconduct. This is all essentially impossible, of course.

My hole? There was a crowd of players between the late tackle and my position, and I could not see which defender threw in the late challenge. I had no idea which player should get the disciplinary card. And the other referee could not help. Ooops!

So I ran over to check on the player lying on the running track. Several of his teammates had come over as well. Naturally, they were upset. All the opponents had backed off.

I was wondering to myself, “How am I going to get out of this hole and identify the perpetrator?”

Well, high school rules give us a little help. The first thing I did was to make certain everyone (players, coaches, benches, parents) understood that the clock was stopped. Now, even with the injured player off the field, nobody was going to say anything about my not getting the game restarted immediately.

Next I determined that the injured player needed the trainer. She came over. Some additional time passed and I was still thinking, "How the heck am I going to get myself out of this?"

A minute or so had gone by, and 5 or 6 of the injured player’s teammates have come over and they were talking. I was thinking to myself, "Come on guys. Somebody say the magic words. Somebody make my day."

"That was a really late tackle, ref" said one. “Yeah,” I thought to myself. “NOT the magic words I want to hear.”

Finally, one of the home team players said to another, "Who did it?” The teammate replied, "It was #17." "Which one," asked another? "It was 17."

Yes! Thank you, thank you, thank you! I knew if I waited long enough someone would spill the beans.

Immediately I knew I could reassert myself and demonstrate that I was in control and would deal with the perpetrator. (Sheesh, talk about bluffing your way out of trouble.)

"Take it easy, guys. I'll take care of #17. You guys stay cool and let me handle it."

Finally the injured player is back on his feet. I walked over by the visiting team’s bench, found #17, and showed him a yellow card.

"What was that for, ref" he asked.

“For the late challenge.”

"OK," he said. No argument from him or any teammate.

Justice had been served. The home team players were satisfied with the yellow card and nobody went looking for revenge (which might have been a possibility had I not shown the card).

The visiting team players were cool with the caution since they knew it was deserved, and they were probably happy I'd pulled the yellow and not a direct red.

Neither coach said a word.

The crowd was satisfied (important only because they can be so provocative in high school games).

By waiting and listening and slowing down the proceedings I had managed to identify the unknown player. He had been dealt with to the extent necessary in that situation. And by talking to the injured player's teammates I had calmed them down so they were not looking for trouble.

I found a way to extricate myself from a hole, and nobody was wise to the fact that I was stumbling through the entire affair. I really did not know exactly how I was going to get myself out. But my experience just told me "Keep the game stopped while you cool down tempers. Things will work themselves and the home team players will start looking around for the perp, That’s when they’ll reveal him to you."

Of course each situation is different, and your mileage may vary.

Managing Games When the Teams Play Diametrically Opposing Styles

As we all know if the referee is to be effective at managing the game to a successful conclusion he or she must understand the players, their skill levels, their backgrounds, their "soccer cultures," etc. This is most obvious when the two teams play classically differing styles, and a clash of some sort during the match is inevitable.

I had an interesting match a few years ago. Over 30s division, one team all British Isles players, the other all Brazilian. As you'd expect with two contrasting styles of play there were two quite different attitudes toward the amount of physical "oomph" the referee should allow when players challenged for the ball.

In this match the Brazilian players started the histrionics quite early.

First a player gave a loud shout ("ouch" or its equivalent) when dispossessed. Then another one tumbled to the ground and embellished the consequences of the contact. It was not to the level of comical "barrel rolls" or a minimal-contact fall that draws sarcastic shouts of “sniper.” But there was no doubt that the players were testing me early -- making a meal of it to see if I'd bite.

Obviously, we all need to be aware that conduct of this sort goes on, and we need to understand the referee's responsibility for keeping a lid on such acts.

The point I want to make to readers is the importance of understanding how different cultures respond to challenges, particularly diving and embellishment, and knowing how to deal with such reactions (i.e., not simply showing a yellow card and leaving it at that).

The British players were VERY upset when a Brazilian player would go to ground or shout in "agony." It was a profound upset that they expressed -- to the point of going up to the fallen player, standing over him, and giving an earful of their displeasure.

This is not the kind of thing you'd typically expect to see if two Latin teams were playing -- the diving and histrionics are almost an expected part of the play and they just get on with it. (Please note that I'm not "dissing" them; it's simply something you see and something that they give and take as part of their game.)

But the British players typically take this diving and histrionics as even worse than foul play. They can accept a rash challenge though they might not like it. Bad tackles are part of the game. They’ll live with that.

But diving, histrionics, and similar gamesmanship they take as cheating -- the worst kind of cheating, for it seeks to deceive and spoil the game. It seeks to beat the opponent not through skill or even luck but, rather, through unfair, calculated deception of the officials.

And so the British players will get right in the face of opponents who dive, and tell them off in no uncertain terms. And the referee needs to be aware that this is going to happen and be prepared to deal with it immediately -- before the verbal challenge turns ugly and fists or boots start to fly.

What to do?

Well, you'll hear the players giving the opponent's an earful -- you can't miss that. The first time it happens you need to run (RUN!!!) to the players and impose your authority and personality. Talk to them, blow the whistle, shout if you must. But stop the verbal confrontation before it can escalate.

You'll want to be certain that both sides understand that you know what's going on. To the aggrieved players, no matter their nationality, you'll need to convey a sense of fairness -- that you recognize the diving or histrionics for what they are, and that you'll deal with it. To the opponents (again, no matter their nationality) you'll need to convey in no uncertain terms that such conduct will not be tolerated, and that they are not to try to "buy" calls by making a meal of the challenges.

How you do this is a reflection of your match management and personality, and the timing and nature of both the challenge and the fall. Some referees will immediately show the yellow card -- to make an early statement that nothing of this sort will be tolerated. If it was a “little dive” other referees will try to talk the first time -- to reason with the players.

However you choose to handle it, your message to both teams must be that they are not to get into personal confrontations, verbal or physical, over dives or perceived dives. You'll deal with it, not them.

This means you must stop the players on the provoked side from blatant verbal berating and from running any distance to stand over an opponent who's gone to ground. (Note, you'll simply never stop them from making quiet comments away from your presence. But it's the overt, standing over the fallen opponents stuff that you must stop the first time.)

This means at a minimum a loud and obvious "get up" to the provoking opponent who shouts in supposed agony and falls to the ground. If that player has embellished the contact then you’d be wise to display a yellow card and send an early message to every person on that field and on the touchlines.

If your presence and authority is obvious the first time, and if you use common sense to manage "advantage" or other situations where you choose not to stop play, you're well on the way to successfully dealing with teams playing diametrically differing styles.

Misreading the Players’ Intentions

A few years ago I refereed what was probably my most challenging high school match since moving to Florida eleven years ago.

Team A has four wins in four games. Team B has four losses in four games. Team A is a little cocky and convinced its winning streak will continue. The other is absolutely determined that it will end tonight.

One team is all Jamaican and Haitian kids. The other is all Central and South American kids. Two very different styles of play, but both very fast, very aggressive.

It’s obvious from the 1stminute that this game needs a tight hand.

3rd minute – There is obvious (to me) handling in the penalty area by the team with the winning streak. I whistle and point to the penalty spot. No protest. The PK is converted.

The players seem to be accepting decisions but are playing with a fierce intensity. There’s nothing vicious, but neither side is taking any prisoners.

Each time a goal is scored the players celebrate. They do not taunt the opponents, but they make it clear that this game is not your normal high school match. There is a lot of pride at stake -- bragging rights.

In the first half I notice that two players seem to be constantly bumping into each other. Nothing nasty; they just seem to be letting the other one know that "I'm here." It appears more annoying and petty than nasty.

Then a few minutes later I notice that these two seem to be jawing at each other. So I move a little closer and hear them trading barbed comments.

Well, the high school association in Florida has made it very clear that we're to crush trash-talking. So the next time I get near the two players I give them my best "I'm watching you" stare and a verbal "Cool it, guys."

They both look at me with that "What, ref? Who, me?" look we've all seen a million times from "innocent" players.

A few minutes later I'm close to them again and I hear from the Latino a very unflattering reference to Jamaicans, and something equally offensive from the Jamaican kid directed back at his Latino opponent.

OK, now I figure I need to get involved. I hold the game at a stoppage and talk to the two players. As I begin my best "Cool it, guys" lecture and prepare to sanction both players with plastic they start laughing and reveal to me that they're actually best friends off the field, and they do this every time they play.

It's all in fun. They're not mad at each other and, apparently, every other player on both teams knows it too. I'm the only one on the field who did not know that they're simply good friends participating in a ritualized “dissing” contest.

So I tell them that I understand. But I suggest that maybe they're setting themselves up for problems with another referee in another game. Perhaps they should consider toning down the edgy chat, or stopping it all together?

I explain that another referee might be much less understanding, and might show them yellow or red cards (technically correct though, in this case, not worth a damn for game management).

So that trash-talking, even though it’s all done in fun and with no animosity whatsoever, could land them each in a heap of easily prevented trouble.

They agreed and stopped the trash-talking -- at least when I was close enough to hear it.

So, here was a case where what I perceived was not reality. Sometimes you need to look twice, to peel back the skin of the onion to see what's actually there.

Sometimes acting too quickly can result in a bad or ineffective decision. First impressions may deceive, so we need to be careful during our observations and think before using that plastic.

This is obviously made more difficult when the players are doing silly things that make our jobs harder, and that may create an edge in the game that can lead us to mistaken decisions. That's a shame, but it’s a reality.

So, as we used to hear on TV’s Hill Street Blues: "Be careful out there."

Oh, yes, the game ended 3-3.

Time Wasting: What Can and Should You Do About It?

Game situation: Last 10 minutes of a match. Team A is up by one goal. To this point they have slowed things down and consumed time using legal tactics. They have not wasted time with illegal tactics such as delaying restarts.

Then, as Team B starts to apply a lot of pressure in an attempt to tie the game, Team A does start using what appear to be questionable tactics. Every time they kick the ball out of play it’s as if they’re trying to send the ball to Cuba. They make a single substitution at every opportunity. Every throw-in requires a committee discussion among the players to decide who’ll put the ball back into play, etc.

Does Team A’s conduct constitute unsporting behavior? Can a player or players be cautioned for repeatedly kicking the ball into the next time zone in an obvious attempt to waste time? Is there such a thing as too many substitutions, and if so, what can you do about it?

Well, these are the types of situations where a wise referee will know how to

"massage" the situation to a successful resolution rather than digging

him/herself a hole that only gets deeper as the referee digs more furiously.

First, there is nothing in the Laws of the Game that says a player cannot kick the ball far off the field. And the wise referee will not look to apply a penalizing

counter-stroke where none is called for (or allowed under the laws). So, no, you

may not caution or send off a player for kicking the ball too far off the field.