LHGCL Email blasts

Xara wrote:
I disagree on multiple levels. Sure, the refs you would ideally want aren't doing it for the money. How could they be? The pay SUCKS and so does the job! But if there were better pay, more qualified people would be willing to overlook the bad aspects of the position because the pay makes it worthwhile.

That's the thing. It's not a crappy job if you're doing it out of your love of the game. Any money you get at all is a bonus perk if you truly enjoy engaging in the game from a whole different vantage point than you did as a player, coach or spectator. The only "qualification" needed is a love of the game and willingness to learn how to apply its rules. Throwing money at it is just casting a wider net to pick up more people who think it's a crappy job but might be more inclined to stomach it for grocery money.

Xara wrote:
More money into mentoring and assessments? Yeah, that has worked great for our school teachers, too. People love being told they need to improve their efforts in doing a job that blows for lousy pay. Seems like I once heard that ref turnover in the first few months after licensing was over 50%. That's terrible. Money buys retention; assessments and oversight breed contempt.

You have to evaluate performance to improve performance. That applies to anything. I'm not talking about "official", rigid assessments for those looking for upgrades, I'm talking about routine performance input. They can be mentors, friendly assessments, weekly reviews, whatever. Has to be something. Show me any system in any endeavor that runs well without oversight.

Xara wrote:As for the abusive coaches and parents, that's an easy one. First, better refs will work harder to keep their jobs and make better calls. Also, good refs don't put up with sideline stupidity. They know how to shut up the idiots. Those that don't probably are crappy refs and will get fired anyway. Again, you get what you pay for. It's true for doctors, attorneys, contractors, and anyone else you hire. Refs are not an exception.

You're comparing PROFESSIONALS to people who are largely volunteers who get a nominal pay stipend. Very few refs are professionals paying their bills with officiating. You could quadruple the ref pay and it's still going to amount to no more than pocket change for most people with a professional career. And you could put Howard Webb on a U11 lake highlands game, pay him $5,000 per game and the out of control parents are still going to act up over every call and the abusive coaches are going chirp in his ear all game.

The officiating is not the root cause of the issues in LH. Refs didn't cause a well known coach to cuss the 11 year olds on the opposing team last spring after they just handed his team their first loss in a while. Refs didn't cause a dad to try to choke out another dad from his own team after they lost that same weekend. Refs didn't make those parents run out on the field last week.

Again, if ref pay was the culprit, you need to justify why boys classic league officiating is appreciably better while paying their refs the exact same amount for every age group. LH needs to put protecting our daughters as the top priority, and I'm sure they've figured out the refs are only a small cog in this machine.

I don't disagree with you that a ref's primary obligation is to the game on the field. I sure would not expect an official to break up a fight between two idiot parents. But I do expect any competent ref to put their foot down hard when they see a sideline getting out of control. His or her first mode of taking care of this is to warn the coach. The coach then gets one chance to shut them up, and then the ref should throw them all out into the parking lot. So what if the parents are all "right" and the referee simply isn't doing a good job. There are avenues to take care of that. Under my recommendation of having more well-trained people available for the job by paying them more, the bad refs are eventually weeded out.

I don't follow your logic on this one at all:

"That's the thing. It's not a crappy job if you're doing it out of your love of the game. Any money you get at all is a bonus perk if you truly enjoy engaging in the game from a whole different vantage point than you did as a player, coach or spectator. The only "qualification" needed is a love of the game and willingness to learn how to apply its rules. Throwing money at it is just casting a wider net to pick up more people who think it's a crappy job but might be more inclined to stomach it for grocery money."

It is a crappy job. Look at the turnover. Look at the conditions in which they do their jobs. Listen to the sideline. It's BEYOND crappy. But if these officials were doing out of some "love of the game" then they would do it for free. No, they expect their paychecks - plain and simple.

And this line is so full of errors, I don't even know where to start:

"You're comparing PROFESSIONALS to people who are largely volunteers who get a nominal pay stipend."

Refs are largely volunteers? You want to bet on that? I've never met ONE who was a volunteer, and they sure don't get paid a "stipend". Officials get a check (or even cash) for the work they perform. Since the job is a profession most of them do on a part time basis, they are indeed professionals. Make the job worth the headache, and good people will line up to do it. People will do just about any job well for the right price; a lesson even the NFL fails to grasp.

Xara wrote:It is a crappy job. Look at the turnover. Look at the conditions in which they do their jobs. Listen to the sideline. It's BEYOND crappy.

This.

During one of my DD's QT matches this summer, an older AR turned to me during the waterbreak and suggested I become a ref. He reasoned I actually knew the LOTG since I was explaining to the parents around me that yes, that was the correct call made against us for reasons x, y, and z. My response to him... why the hell would I ever want to be a ref and deal with idiotic coaches and parents? The kids aren't the problem. They're the only reason I coached for the number of years I did. But the rest.... oy.

Plus I know I'd be the kind of ref to find my tires slashed in the parking lot because I would not hesitate to bust out the reds for most of the sideline behavior I've seen.

It'd be much more fun to let the parents rage and rampage on the sidelines every saturday and sunday (like they do anyway) and then trade it out during the week by letting the refs come visit each complainer's job for a couple of hours and return the favor. you might see some "volunteer" refs actually decline that paycheck for the opportunity to have some sideline fun.....

i heard a referee had to clear an entire sideline at Railroad Park early this morning.

txtransplant wrote:
He reasoned I actually knew the LOTG...

... I would not hesitate to bust out the reds for most of the sideline behavior I've seen.

Gunner9 wrote:

That's why I said "he thought" I knew the LOTG.

I do realize you do not show cards to spectators when ejecting them from a game and while it's not in the FIFA rules to show a card to the coach, don't some leagues here require officials to show reds to coaches or assistants they are ejecting from the game? I know that was a requirement in our old league up north and I've seen it more than once in league and tournament play down here.

I was coaching a young team today and listening to the parents from both teams going crazy about every call by the ref, bump by a player, and girls who "weren't hustling". Of course being on the complete other side, I could not pick out which parents might be crossing the line.

Then it hit me: Why are they so far away from me? I'm supposed to be in control of the parents' behavior to a certain extent, right? So why not do it like we did at U-Tiny and put the parents on the same side as the team? Do the same thing with the other team on the opposite side of the field. Then everytime a parent screams "Suzy, kick the ball harder", I can tell him or her to stop coaching. A parent yells at the ref, I can say "I've got this. Chill." It would solve so many issues so simply. The coaches and players would still have their technical areas on each side with the parents seated on either side. And as a positive by product, the parents of my players would be able to hear what I'm saying to their daughters and how I treat them. What's wrong with this setup?

The only issue is control. If you put the girls right in front of their parents, the temptation will be too great for 99% of parents. If the coach is slightly "unsuccessful" (two straight losses) and chirps at a parent in the heat of the moment, then all hell breaks loose with the "my daughter plays for Hitler" camp. I think it would kill the "team" concept in a heartbeat.

dadof3 wrote:The only issue is control. If you put the girls right in front of their parents, the temptation will be too great for 99% of parents. If the coach is slightly "unsuccessful" (two straight losses) and chirps at a parent in the heat of the moment, then all hell breaks loose with the "my daughter plays for Hitler" camp. I think it would kill the "team" concept in a heartbeat.

Fair enough evaluation. But I'm making my point based on the discussion so far in that (1) refs can't control parents and aren't really supposed to anyway, (2) it's the kids' sport, not the parents', so the kids deserve the best possible situation, and (3) coaches can't do much to control poor parent behavior when they are so far away.

I suppose a coach could lose it and go off on a problem parent if they are close by. Don't they deserve it? The other parents would likely be cheering in their minds. And for that matter, I and many other coaches regularly yell across the field to out of hand parents that they need to knock it off. So be it. People will paint coaches who exert any level of control at Hitler on this forum anyway. Might as well give them a more legitimate reason, right?

back a few years, it used to be where the teams were on opposite sides of the field and the parents sat behind each team bench. IIRC, the coaches REQUESTED the change to have the team benches on the same side and the parents on the opposite side becuase of the interference from loud-mouth parents. of course, there wasn't nearly as much money involved but that was a significant change at the time.

i think the answer is that parents/fans need to just tame it down a touch. soccer is a contact sport and little suzy is going to hit the ground every now and then. you can usually tell who's kid is on the ground by the parent thats doing the screaming anyway, especially GK parents. if you don't want your child to get hurt, there's always tiddlywinks.

JustaSport wrote:

dadof3 wrote:The only issue is control. If you put the girls right in front of their parents, the temptation will be too great for 99% of parents. If the coach is slightly "unsuccessful" (two straight losses) and chirps at a parent in the heat of the moment, then all hell breaks loose with the "my daughter plays for Hitler" camp. I think it would kill the "team" concept in a heartbeat.

Fair enough evaluation. But I'm making my point based on the discussion so far in that (1) refs can't control parents and aren't really supposed to anyway, (2) it's the kids' sport, not the parents', so the kids deserve the best possible situation, and (3) coaches can't do much to control poor parent behavior when they are so far away.

I suppose a coach could lose it and go off on a problem parent if they are close by. Don't they deserve it? The other parents would likely be cheering in their minds. And for that matter, I and many other coaches regularly yell across the field to out of hand parents that they need to knock it off. So be it. People will paint coaches who exert any level of control at Hitler on this forum anyway. Might as well give them a more legitimate reason, right?

I don't think there is an issue that the coach can't do much because they're far away. I sat on the bench with the team for a long time, and you can absolutely tell when the sideline is getting out of control. You may not hear every word, and you may have some trouble telling exactly who said what, but after the game, the parents will freely rat each other out, at least that's been my experience.

I think parents on the same sideline as the team would create more disruption, something the coach doesn't want.

Justa-I see your point. It takes a special to be able to walk that line of delivering what parents "pay for" without biting the hand that feeds them, but wouldn't that be a dream world where most coaches meant what they said...I think the manager's role could be more effective in that capacity in our world.

twotone-Honestly, soccer isn't by definition a contact sport...Now granted, there IS contact, and it IS physical, but it is NOT a contact sport. I played very physically, and my kids and their teams play a physical style, but not fraught with fouls and cheap shots, but then that is the difference isn't it?

Ballhead-see the comment to justa, maybe the managers should have that role.

actually, by definition, soccer IS a contact sport. it's listed as a contact sport under teh definition of sport. broken down into collision sport (american football, rugby, hockey), contact sport (soccer, basketball, baseball), non-contact sport (swimming, running).

Taken from my Sport Management textbook....."In "collision" sports (eg, boxing, football, and rodeo), athletes purposely hit or collide with each other or inanimate objects, including the ground, with great force. In "contact" sports (eg, basketball), athletes routinely make contact with each other or inanimate objects but usually with less force than in collision sports."

I'm sure you could find that on wikipedia also.

I wasn't trying to call you out, but that makes me laugh. My point was that IMO putting the parents behind the bench would breed more problems than it would solve...mob mentality, but that is in Psychology texts (and probably Wikipedia).

The reason I laugh about Wikipedia is that I can change a definition on Wikipedia at my whim. I had a young man "prove to me" after a debate, that according to Wikipedia pandas are striped...it doesn't say that any more (I don't think), but it did once...when he changed it-and printed it to show me.

Not that it matters, but how is running NOT a contact sport if you define contact with the ground as "contact"...by that definition, diving poorly is a contact sport...belly floppers can attest I suppose.

Anyway, I digress. Have a wonderful night. I am signing off for now, I fulfilled my quota of posts for the day.

Cheers!

Xara wrote:I don't disagree with you that a ref's primary obligation is to the game on the field. I sure would not expect an official to break up a fight between two idiot parents. But I do expect any competent ref to put their foot down hard when they see a sideline getting out of control. His or her first mode of taking care of this is to warn the coach. The coach then gets one chance to shut them up, and then the ref should throw them all out into the parking lot. So what if the parents are all "right" and the referee simply isn't doing a good job. There are avenues to take care of that. Under my recommendation of having more well-trained people available for the job by paying them more, the bad refs are eventually weeded out.

I don't follow your logic on this one at all:

"That's the thing. It's not a crappy job if you're doing it out of your love of the game. Any money you get at all is a bonus perk if you truly enjoy engaging in the game from a whole different vantage point than you did as a player, coach or spectator. The only "qualification" needed is a love of the game and willingness to learn how to apply its rules. Throwing money at it is just casting a wider net to pick up more people who think it's a crappy job but might be more inclined to stomach it for grocery money."

It is a crappy job. Look at the turnover. Look at the conditions in which they do their jobs. Listen to the sideline. It's BEYOND crappy. But if these officials were doing out of some "love of the game" then they would do it for free. No, they expect their paychecks - plain and simple.

And this line is so full of errors, I don't even know where to start:

"You're comparing PROFESSIONALS to people who are largely volunteers who get a nominal pay stipend."

Refs are largely volunteers? You want to bet on that? I've never met ONE who was a volunteer, and they sure don't get paid a "stipend". Officials get a check (or even cash) for the work they perform. Since the job is a profession most of them do on a part time basis, they are indeed professionals. Make the job worth the headache, and good people will line up to do it. People will do just about any job well for the right price; a lesson even the NFL fails to grasp.

Right on the money XARA: We are told we need to provide exact cash in LH, I am sure it the same in most leagues. Out ref yesterday was on his 4/5 games for the day. So he spend 8Hrs of his day as a volunteer? Maybe the xercise? or maybe those awesome knee high tan lines....
I don't think so - for what... for $100cash plain and simple. This refs comments "barely covers my bar tab for the weekend".

ballhead wrote:

JustaSport wrote:

dadof3 wrote:The only issue is control. If you put the girls right in front of their parents, the temptation will be too great for 99% of parents. If the coach is slightly "unsuccessful" (two straight losses) and chirps at a parent in the heat of the moment, then all hell breaks loose with the "my daughter plays for Hitler" camp. I think it would kill the "team" concept in a heartbeat.

Fair enough evaluation. But I'm making my point based on the discussion so far in that (1) refs can't control parents and aren't really supposed to anyway, (2) it's the kids' sport, not the parents', so the kids deserve the best possible situation, and (3) coaches can't do much to control poor parent behavior when they are so far away.

I suppose a coach could lose it and go off on a problem parent if they are close by. Don't they deserve it? The other parents would likely be cheering in their minds. And for that matter, I and many other coaches regularly yell across the field to out of hand parents that they need to knock it off. So be it. People will paint coaches who exert any level of control at Hitler on this forum anyway. Might as well give them a more legitimate reason, right?

I don't think there is an issue that the coach can't do much because they're far away. I sat on the bench with the team for a long time, and you can absolutely tell when the sideline is getting out of control. You may not hear every word, and you may have some trouble telling exactly who said what, but after the game, the parents will freely rat each other out, at least that's been my experience.

I think parents on the same sideline as the team would create more disruption, something the coach doesn't want.

Agreed, no question in my mind - we are here for the kids and the same sidelines may have been fine for Glasa rec - ahhh, those cute little girls with a ball knee high....

Today, they need the space from thier parents and really only encouragement. They know their coach is where they get thier direction from. We try to tell our DD as much as possible how much fun we have and enjoy watching her play... of course we have developed soem code words as gentel reminders which are a fun way to keep her head in the game!

the LHGCL officials are a joke as are the email blast. QUITE sending them; they are only adding insult to a near fatal injury

Problems or perceived problems with officiating will never go away. I am as guilty as anyone with regards to disagreeing with the refs. Which is funny since I am not a soccer rules guru.

However, being a football official for many years has taught me a bit of perspective. First of all, this is not World Cup Soccer. I know it is select and these are our DDs...but it is still youth soccer. The pay is crap. But raising the pay may not help much. I know this as peewee football pays pretty well and is usually cash up front. However, I would never subject my self to that ridiculous officiating environment unless I really needed the cash. Also, most of your really good officials with intentions to move up the officiating ranks will not work youth soccer. You have to dumb yourself down to keep control which can lead to lazy habits which could translate to mistakes in their upper level games.

I think the best thing an official can do is start tossing parents that deserve it. Warn them if possible, then toss if they continue. That simple. When I first started officiating football and worked peewee, that is what I did. Toss a parent or coach and it is church on that sideline the rest of the game. If that happens enough, parents will not go there. Of course, you need to make sure they have earned the early exit. Do not toss someone just to flex your muscles. It is very important for parents to understand that you will get very inconsistent levels of officiating in youth soccer. Will never change. If you make it too hard to be an official, they will quit and then you have no one.

textigerfan wrote:Problems or perceived problems with officiating will never go away. I am as guilty as anyone with regards to disagreeing with the refs. Which is funny since I am not a soccer rules guru.

However, being a football official for many years has taught me a bit of perspective. First of all, this is not World Cup Soccer. I know it is select and these are our DDs...but it is still youth soccer. The pay is crap. But raising the pay may not help much. I know this as peewee football pays pretty well and is usually cash up front. However, I would never subject my self to that ridiculous officiating environment unless I really needed the cash. Also, most of your really good officials with intentions to move up the officiating ranks will not work youth soccer. You have to dumb yourself down to keep control which can lead to lazy habits which could translate to mistakes in their upper level games.

I think the best thing an official can do is start tossing parents that deserve it. Warn them if possible, then toss if they continue. That simple. When I first started officiating football and worked peewee, that is what I did. Toss a parent or coach and it is church on that sideline the rest of the game. If that happens enough, parents will not go there. Of course, you need to make sure they have earned the early exit. Do not toss someone just to flex your muscles. It is very important for parents to understand that you will get very inconsistent levels of officiating in youth soccer. Will never change. If you make it too hard to be an official, they will quit and then you have no one.

I agree, well said. If the The majority of the time a strong warning should do the trick, and it may even be a bit embarrassing to the parent is certain situations. I know that the coach really does not like getting warned either when it is about what the parents are doing and it all becomes a distraction to their development process.

I can tell already that things are quite calmer just moving from U11 to U12 this year and I suspect it will continue as the parents mature. Haha.