my assessment of a ELRA 3 ref

[ex-lucy]

i am assessing on Sundays these days to help our club refs and helping blood some youngsters ...

i assessed a guy recently

i just didnt know what to say ....
U14s
kick off was set for 11:00 ... actually kicked off @ 11:07
first prematch brief was at 10:54
didnt mention 'crouch, touch, set'
scrum collapsed .. he played on
blew final whistle when he had just awarded a penalty to the losing team
etc etc

i couldnt think of 3 good things ..
line outs were ok, good gap and positioning

what do you do on such occasions?

 

[Simon Thomas]

compliment him for having his shirt tucked in, his boot laces done up and remembering to have two halves,

or suggest he might take the Level 1 RFU Coaching course, as he may have found ELRA a bit complicated.

 

[FlipFlop]

I like the "why?" approach.

Find some things he did right (not well necessarily, but right), and ask why he did it like that. Get his confidence up a bit, then ask why he did something he got wrong. He will talk through his decision making, and you can ask why at the appropriate times. Normally they quickly see they were wrong, but you can also see WHY they got it wrong (nerves, saw it different, law error) and can correct it.

Watched a guy who got the tackle sequence wrong all game (PK against tackled player for not releasing, while tackler lies all over the ball etc - consistently all game doing this, ruined the game). After the game I asked him for the tackle sequence. He got it right. I asked about a PK near the end, and he talked my through it, and suddenly his eyes went wide open, and he said - "Sh!t", then asked if that was a one off, I said no. He went and said sorry to the teams. We spoke about why etc. He has since got a lot better...

 

[Davet]

i just didnt know what to say ....
U14s
kick off was set for 11:00 ... actually kicked off @ 11:07

Can happen when teams are messing about -

first prematch brief was at 10:54

See answer above.


didnt mention 'crouch, touch, set'

Pre-match brief must include scrum engage


scrum collapsed .. he played on

That is the most serious issue, and really has GOT to be addressed.

blew final whistle when he had just awarded a penalty to the losing team

were they >50 behind, or were they a long way behind and the weather very inclement? Failing anything like that (which i doubt from your post) then not good.


So we have a few things to focus on in gterms of what can be done better - max of 3 things - for me the CTS procedure and the scrum collapse select themselves as 1 and 2 - the timing... ending on a PK... maybe - was everything else OK, in particular what was the breakdown like, did he keep players on their feet, did he keep the ball available?

Were the things you mentioned one off -a single collapsed scrum where he may have played on because the ball was actually right at the back and away the next split second - or was it one of a series? (that's not to say playing on is OK in that case, but it is different from a regular event that he was habitually ignoring)

Its difficult to tell, if you pick out and present only the "highlights". Did the kids enjoy the game?

As to things he did well - I don't know, was he up with play, did he use his voice to help manage players, how was his whistle tone, lineouts, managing offside in open play and at scrums, rucks mauls?

 

[Blackberry]

i am assessing on Sundays these days to help our club refs and helping blood some youngsters ...

i assessed a guy recently

i just didnt know what to say ....
U14s
kick off was set for 11:00 ... actually kicked off @ 11:07
first prematch brief was at 10:54
didnt mention 'crouch, touch, set'
scrum collapsed .. he played on
blew final whistle when he had just awarded a penalty to the losing team
etc etc

i couldnt think of 3 good things ..
line outs were ok, good gap and positioning

what do you do on such occasions?

Hi ex-Lucy, good to be hearing from you again

With any person who you find to be struggling, I try to establish the context. I'm looking to see if he has the potential, so I find out how much training he has had and learning he has carried out. If it transpires his poor performance is a training / support issue, you tackle it in a very different way that you would an ability issue. So, its important to establish the cause.

I worked at a school which had a staff turn over which would have shamed a kamakaze squadroon. My team were great, they stayed on, but I made sure they got access to top level training and they never got the poor perfromance reviews many others did. During a DofE inspection they were described by an HMI as outstanding, but (and I joke not) took the shine off the victory when the HMI found them doing a conga down the classroom corridor singing "We are all outstanding, we are all outstanding" to the tune of "We're on our way to Wembley". The point I'm making is that his poor performance could be down to poor preparation opportunities offered by his society.

Depending on what I found out I might have said. "OK. you've got the potential to be a good ref, but today showed up a lack of training which we must put right straight away"

Don't automatically feel you've got to ask him first what he thought, then say something nice before launching into the "needs work" section. We are all quite bright (if sometimes opinionated) people in the refs world. What we want is hard, useful constructive feedback. However, questions to him can help establish the context of his performance.

When I started to play prop, a whizened old LH used to tell me tricks when I played against him in training. These would have taken me seasons to learn, but just a minute to be taught. Its the same with advising. Lay out clearly where he is, then if he has a mentor they can work out a programme, or if not, you and/or the society can work out what to attack and when.

 

[SimonSmith]

The 3 good 3 bad framework is a template that shouldn't be universally applied.

(side note: coming from the HR side of the Force, a good feedback session needs either a lot of training, a lot of experience, excellent interpersonal skills, or a combination thereof)

A theme I'm seeing with new referees is the inability to have a refereeing framework - why we apply some laws in the way that we do; what our job actually is. There is a way to deliver some very telling feedback in the form of Q&A and discussion, rather than delivering specific points.

Try saying "here's what I do, and here's why....." in a feedback session. Don't tell him what's wrong, or what he missed. Very few people, outside of those who get that kind of feedback on a regular basis, react well to that framework, BryanA might, your average club ref won't. And have a reason for why you make a recommendation for improvement. Most people have a WIIFM mentality - or need to know what the imperative is for change. Give it to him

 

[Dixie]

Most people have a WIIFM mentality - or need to know what the imperative is for change. Give it to him

Guessing here - What's In It For Me?

Perhaps you've spent too long Stateside!

 

[Dixie]

The 3 good 3 bad framework is a template that shouldn't be universally applied.

I agree. Early in my career I was managing a team doing interesting and demanding work in a toxic environment - low pay, jobsworth attitudes, higher management nitpicking over expenses, constant supervisory challenges to decisions made. Staff turnover was high. The new arrivals were transfers in from elsewhere in the organisation - arriving with attitude. The job was significantly more complex than they were used to and they needed time to get up to speed. Any early evaluation pointing out failings risked having them flounce out with their expectations confirmed. I found the best way to handle them was to stress their importance and that of their role to the organisation; to shine a light on the challenges and interesting aspects of the job; and to offer insights into the way some of those challenges could be handled. In time, the better ones rose to those challenges; the weaker could be offered support through more standard evaluation approaches, or weeded out as necessary.

 

[Phil E]

Best way to approach these debriefs is by using the REVIEW process.
When I can get to my laptop I will upload it for you.

 

[Dickie E]

I agree. Early in my career I was managing a team doing interesting and demanding work in a toxic environment - low pay, jobsworth attitudes, higher management nitpicking over expenses, constant supervisory challenges to decisions made. Staff turnover was high. The new arrivals were transfers in from elsewhere in the organisation - arriving with attitude. The job was significantly more complex than they were used to and they needed time to get up to speed. Any early evaluation pointing out failings risked having them flounce out with their expectations confirmed. I found the best way to handle them was to stress their importance and that of their role to the organisation; to shine a light on the challenges and interesting aspects of the job; and to offer insights into the way some of those challenges could be handled. In time, the better ones rose to those challenges; the weaker could be offered support through more standard evaluation approaches, or weeded out as necessary.

Dixie, I've a new avatar for you ...

 

[Simon Thomas]

whole elements of the three RFU Assessor courses I have attended cover the review and de-brief process, as well as topics like learning types, motivations, etc.

I have also done similar modules in various management courses at work.

It isn't easy to do it properly and effectively.

 

[Dixie]

Dixie, I've a new avatar for you ...

View attachment 2463

:clap: I'll get you, Dickie!