New Haven vs Long Island

[jboulet4648]

Happy Reading!!!

 

[Robert Burns]

Seems like you had a really good game, It still makes me think that the assessors are looking at too much detail in these reports. But you know what you are are getting, you've had a fair few.

Well done Judah, What levels are above Level 1 in US?

 

[jboulet4648]

First Class which is International Tier 1 U23 and Our Super LEague final, then International A which is International Tier 1 A side, and Tier 2 Test, and the highest is International Tier 1 Test

 

[FlipFlop]

In my view, these reports are way too detailed (stat heaven/hell), but fail to touch on management of the game, which is pretty much all ours do.

I can't help but think that assessors commenting on if every decision was correct or material, from 60 yards away (even with a video), is not the best. Did they really see everything? I doubt it.

But each country to their own.

 

[jboulet4648]

Which is what I found the assessments in Scotland did, and I did really well there. Our referee coaches in the US focus on management and qualitative aspects, our assessors, the ones who determine our grade have the hard core quantitative analysis....

The way the scoring works, is that is you miss two things at the tackle in 80 minutes, your score for that segment goes from 5 to 4 for the tackle....

 

[Davet]

you miss two things at the tackle in 80 minutes

But the "miss" is in the opinion of an assessor who is normally far further away than the referee. It is not unknown for people watching a game to think they have seen something which they have not.

Why is the assessors opinion of what happened, at that level of detail, better than the refs? The real advantage the assessor has is seeing the wider picture -being further away. He has the same view as a TJ, and his his view on what happened is just as valuable as that of the TJ.

 

[Deeps]

But the "miss" is in the opinion of an assessor who is normally far further away than the referee.

True, he also has the benefit of running the DVD through the incident as many times as he needs to.

 

[Davet]

True, he also has the benefit of running the DVD through the incident as many times as he needs to.

True. If there is a recording, and if its of decent quality, and if its able to focus in quite close to the tackle zone.

Most non-professional recordings of games are not that good.

In this case the assessor made the point that the quality was actually poor, and the video partial.

I do think assessors are sticking their necks out by commenting on play of which they have a poor view. Their value is their wisdom and experience in terms of positional play by the ref, game management, and advice on aspects of the wider game - including warnings about thinsg refs may miss by being too focused - banana back lines give a winger 10m head start, etc. I really struggle to see how an advisor 25m away can have a better view of the close in play at the breakdown than the ref. Their efforts would be far better directed to wider issues.<!-- / message -->

 

[ExHookah]

To be fair, this evaluator is an IRB evaluator, who regularly travels to assess test match referees. So I think he has a decent idea about what he's doing and how best to do it.

He's also an MIT graduate, so the stats are second nature to him.

 

[SimonSmith]

The assessment system in the USA is, in my professional opinion, unfit for purpose.

It's a statistical process that is designed to give a number. It is NOT intended to give qualititative feedback designed to help improve. It's possible to discern trends from within the stats, but that is not the primary design of the form.

Speaking as an HR professional with an interest in performance management, if this methodology was presented to me at work, I'd junk it post haste.

Let me compare my "assessment" experiences in the UK and in the US. And I'll start with the qualification that there are good and bad assessors in both.
I learnt far more in the UK than I have over here. I can read back over my reports from Hampshire and still see the key learning points. I do the same with the reports from the US and don't get them.

Too many times I have been advised over here by someone who hasn't moved an inch during the entire 84 minutes, and feels qualified to tell me what I missed from over 70 yards away.
Too many don't have an understanding of the game, or refereeing, or even the laws. I can't tell you the number of times I've had to go to the law book to prove a point. Trying to "manage" a game has led me to more problems than I care to think about.

Is there a feedback mechanism to allow for better assessing? Nope. Nothing formal, anyway. And the one time that I tried anything informally I ended up on a shitlist.

As I said, there are good and bad. The guy that saw me in NorCal engineered a really good discussion; one guy in Potomac...it's a short list.

In short - the system is bad; that is exacerbated by the fact that the implementers of the system are often bad as well.

<walks off having vented>

 

[jboulet4648]

Personally, I have no problem with the assessment, if in someones opinion I missed, or misjudged an infringement which they felt the saw, I want to know. Especially if it changes the context of the match. The person who did this assessment I greatly respect, and is one of our countries great rugby minds. I have no issues with his report, especially with my needing to be slightly more strict with the technical stuff, early jumping in LO. Yes they did early jump, I told them to bring the person down, however, outside of that I did not address it. I was trying not to blow my whistle, and get flow, however, on one occassion it ended up hurting the throwing in side. The not straight miss, well that's an opinion one, I need to see the video.

I have more of an issue with the overall process we use. If a B2 referee and I refereed the same match, and got the same score, a B2 referee would get an above grade, B1 evaluation. Myself as a B3 would get a B2 evaluation. Slightly skewed. My feeling is if two refs go out and ref identical matches, and one is a B3 and one is a B2, well both should get a B1 eval.

 

[Simon Thomas]

It is only the lower grade levels in England that don't have loads of stats from assessors. But at all levels a Hampshire Advisor / Assessor should be able to tell you for example :

i) penalty count by team by half
ii) free kicks ditto
iii) # scrums and line outs ditto
iv) critical incidents and resolution
v) spotted / missed patterns, and use of correct / incorrect sanctions

In England once you get to Group level and onto National Panel, you get both a coach and and assessor each match - so no hiding place !

The Group and Panel assessor forms are complicated. I have used them occasionally for level 6/7 refs and the guys were shocked that I had a minute by minute analysis of what they had done (or not done !), and how the match patterns emerged.

And there are reams of stats to be applied - and promotion does become far more of a numbers game in a similar way to that explained for the USA guys - of course once you have achieved acceptable match management standards and deal with all critical incidents correctly.

FIRA Assessors in Europe use a similar system - you start off with a prefect score and lose marks for things missed / done incorrectly.

One must make a very clear distinction between the role of assessors and coaches / advisors (these have more qualitative than quant). But assessors should have qual input too - well according to our Society's IRB Assessor they should and this is apparently a shortcoming of some second tier country IRB guys.

I think one of the USA Assessors issues is that many don't have the experience in playing or refereeing they need - and that came from a USA National Assessors who I have known well (and who was a good referee in his own right a number of years ago). This is in my experience a common problem with the second tier and below countries - they just don't have the experienced guys who can develop and assess referees to elite level.

The assessement process is the final element in the overall development of the referee, not an objective init's own right. So it must be fully integrated with development & coaching, not isolated.

 

[jboulet4648]

My referee coach says get all the intangibles down and the assessments will follow....