Ask me about being a FIFA-certified soccer referee

[DrewDevil]

How do you keep from falling asleep during the games?

[anklebreaker]

[ QUOTE ]
When a guy fakes an injury rolling around on the ground and then hops back up and continues to play as if nothing has happened, why don't you penalize him? This is the single reason why American non-wuss sports fans will never embrace your silly game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see. Why have american non-wuss sports fans have embraced rugby?

[ClassicBob]

[ QUOTE ]
How do you keep from falling asleep during the games?

[/ QUOTE ]

This has been a pretty quality thread so far, don't [censored] it up by trolling.

[DrewDevil]

Hey come on, these are just jokes, they bounce right off.

[anfernee]

why is there only one referee in the middle?
have you ever been proposed with a bribe to throw a match to a particular team?

[libertos]

[ QUOTE ]
One of the reasons that Pierluigi Collina was such a great referee (and you can see this if you watch footage of matches he worked) is that he was in such outstanding physical shape that he could keep up with the players and was frequently standing 2 feet away from the play whenever he called a foul. Players aren't going to argue with you as much if you call them for a foul when you're right on top of them. When a referee is out of position because he's not in shape to keep up with the game, that's when things can get ugly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think Collina was a great referee? I haven't seen that many of his games but people generally seem to think he was a big attention whore who made himself the centerpiece of just about any game instead of concentrating on making the right judgements and staying on the background.

[adsman]

I'm a rugby and cricket fan. I'd like to know why soccer doesn't get with the times and have a proper third off-field referee who can check all the video angles as these other sports now do.

[cognito20]

[ QUOTE ]
What's the pay like (if you don't mind answering)

[/ QUOTE ]

Very dependent on what level it is you're working. When I first started doing indoor league games when I started out, it was $15-20 a match. High school is more along the lines of $50-60 a match, but since you can frequently work two matches in one day that can be doubled if you want to put in the time. In the NCAA, it depends whether I'm the main referee or an assistant, the guy in the middle generally gets in the neighborhood of $300 and the assistants pull in about $175-200. There's no standardized amount, it really depends on the school since the officials are paid by the home school. Colgate, Syracuse and SUNY-Cortland tend to pay better than most schools I work (Cornell apparently pays very well but I can't referee their matches), and Hartwick, SUNY-Binghamton and LeMoyne are a little stingier. One of the two games I refereed in the A-League I made $575, which is the most I've ever made for one game. Although I did get one $2000 paycheck for the entire 2005 Dallas Cup.

In short, it's nothing you're gonna retire on. Even Level 1 referees have other jobs.

[cognito20]

[ QUOTE ]
why is there only one referee in the middle?

[/ QUOTE ]

In some of the matches I work, there isn't. There is only one referee if the diagonal system is being used, in which there is one on-field referee and two assistants running the touchlines. In the dual system, which is used if there are only 2 officials available to work a given match (I see this one used more at high school or NJCAA level), there are 2 on-field officials, each of whom is responsible for one half of the pitch, and no linesmen. With the diagonal system, it's a lot easier to adjudge things like offside since the assistant referee tends to stay even with the second-to-last defender and is actively looking for it. In the dual system, offside becomes a lot harder to judge correctly since by the nature of the system the referees are sometimes out of position to see where precisely the player was when the ball was played to him or her, but more of the on-field fouls tend to get called since there are 2 sets of eyes watching more closely. There is also a system called the "double-dual" system with 3 on-field referees, but that one doesn't get used very much.

[ QUOTE ]
have you ever been proposed with a bribe to throw a match to a particular team?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, I don't work in the Italian league. :P Seriously, though, I don't officiate at a high enough level where anyone would bother. Even if it did happen, I enjoy refereeing and the game far too much to risk a career I get a great deal of satisfaction from for a little extra money to cheat. If anyone approached me with a bribe, I'd basically tell them to go s**t in their hat.

[MediaPA]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a rugby and cricket fan. I'd like to know why soccer doesn't get with the times and have a proper third off-field referee who can check all the video angles as these other sports now do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cricket the review is basically just used to determine if someone is out of the crease when the stumps go down. Perhaps for a catch??

Rugby I'm not familar with anymore - perhaps just for tries?

What do you want reviewed in soccer exactly? Goals, fouls, offsides?? I think you need to weigh the effect/benefit of reviews for most of these situations versus the delays to a game which is meant to be fairly continuous in nature.

A minor comparison to basketball could be made as there are very limited reviews there - 3 pointer, time at end of game. Baseball (nearly cricket) also has no reviews currently. I'm not seeing the added benefit of a in game review system.