Green v Blue - Assessor's Report

Simon Griffiths


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,914
Post Likes
0
Referee Simon Griffiths
Grade 10
Result Torrington 18 v 17 Totnes


Description of the Match and its challenge for the game (Level 9)

The match was keenly contested but played in good spirit. There was only one notable incident of foul play where a Torrington player fended off a tackle with a straight arm. Totnes should have won the game comfortably, but their handling let them down on several occasions when in sight of the goal line. With the score 10-10 at half time the game was always going to be close and Torrington with the advantage of playing down the slope won it with a try two minutes from time.
Simon handled the game in a quiet and non-officious way which was appreciated by the players. He could perhaps stamp his own personality on the game a little more, but his verbal communication was generally effective, with both sides prepared to listen and act on his commands. He refereed the tackle law well and thus kept players on their feet most of the time. He is fit and always arrived at the breakdown in good time to see the initial offence. He does nevertheless, lack a sprint pace. He should work on this, since games at a higher level will be much faster. The overall penalty count was relatively low.
In all honesty, the match did not present much of a challenge to him, but you can only referee the game put in front of you. The one incident of foul play did however, warrant a yellow card, and thus in this area he could have been less lenient.


Please outline up to three areas for improvement (using Key Components) and OFFER SOLUTIONS

MAUL: I felt that Simon was rather static, once he had located the ball. Consequently, he missed players joining the maul offside, as well as the three-quarters creeping offside behind him. Furthermore, as the maul was driven to the goal line he was relatively slow to get in goal in order to judge any possible try.
Therefore, I feel he must circulate the maul a lot more (on the side of the team in possession). In addition, he should avoid “the chariot position”, since he is likely to get in the way of players joining the maul. Rubber necking is a suitable ploy to catch the three-quarters creeping offside. If players spot you doing this, it may well be enough of a deterrent. Always try to anticipate well in advance when there is a possibility of a try being scored and get into a position in-goal, early.

ADVANTAGE: On the day, Simon’s application of the advantage law was rather inconsistent, especially in the first half. In particular, he tended to blow too early for some offences (e.g. not straight at a line out and the ball not travelling the full 10 meters at a kick off) and thus leave enough time for advantage to develop. On the other hand, on occasions when advantage accrued for the defending side in their own 22, it was left for too long.
Unless are dealing with a safety issue or instances under Law 8.3, then always give time for an advantage to develop. You can always bring play back to the original offence even if considerable time has elapsed. Keep teams informed as to the progress of advantage; this was, on the whole, done well. It is best to keep your whistle away from your mouth in order that you give yourself time to assess the situation. However, defensive advantage is generally much shorter than when the team that has the advantage is in attack.


Please list up to three of the referee’s strengths in this match

TACKLE: This area was refereed well. Simon got to the breakdown quickly and was in position to give verbal commands or indeed, penalize any miscreants. He identified the offences accurately and apart from a 10 minute period early in the second half, succeeded in keeping most players on their feet.

KICKS: Simon kept players onside throughout the match. His fitness meant he had no problems keeping up with the game and only penalized when necessary e.g. when players loitered rather than retiring from the 10 meter zone after a kick and thus cut down their opposition’s options having not listened to his verbal communication.


Match Management and Potential

MD
Capable of refereeing at the next level.
 

Simon Griffiths


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,914
Post Likes
0
I have a couple of issues with this report, which I did voice to my assessor (this is actually the first time that I have done such a thing, and might have contributed to the MD, despite a strong suggestion that it would be a G...).

I disagree entirely that the fend off that I penalised should have been a yellow card. It really wasn't very bad, slightly badly timed, but in no way malicious. The game was being played in a good spirit, and a YC would have been completely out of place. (He even writes that it was played in a good spirit...)

He was also advocating getting to the in-goal side of a maul as soon as it was within about 7m of the line. I argued that given the speed that mauls usually travel at (and indeed the fact that they can be pulled down now), I had plenty of time to ascertain where the ball was, which in due course would make my job in-goal much easier as I would be able to more accurately be able to anticipate where the ball would be.

It is quite interesting however, reading through my previous reports, that my man management comments differ in different games. This is something I am quite pleased with, as it shows I can adapt my own style to the type of game put infront of me. :)

On the positive, my assessor passed on a nice little bit of information from his wanders around the ground. He didn't hear any negative comments... :p
 
Last edited:

Simon Griffiths


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,914
Post Likes
0
Without wishing to give the assessor too hard a time...

He also listed the match as a L10, when it was a Devon One match, L9.
 

ExHookah


Argentina Referees in Argentina
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
2,444
Post Likes
1
Without wishing to give the assessor too hard a time...

He also listed the match as a L10, when it was a Devon One match, L9.

So the level is set in stone, and not flexible, at least in terms of evaluations, depending on the actual standard of the match in question? So if it's a level 9 on paper, but the match itself is of a poor quality, then they drop it on the report by a level. That's the process I'm familiar with, and one I think works well for reports.
 

Dixie


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
12,773
Post Likes
338
So the level is set in stone, and not flexible, at least in terms of evaluations, depending on the actual standard of the match in question? So if it's a level 9 on paper, but the match itself is of a poor quality, then they drop it on the report by a level. That's the process I'm familiar with, and one I think works well for reports.
Hookah, I have no idea how this is managed in my Society, but if two L.7 teams engage in a slugfest that takes the quality of rugby down to L.10, IMO that in no way reduces correspondingly the challenges set to the referee who's been invited to officiate. The flankers still get there much quicker than would happen at L.10, and the referee must be there to manage the contest. The lineout drills will be more ambitious, even if poorly executed. The front rows will be more competitive, with greater willingness (even if not necessarily greater ability) to put one over their oppo.

Personally, if I were appointed to and evaluated on a game in which the teams don't produce the quality of rugby expected at that level, I would hope to have my performance judged against the challenges of the match, rather than the quality of the rugby.
 

Simon Thomas


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
12,848
Post Likes
189
As always it is a brave and honest referee to go public on here and I reply in the same way, only trying to help in your progress.

For League matches in England the level is set in stone. Your assessor may well have set Devon 1 as level 10 incorrectly - it says 9 on report on here, did you change it ?

London 1 = SW 1 level 5
London 2 = SW 2 level 6
London 3 = Southern Counties / Western Counties level 7
London 4 = Cornwall / Devon level 8
Hampshire / Surrey / Sussex 1 = Devon 1 level 9

same applies for Midlands and North divisions but I don't know the structures well enough

As for the actual report, it appears you and the assessor saw the straight arm differently - it happens. At higher levels, such an action would require a YC in many cases, and it sounds as if you may still be a "players' ref" and trying to manage things too much.

The MD is unlikely to be a result of arguing your side of things with the assessor - reading the report I would expect to see MD as you did not satisfy all key components most of the time" - Maul and Advantage both being in need of attention. A G should not have been on the assessor's agenda, as this report is a clear MD, not a borderline G.

An MD is not a problem grade and the assessor has said you are capable of refereeing at the next level - for a 10+2 freferee doing a level 9 (or 10) match a satisfactory result.

Having watched you myself, I am concerned to see that the assessor notes a lack of sprint pace still, which will prevent you going much higher.

Being static at maul is a common level 9/0 referee issue and you need to get more mobile to move up. By now you should not be adopting the chariot position. Missing offside players joining the maul and backs creeping up behind you must be addressed and are enough to justify the MD alone.

Inconsistent advantage application will kill you in moving up, and I suggest you need to work on it with a level 6 / 7 referee or similar mentor. One suggestion I have is for you to visualise different scenarios, consider the scrum / penalty differential, and work through the time to run it based on type of offence, position on pitch, temper and stage of match, and most importantly what is on offer to the players. You need to establish a framework for advantage consistency to work from.

As I know, you have good management and communication skills and lots of potential. Good luck.
 

Lee Lifeson-Peart


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
7,798
Post Likes
999
Current Referee grade:
Level 6
...North divisions but I don't know the structures well enough

.

For ST or anyone who's interested Yorkshire/Northumberland /Durham=East side of the North Division - you'll have to ask Cumbria/Lancs lads for their bit.

Level 5 - North 1 :mad:
Level 6 - North 2 East:(
Level 7 - Yorkshire 1 & Northumberland/Durham 1 :nono:
Level 8 - Yorkshire 2 & N/D 2 :chin:
Level 9 - Yorkshire 3 & N/D 3 :sleep:
Level 10 - Yorkshire 4 :confused:
Level 11 - Yorkshire 5 A&B - Welcome t'jungle we've got fun & games!:eek:

NB the emoticons are just a bit of fun and are in no way meant to reflect the relative refereeing enjoyment to be had at any particular level - honest!
 
Last edited:

ex-lucy


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
3,913
Post Likes
0
SG .. how many games have you reffed this season?
adv and static at maul, is that due to just lack of match practice. match fitness? could be...
 

Mat 04


Referees in Wales
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
906
Post Likes
0
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
What do these Grades mean? MD , G, etc etc
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
Good (G) complied with all the control and communications descriptors on nearly all occasions

Minor Development (MD)complied with all the control and communications descriptors on most occasions

Needs Development (ND) complied with all the control and communications descriptors not regularly enough

Significant Development (SD) complied with all the control and communications descriptors too infrequently
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,073
Post Likes
2,346
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Good (G) complied with all the control and communications descriptors on nearly all occasions

Minor Development (MD)complied with all the control and communications descriptors on most occasions

Needs Development (ND) complied with all the control and communications descriptors not regularly enough

Significant Development (SD) complied with all the control and communications descriptors too infrequently

So what happens if you have a blinder and:
complied with all the control and communications descriptors on all occasions?

I suspect the answer is, it never happens and even if it did I would still give a 'G' :nono:
 

Simon Griffiths


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,914
Post Likes
0
ex, two full length matches over a month ago and two tournaments in the USA three weeks ago.

I have never disagreed with an assessor before (well, maybe on one minor point, and only ever slightly), however, I am quite shocked by how much I have disagreed with this one... :chin:

...

Almost without fail I get complimented on my advantage, not just avoiding negative comment, but actual tick in box stuff (checking through my previous reports and thinking to the captain's cards we have in Gloucester). Hopefully I just had a naff day in that department. Having said that, one can always improve any facet.

Advantage was an area that I disagreed on the application of with the assessor. He was suggesting that my advantage was inconsistent. I agreed that I had blown too early on a couple of occassions, missing obvious situations which might have given advantage. However, he was advocating that all defensive advantages should be shorter (whether they were on the 5m line or the 22m line, or moving up towards the 10m line). If there is an opportunity for a side to take advantage of a gap on the 22m line and break through and make 50+m then I'm going to give that chance if they're not under too much pressure.

ST, Interesting to know on the MD front, thank you. I had read it differently given his comments on the day and regarding the fend off incident in the report. I think then, that the assessor should consider his debrief methods and not suggest (verbally) that it could well be a G.

Players' ref or otherwise, I am absolutely adamant that the fend off was not a YC in that match, and in virtually any circumstance in another match. In more detail: The player was raising his arm (bent) to make the fend off, with less than a metre to go he was tackled from behind. In my opinion, this act caused him to stiffen his arm through reflex and fall forwards thereby catching the other player coming in to make the tackle. A combination of timing and external factors, there was no intent whatsoever.

PS. How can one show a sprint pace when the match doesn't call for it? There was one break away try from one of the wingers and I beat him to ingoal from the half-way line. :chin:
 

Simon Thomas


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
12,848
Post Likes
189
RFU have a structured assessment framework for all levels of the 'Referee Pathway', with different Forms.

ELRA Stage 3 Form - for first assessment during first 6 mathes
Form 1 - Coaching Report - levels 15 to 6
Form 2 - Assessment Form - levels 15 to 6 (for development referees or on exchange)
Group & Panel Assessment - highly statistical and objective report
Elite and IRB Match Observer Report - even more statistical detail

It is Form 2 - Assessment Form which has the grades G, MD, ND, SD which is an overall grade based on match management & communication, plus overall competence based on key components of advantage, ruck, maul, tackle, scrum, line out, etc. This is measured against the old CBRDS (Competence Based Referee Development System), where each area has a set of major and minor items (e.g. for Tackle - tackler release, tackled release, arriving players on feet, etc) and you measure against 4 rough ranges :

G = Good (applied all key elements and most of minor most of the time (60-80% +)
MD = Minor Development (applied most of key and minor elements most of time over 60-80%)
ND = Needs Developent (applied most of key and minor a majroty of the time approx 50-60%)
SD = Significant Development (failed to apply one or more key components most of the time under 60%)

So in Simon G's case the assessor has identified his positioning at maul meant on occasions he missed side entry and offsides (both major elements) - and both enough to get a MD alone, if not applied most of the time and with other missing elements it could have gone down to ND. And also he had issue with consistency of advantage, so a MD sounds fair enough.
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
So what happens if you have a blinder and:
complied with all the control and communications descriptors on all occasions?

I suspect the answer is, it never happens and even if it did I would still give a 'G' :nono:
There is plenty of space for comment as well.
 

Simon Thomas


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
12,848
Post Likes
189
So what happens if you have a blinder and:
complied with all the control and communications descriptors on all occasions?

I suspect the answer is, it never happens and even if it did I would still give a 'G' :nono:

Exactly Phil E !

I have never seen or given a perfect refereeing performance - we can all improve something and we all miss something.

A serious comment and personal view as a thought for everyone - we could be over-rating our performances by between 10-30% depending on how self-critical we are. Often we will focus on our small errors, and assume or kid ourselves that we got the main things right. When you have a coach when you get to higher levels, he will do this with you and that can be quite a surprise over the start of that coaching relationship.

If you don't have a coach, get yourself video'ed - possibly a big shocker initially, but a massive help to realism going forward and identifiying what you need to work on.
 

ex-lucy


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
3,913
Post Likes
0
ST. i had a chat with Mike from London Society prematch who is a level 5 group referee about your points about level 5 assessments ... great conversation!!
and i thought i had this reffing lark licked !
i learnt so much from 20 mins chatting to him about what you typed and his answers....e.g. downtime .. "oh yes, some games you work harder in downtime than in normal play."
he rcvs 3 or 4 pages of notes/ comments from advisor even if he had a good game. Talking to his assessor afterwards, it seems Mike did have a goodun but they still had a long chat.
interesting statistic .. only 2 pens awarded to winning team all match.
the second was the winning pg in 63rd minute of second half.

i made a point in my game on Sunday of using my downtime to chat to skippers and certain players. good feedback for it too.
 

Simon Thomas


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
12,848
Post Likes
189
None of us ever stop learning !

And you don't know what you don't know until you know it.

This is why I get a little annoyed with level 12 refs or terrace / armchair refs, who have no practical ecperience or knowledge, being critical of those active at much higher levels.
 

Dixie


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
12,773
Post Likes
338
This is why I get a little annoyed with level 12 refs or terrace / armchair refs, who have no practical ecperience or knowledge, being critical of those active at much higher levels.
Ouch! that's us put in our place, Chopper.
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,073
Post Likes
2,346
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Ouch! that's us put in our place, Chopper.

Terrace refs cant see this forum Dixie.

Do you think thats why Simon said it? [runs ducking and weaving]
 

Simon Thomas


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
12,848
Post Likes
189
Terrace refs cant see this forum Dixie.

Do you think thats why Simon said it? [runs ducking and weaving]

of course Phil - preventative management :D

and Dixie with your playing experience level, I would hardly place you as a run-of-the-mill level 12 ref, as is shown by your rise to level 9 !
 
Top