I've mentioned this on another thread but I just thought I'd see what people's thoughts were. Before I start I know people will baulk straight away at the professional bit, but I think it is essential that refereeing standards across the game improves significantly and if that means spending a bit of money getting it right then maybe it's worth looking into.
I'd suggest each county has a full time professional referee, either from within the county or allocated to it. This will provide a referees board of 32 officials who will officiate only at inter county matches. I would suggest that they meet each Monday to assess the performances in each of the games that weekend then a delegation will attend a follow up meeting with a steering committee of players representatives (maybe GPA) , past players and a GAA representative to report on what was discussed and the outcome of any controversial decisions. Referees are graded on their performances and allocated games accordingly.
Outside officiating the referees will spend their time training referees in their county, visiting club games at all levels giving feedback to referees on their performances and visiting clubs to advise and help with the application of the rule book. The referee committee will also form a voice in the changing of any rules of the game.
Hopefully, better consultation between inter county referees and closer connections between the county ref and the club refs will encourage a greater level of consistency across the board and give players and supporters a bit more confidence in their referees.
Downside - they are getting paid, human nature means they will still make mistakes, the pressure will be greater and they will probably get even more abuse.
Quote from: BennyHarp on July 26, 2018, 10:14:33 PM
I've mentioned this on another thread but I just thought I'd see what people's thoughts were. Before I start I know people will baulk straight away at the professional bit, but I think it is essential that refereeing standards across the game improves significantly and if that means spending a bit of money getting it right then maybe it's worth looking into.
I'd suggest each county has a full time professional referee, either from within the county or allocated to it. This will provide a referees board of 32 officials who will officiate only at inter county matches. I would suggest that they meet each Monday to assess the performances in each of the games that weekend then a delegation will attend a follow up meeting with a steering committee of players representatives (maybe GPA) , past players and a GAA representative to report on what was discussed and the outcome of any controversial decisions. Referees are graded on their performances and allocated games accordingly.
Outside officiating the referees will spend their time training referees in their county, visiting club games at all levels giving feedback to referees on their performances and visiting clubs to advise and help with the application of the rule book. The referee committee will also form a voice in the changing of any rules of the game.
Hopefully, better consultation between inter county referees and closer connections between the county ref and the club refs will encourage a greater level of consistency across the board and give players and supporters a bit more confidence in their referees.
Downside - they are getting paid, human nature means they will still make mistakes, the pressure will be greater and they will probably get even more abuse.
Biggest downside is that by compromising on paying referees it considerably weakens the arguments about the amateur status of everyone else. If the GAA is going to pay refs how can they still get their knickers in a twist about managers lifting dough on under the table.
Quote from: trileacman on July 26, 2018, 11:02:33 PM
Biggest downside is that by compromising on paying referees it considerably weakens the arguments about the amateur status of everyone else. If the GAA is going to pay refs how can they still get their knickers in a twist about managers lifting dough on under the table.
The Association's long since been compromised, it's not like there's no money in the 'amateur' system any more, and we only need to look at the involvement of Sky, the GPA, etc.
Something needs to be done, the standard of refereeing at times is shocking, truly.
Two things.
1. That adds up to over a million a year in salaries, before administration costs, travel costs, and other overheads. To be honest with you, I'm sick to f**king death of the rising costs of competing in GAA for clubs and members, as a large part of these increases is simply to cover administrator salaries... and the first rule of being a paid administrator is you will want paid support to share the workload.
2. The biggest problems we face with the officiating of games is that a) the rules on tackling are open to interpretation, and b) there is a culture in our game whereby cheating isn't just acceptable, it's demanded by the fans. So a referee, unfortunately, rarely gets to referee a game, but instead he's a the pantomime villain. Paid referees can't fix these problems.
Quote from: trileacman on July 26, 2018, 11:02:33 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on July 26, 2018, 10:14:33 PM
I've mentioned this on another thread but I just thought I'd see what people's thoughts were. Before I start I know people will baulk straight away at the professional bit, but I think it is essential that refereeing standards across the game improves significantly and if that means spending a bit of money getting it right then maybe it's worth looking into.
I'd suggest each county has a full time professional referee, either from within the county or allocated to it. This will provide a referees board of 32 officials who will officiate only at inter county matches. I would suggest that they meet each Monday to assess the performances in each of the games that weekend then a delegation will attend a follow up meeting with a steering committee of players representatives (maybe GPA) , past players and a GAA representative to report on what was discussed and the outcome of any controversial decisions. Referees are graded on their performances and allocated games accordingly.
Outside officiating the referees will spend their time training referees in their county, visiting club games at all levels giving feedback to referees on their performances and visiting clubs to advise and help with the application of the rule book. The referee committee will also form a voice in the changing of any rules of the game.
Hopefully, better consultation between inter county referees and closer connections between the county ref and the club refs will encourage a greater level of consistency across the board and give players and supporters a bit more confidence in their referees.
Downside - they are getting paid, human nature means they will still make mistakes, the pressure will be greater and they will probably get even more abuse.
Biggest downside is that by compromising on paying referees it considerably weakens the arguments about the amateur status of everyone else. If the GAA is going to pay refs how can they still get their knickers in a twist about managers lifting dough on under the table.
Yeah I get your point but my thoughts would be that if paid CDA can work within counties then why not paid officials?
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 26, 2018, 11:14:10 PM
Quote from: trileacman on July 26, 2018, 11:02:33 PM
Biggest downside is that by compromising on paying referees it considerably weakens the arguments about the amateur status of everyone else. If the GAA is going to pay refs how can they still get their knickers in a twist about managers lifting dough on under the table.
The Association's long since been compromised, it's not like there's no money in the 'amateur' system any more, and we only need to look at the involvement of Sky, the GPA, etc.
Something needs to be done, the standard of refereeing at times is shocking, truly.
Most of the time it isn't really though. The inconsistency generally isn't between one minute to the next it's between one ref to another. So the way Sean Hurson refs a match is much stricter than the way Gough or Coldrick will ref it. That's the shitty thing but when you've a tackle rule as loosely defined as the GAA tackle is sure anything is possible.
Quote from: thewobbler on July 26, 2018, 11:15:38 PM
Two things.
1. That adds up to over a million a year in salaries, before administration costs, travel costs, and other overheads. To be honest with you, I'm sick to f**king death of the rising costs of competing in GAA for clubs and members, as a large part of these increases is simply to cover administrator salaries... and the first rule of being a paid administrator is you will want paid support to share the workload.
2. The biggest problems we face with the officiating of games is that a) the rules on tackling are open to interpretation, and b) there is a culture in our game whereby cheating isn't just acceptable, it's demanded by the fans. So a referee, unfortunately, rarely gets to referee a game, but instead he's a the pantomime villain. Paid referees can't fix these problems.
Agreed, the tackle rule in the GAA is that if you make it look like you deserved it, you'll get the free.
Quote from: thewobbler on July 26, 2018, 11:15:38 PM
Two things.
1. That adds up to over a million a year in salaries, before administration costs, travel costs, and other overheads. To be honest with you, I'm sick to f**king death of the rising costs of competing in GAA for clubs and members, as a large part of these increases is simply to cover administrator salaries... and the first rule of being a paid administrator is you will want paid support to share the workload.
2. The biggest problems we face with the officiating of games is that a) the rules on tackling are open to interpretation, and b) there is a culture in our game whereby cheating isn't just acceptable, it's demanded by the fans. So a referee, unfortunately, rarely gets to referee a game, but instead he's a the pantomime villain. Paid referees can't fix these problems.
I'm sure a sponsor for the refs (Specsavers as in the Scottish prem) could be a possibility to cover some of the costs but a fully functioning, active and competent referees board could help apply the rules consistently which for me is one of the most frustrating aspects of following football.
Not a bad idea but say if ref ☓ becomes ref for a county, how long would he have the job for? If it's not a substantial amount of time, it's going to be hard to get anyone to give up a job to take it. Also, would he have a vested interest in not training up decent refs within his own county.
Overall I wouldn't be against the idea but the details would need to be worked out carefully
All refs will referee the game as they see it, be that down to their own involvement in the past as players or how they believe the game should be ref! Rightly or wrongly that's how I see it and why we have so many inconsistencies.
technical or easy fouls and should be adhered to by everyone, for me the way to get it right is this, providing they are consistent on the tackle rule (as they see it) then the players (if they are smart) will adapt to his own interpretation..
Paying a referee won't change that. The team that generally loses, blames the ref, shocker! One or two incidents won't be the reason a team generally loses, the players managers make far more mistakes in a game.
Bashing referees isn't the answer to a county or a club teams woes, improving your standards should be the focus
I dont think professional referees is a pathway to professional players. They would be direct GAA employees.
But how would they become better without day jobs? Soccer referees who are full time train amateur refs during the week. Is there a market for that?
Quote from: thewobbler on July 26, 2018, 11:15:38 PM
Two things.
1. That adds up to over a million a year in salaries, before administration costs, travel costs, and other overheads. To be honest with you, I'm sick to f**king death of the rising costs of competing in GAA for clubs and members, as a large part of these increases is simply to cover administrator salaries... and the first rule of being a paid administrator is you will want paid support to share the workload.
2. The biggest problems we face with the officiating of games is that a) the rules on tackling are open to interpretation, and b) there is a culture in our game whereby cheating isn't just acceptable, it's demanded by the fans. So a referee, unfortunately, rarely gets to referee a game, but instead he's a the pantomime villain. Paid referees can't fix these problems.
Cheating is demanded by the fans? Care to elaborate?
I think getting consistency is key. Even within games there are frees given and then not given for the same thing. Very frustrating for fans before we even think about how it must be for the players
The consistency thing is my point here. By having refs discuss and debate their decisions during the Monday meeting will ultimately, hopefully lead to a greater understanding of each other's decision making process and encourage greater consistency over time.
Professionalism has always crept into sport where it's economically viable, regardless of the rules of the sport's governing body. There's more of an incentive for players to go pro because of the impetus to win. More winning -> more visibility for sponsors -> More revenue this year and more sponsorship revenue the next year -> greater incentives to win. The more money your team brings in, the more you can spend on improving your game, so it becomes a bit of a cycle of more spending.
Professionalism (allegedly) arrived in the GAA years ago when US-based clubs (allegedly) started paying for big name players to come out from Ireland and help them win US championships. It's (allegedly) economically viable so it (allegedly) happens regardless of the rules.
There's less of an incentive for refs to go pro since they're under the control of the governing body, but it's not impossible. We already have some paid staff in Croke Park, as well as paid development officers all over the world.
My experience at GAA conventions has been club delegates berating a part-time volunteer board for failing to provide a full-time professional standard service. This kind of abuse can motivate boards to hire full time administrators, since if you want something done right you have to pay for it. Refs are on the receiving end of the abuse but aren't in much of a position to change the rules to allow paid refs, so the powers-that-be might be a little slower to act.
In principle I wouldn't have a problem with refs joining the ranks of paid GAA people, as long as a good funding source can be found (like SpecSavers as mentioned before) and their time can be filled with productive work. Doubling up as referee tutors is definitely worthwhile.
Referees already get lots of abuse from both players and spectators. This must discourage a lot of people from becoming referees or continuing as referees. Changing the culture around how refs are treated would probably go further in encouraging a bigger pool of refs and raise standards.
Quote from: dec on July 27, 2018, 07:51:03 PM
Referees already get lots of abuse from both players and spectators. This must discourage a lot of people from becoming referees or continuing as referees. Changing the culture around how refs are treated would probably go further in encouraging a bigger pool of refs and raise standards.
Maybe, but how do you change a culture? It's all right printing jerseys with slogans on them like "give respect, get respect," but if a coach has spent his career screaming abuse from the sideline then I couldn't see him responding too much to anything short of a yellow card.
I once saw a ref moving the ball up for every bit of dissent he got from the players, but not all refs do that. A bit of consistency might help
A few days ago there was an article in the New York Times about the abuse the referees in youth sports get. A soccer referee created a Facebook page where he posts videos of parents/coaches/spectators abusing refs in the hope that shaming might make people think twice
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/sports/referee-parents-abuse-videos.html
"The harassment has grown so rampant that more than 70 percent of new referees in all sports quit the job within three years, according to the National Association of Sports Officials. The chief cause for the attrition, based on a survey conducted by the association, was pervasive abuse from parents and coaches."
I don't know if 70% of new GAA refs quit within 3 years or if people just never bother being refs because they know what the abuse is like.
When I was organizing college hurling matches I once had someone (a screamer from the sideline) give out to me by email about reffing. I replied and said if reffing standards are low, it's partly because of a limited number of people willing to do the job. The low number of people willing to do the job is because of the amount of abuse they get. If you scream abuse at the ref, then you're contributing to the problem.
Many referees are semi-professional as it is. One could referee a game seven days a week and at least two on Saturdays and Sundays. Clearing the guts of £300 a week tax free. And that's at the very bottom rung of the ladder. Heard a story once about a referee looking £1K for himself and his team to officiate at a colleges' game.
Quote from: Champion The Wonder Horse on July 27, 2018, 09:24:28 PM
Many referees are semi-professional as it is. One could referee a game seven days a week and at least two on Saturdays and Sundays. Clearing the guts of £300 a week tax free. And that's at the very bottom rung of the ladder. Heard a story once about a referee looking £1K for himself and his team to officiate at a colleges' game.
Think you heard wrong, referees get expenses.. they don't get paid to hear someone abuse them for 1 hour and then confront you as you head towards the changing room, they don't get paid to take abuse from players or management.. they don't get paid to then take further abuse from trolls on discussion boards who believe they know the rules better than the referees (at county level the pass mark is very high)
As for the 1k for a team of officials I'd like to hear more on that? Is that for hotels, dinners and travel expenses? (From Spain) think you're making that one up to suit your pathetic post
They could stamp out the verbal abuse very easily by adopting the same rule as rugby......only the captain can question a decision. This is a very simple thing to do, but HQ are very slow/reluctant to evolve.
Quote from: Insane Bolt on July 28, 2018, 08:34:30 AM
They could stamp out the verbal abuse very easily by adopting the same rule as rugby......only the captain can question a decision. This is a very simple thing to do, but HQ are very slow/reluctant to evolve.
In football if a referee gets verbal abuse he can black card the player, it's up to the ref to use it, hell he can even red card him, I don't take abuse from a player, why should I ?
I make mistakes, no ref gets it right all the time, why supporters/players/managers think they should call all the things they want is beyond me
Most of the idiots who sound off about referees wouldn't recognise a rulebook if it was put in front of their noses. They have never seen one before, but I guess that's why they're such "experts".
You don't have to be any expert on the rules to see when a referee is totally out of shape, and incapable of keeping up with the play.
Believe it, or not, when you're out assessing refereeing performances, you are not permitted to refer to fitness levels in your report, nor to comment on a referee's ability to "keep up with the play".
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on July 28, 2018, 01:01:24 PM
Believe it, or not, when you're out assessing refereeing performances, you are not permitted to refer to fitness levels in your report, nor to comment on a referee's ability to "keep up with the play".
Wow! Is that not a (massive) part of the problem, right there?
I know that referees must do annual personal fitness tests, etc., but surely their respective abilities to keep up with the play, or not, must be critical aspect of match fitness?
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 28, 2018, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on July 28, 2018, 01:01:24 PM
Believe it, or not, when you're out assessing refereeing performances, you are not permitted to refer to fitness levels in your report, nor to comment on a referee's ability to "keep up with the play".
Wow! Is that not a (massive) part of the problem, right there?
I know that referees must do annual personal fitness tests, etc., but surely their respective abilities to keep up with the play, or not, must be critical aspect of match fitness?
He's up with play better than the supporter hanging over the fence a further 60 yards from the referee but that guy calls it! You are what's the problem is..
Funny enough today we had our rules tests, was chatting to the coordinator and he was asked to go to a club by a manager to talk about refereeing issues the players and managers had, some mentors and clubmen also, very positive talk and near the end couple lads started questioning about certain rules, the referee set down a few question papers multiple choice, so even the answer was there, yes no true or false and far easier than hours, 30 questions, the best score was 6
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 28, 2018, 02:14:29 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 28, 2018, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on July 28, 2018, 01:01:24 PM
Believe it, or not, when you're out assessing refereeing performances, you are not permitted to refer to fitness levels in your report, nor to comment on a referee's ability to "keep up with the play".
Wow! Is that not a (massive) part of the problem, right there?
I know that referees must do annual personal fitness tests, etc., but surely their respective abilities to keep up with the play, or not, must be critical aspect of match fitness?
He's up with play better than the supporter hanging over the fence a further 60 yards from the referee but that guy calls it! You are what's the problem is..
No need to be so defensive, and what you're saying there is not necessarily true -- if I'm beside the sideline of the ground and the play is on the sideline, and the man-in-the-middle is, erm, in the middle, he's most definitely not better placed -- blind sided and clueless.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 28, 2018, 02:25:38 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 28, 2018, 02:14:29 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 28, 2018, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on July 28, 2018, 01:01:24 PM
Believe it, or not, when you're out assessing refereeing performances, you are not permitted to refer to fitness levels in your report, nor to comment on a referee's ability to "keep up with the play".
Wow! Is that not a (massive) part of the problem, right there?
I know that referees must do annual personal fitness tests, etc., but surely their respective abilities to keep up with the play, or not, must be critical aspect of match fitness?
He's up with play better than the supporter hanging over the fence a further 60 yards from the referee but that guy calls it! You are what's the problem is..
No need to be so defensive, and what you're saying there is not necessarily true -- if I'm beside the sideline of the ground and the play is on the sideline, and the man-in-the-middle is, erm, in the middle, he's most definitely not better placed -- blind sided and clueless.
So if you are closer to the play and you see it better as you are there, then of course you are closer, that was not in my post!! I said if I'm 60 yards closer to the clampit on the sideline then I should see it better, no? In most of a game, I'll be closer to the play that a supporter who stays in the one place, agree?
You havent addressed my other point on the muppets who think thye know the rules and when questioned on them knew nothing really, a referee has to call that in seconds, he doesnt get to sit down and study a rule book there and then, he gets it wrong sometimes, just like the player who shoots when he should have passed, or teh manager who takes of a player in corner forward when the problem is in midfield
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 28, 2018, 04:34:27 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 28, 2018, 02:25:38 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 28, 2018, 02:14:29 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 28, 2018, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on July 28, 2018, 01:01:24 PM
Believe it, or not, when you're out assessing refereeing performances, you are not permitted to refer to fitness levels in your report, nor to comment on a referee's ability to "keep up with the play".
Wow! Is that not a (massive) part of the problem, right there?
I know that referees must do annual personal fitness tests, etc., but surely their respective abilities to keep up with the play, or not, must be critical aspect of match fitness?
He's up with play better than the supporter hanging over the fence a further 60 yards from the referee but that guy calls it! You are what's the problem is..
No need to be so defensive, and what you're saying there is not necessarily true -- if I'm beside the sideline of the ground and the play is on the sideline, and the man-in-the-middle is, erm, in the middle, he's most definitely not better placed -- blind sided and clueless.
So if you are closer to the play and you see it better as you are there, then of course you are closer, that was not in my post!! I said if I'm 60 yards closer to the clampit on the sideline then I should see it better, no? In most of a game, I'll be closer to the play that a supporter who stays in the one place, agree?
You havent addressed my other point on the muppets who think thye know the rules and when questioned on them knew nothing really, a referee has to call that in seconds, he doesnt get to sit down and study a rule book there and then, he gets it wrong sometimes, just like the player who shoots when he should have passed, or teh manager who takes of a player in corner forward when the problem is in midfield
I was referring specifically about how crucial it is, generally, for the referee to be up with the play. Something that's glaringly obvious far too often, the lack of it.
Regarding ignorance of the rules on the sidelines, of course that's a curse. Though worse, is a referee who doesn't apply them with consistency, and again, which is all too prevalent.
I've said before I'll say again. The game at the top level is too quick too big and too professional for one single amateur ref. I don't know if the answer is professional refs or maybe more officials but I do think something needs done.
Quote from: hardstation on July 28, 2018, 05:53:47 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 27, 2018, 09:59:09 PM
Quote from: Champion The Wonder Horse on July 27, 2018, 09:24:28 PM
Many referees are semi-professional as it is. One could referee a game seven days a week and at least two on Saturdays and Sundays. Clearing the guts of £300 a week tax free. And that's at the very bottom rung of the ladder. Heard a story once about a referee looking £1K for himself and his team to officiate at a colleges' game.
Think you heard wrong, referees get expenses.. they don't get paid to hear someone abuse them for 1 hour and then confront you as you head towards the changing room, they don't get paid to take abuse from players or management.. they don't get paid to then take further abuse from trolls on discussion boards who believe they know the rules better than the referees (at county level the pass mark is very high)
As for the 1k for a team of officials I'd like to hear more on that? Is that for hotels, dinners and travel expenses? (From Spain) think you're making that one up to suit your pathetic post
Milltown, this is not an attack on referees or you because I really couldn't care less about the refs getting a few quid but when you say referees don't get paid, they get expenses, that suggests that there is a calculation of how much the referee is out of pocket for refereeing the game. I got a ref for a game and he told me "the fee is £30". It was a game played local to him and he was able to do it as he wasn't working. As I say, I've no issue with it but is the "it is expenses" just a line to get around paying tax as the ref I got was simply "paid" £30 to do the game.
That's up to you, I've done challenge games for free, but most cases I've ended up with 20 quid, unless it's at Jordanstown it's not local..
If a referee is doing it for money then he's an odd person, IMO
I did refereeing for 2 years and never claimed.. I got into refereeing because of club needed people and I was fed up with referees at the time, wrongfully though
Well if they are doing that Hardstation then they are doing it for the wrong reasons, I'd be worried if that was the case then they would be possibly throwing games to gain financially if it was a game that you could place a bet on it!
Champions story of a grand for refereeing is bullshit, I've asked him about to explain it, hasn't bothered to get back to me...
Only reason I didn't get back was that your original contribution was not worthy of a reply. Nor is you follow-up, but since you're not going to stop, I'll humour you.
My post was not a criticism of referees. I would have no problem paying £30 or £40 to a competent official and I have found myself in the same position as hardstation outlined re. fees. Nor do I have a problem with competent referees officiating every night of the week from April through to September; in fact I would encourage them to do so. It all adds up nicely.
Regarding the £1K fees, I should have said €1K for a ref and four umpires from a famously parsimonious part of the country. There are probably men in your own club who could verify the story.
When I was refereeing, it was £20 a game, as far as I remember, plus mileage. If I took a team of 4 umpires to a championship game & got them a couple of pints each afterwards, I was out of pocket. So anybody who comes on here & says refs are in it to make money haven't the first idea what they're talking about.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 28, 2018, 09:54:15 PM
Quote from: hardstation on July 28, 2018, 05:53:47 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 27, 2018, 09:59:09 PM
Quote from: Champion The Wonder Horse on July 27, 2018, 09:24:28 PM
Many referees are semi-professional as it is. One could referee a game seven days a week and at least two on Saturdays and Sundays. Clearing the guts of £300 a week tax free. And that's at the very bottom rung of the ladder. Heard a story once about a referee looking £1K for himself and his team to officiate at a colleges' game.
Think you heard wrong, referees get expenses.. they don't get paid to hear someone abuse them for 1 hour and then confront you as you head towards the changing room, they don't get paid to take abuse from players or management.. they don't get paid to then take further abuse from trolls on discussion boards who believe they know the rules better than the referees (at county level the pass mark is very high)
As for the 1k for a team of officials I'd like to hear more on that? Is that for hotels, dinners and travel expenses? (From Spain) think you're making that one up to suit your pathetic post
Milltown, this is not an attack on referees or you because I really couldn't care less about the refs getting a few quid but when you say referees don't get paid, they get expenses, that suggests that there is a calculation of how much the referee is out of pocket for refereeing the game. I got a ref for a game and he told me "the fee is £30". It was a game played local to him and he was able to do it as he wasn't working. As I say, I've no issue with it but is the "it is expenses" just a line to get around paying tax as the ref I got was simply "paid" £30 to do the game.
That's up to you, I've done challenge games for free, but most cases I've ended up with 20 quid, unless it's at Jordanstown it's not local..
If a referee is doing it for money then he's an odd person, IMO
I did refereeing for 2 years and never claimed.. I got into refereeing because of club needed people and I was fed up with referees at the time, wrongfully though
You take the £20?
Quote from: David McKeown on July 28, 2018, 06:48:46 PM
I've said before I'll say again. The game at the top level is too quick too big and too professional for one single amateur ref. I don't know if the answer is professional refs or maybe more officials but I do think something needs done.
It's definitely time for two referees in hurling. Milwaukee Hurling Club has used twin referees for years in their pub league. Works no bother. A lot of advantages to it beside the obvious. For one thing, off-the-ball incidents are unheard of because there's always one referee looking in their direction.
Why wouldn't you take the £20? You need petrol to get you to & from a match ffs. You give up enough of your time to officiate without being out of pocket too.
Sure refs drive big fancy cars full of linesmen.
Quote from: hardstation on July 29, 2018, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: playwiththewind1st on July 28, 2018, 11:21:40 PM
When I was refereeing, it was £20 a game, as far as I remember, plus mileage. If I took a team of 4 umpires to a championship game & got them a couple of pints each afterwards, I was out of pocket. So anybody who comes on here & says refs are in it to make money haven't the first idea what they're talking about.
You don't make the dough on the official championship games ffs. The school games, challenge matches etc. No umpires. Set your own fee.
It is possible to make a few quid and I would imagine some do. Again, I don't really give a shite that they do.
If you were looking to get extra money from another job, being a referee wouldn't be my choice, taking abuse during a game for £20, I'd rather go to work on a Saturday.. school matches are on during the day, so the person doing them would need a flexible job to allow him..
But in theory a referee could be out doing ladies football camogie juvenile senior in both codes 7 days a week, you don't get paid like a wage, two payments a year, so it's not a weekly income
The standard of flag waving by umpires is poor.
In a place the size of Croke Park, the umpires arm should be fully extended!
Not be hurling fanatic but watched cork limericks today. Is it time for 2 referees in hurling? The match was so fast. The ref had bother keeping up and then when he did keep up he had done difficult calls to make! Should be trialled in a pre season comp in coming years
Today's ref got nearly all the right calls, you not being a hurling man, as you have said, know nothing about hurling. Any hurling man I've spoken to didn't once talk about the ref
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 29, 2018, 11:38:52 PM
Today's ref got nearly all the right calls, you not being a hurling man, as you have said, know nothing about hurling. Any hurling man I've spoken to didn't once talk about the ref
Where have I criticised the referee me know it all? I admire any ref in a game as it's not an easy job at a game warm day 70 odd thousand there and some difficult calls to make like slot of games.
Quote from: hardstation on July 29, 2018, 11:41:26 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 29, 2018, 11:38:52 PM
Today's ref got nearly all the right calls, you not being a hurling man, as you have said, know nothing about hurling. Any hurling man I've spoken to didn't once talk about the ref
Ref did well today. Though what do you make of his general suggestion of having 2 refs, milltown?
He has two linesmen, one refereed last years final (excellent too he was) who talk to him throughout the game, he has four personal friends doing umpire, whom he's talking to regularly..
Having another referee and people will still say the refs interpretation of the foul is wrong! It's about opinions. That's mine.
Does being personal friends with the referee make them more qualified for the job of umpire than me or you? Is there a training need for umpires in the GAA?
Quote from: hardstation on July 30, 2018, 12:06:00 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 12:02:03 AM
Quote from: hardstation on July 29, 2018, 11:41:26 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 29, 2018, 11:38:52 PM
Today's ref got nearly all the right calls, you not being a hurling man, as you have said, know nothing about hurling. Any hurling man I've spoken to didn't once talk about the ref
Ref did well today. Though what do you make of his general suggestion of having 2 refs, milltown?
He has two linesmen, one refereed last years final (excellent too he was) who talk to him throughout the game, he has four personal friends doing umpire, whom he's talking to regularly..
Having another referee and people will still say the refs interpretation of the foul is wrong! It's about opinions. That's mine.
Can they advise on fouls in general play? A referee can find himself far away or have his view blocked very easily.
Did a match last year, was linesman, rigged up to the ref, before the game we were told to bring everything to the refs attention, the referee ultimately has the call but if he believed you were in better position he'll call it, based on the linesman's call. I don't know if that answers your question but I found it very good..
All umpires at that level go through a course on umpires Corn
The worst thing about this thread is non referee posters not actually understanding refereeing but come on with absurd ideas
I'd much prefer at all games umpires and linesmen... two refs is just more confusing. Sure the auld boy who's struggling to walk and see is all you need on the line.
Is it just me then or do hurling refs interpret the rules just whatever way they want? Not that it takes away from the spectacle but Jesus they're very lax about steps, charging and throw balls, even more so than footballl refs.
If football refs were that slack about pulling for those 3 offences I'd say they'd get a bollixing on here.
Football is pure dung. Made up of people trying to con the ref. Old style were men men and got on with the game is lost now.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 12:14:14 AM
The worst thing about this thread is non referee posters not actually understanding refereeing but come on with absurd ideas
My original post wasn't meant to be a dig at referees. On the contrary it was just a suggestion to try and boost the profile and status of the referee and for the top referees to possibly be given responsible for developing a greater level of consistency amongst themselves whilst trying to develop the same amongst refs in their county. If that means throwing a bit of money at it, then fair enough.
Quote from: BennyHarp on July 30, 2018, 01:00:27 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 12:14:14 AM
The worst thing about this thread is non referee posters not actually understanding refereeing but come on with absurd ideas
My original post wasn't meant to be a dig at referees. On the contrary it was just a suggestion to try and boost the profile and status of the referee and for the top referees to possibly be given responsible for developing a greater level of consistency amongst themselves whilst trying to develop the same amongst refs in their county. If that means throwing a bit of money at it, then fair enough.
It's part of the game, the ref has his job the players and manager had theirs.. if players perfected the tackle then we'd be grand, there are games and you just wonder, WTF! Blow the whistle all the time and you're not letting the game flow, don't blow the whistle and he's losing control and the players are blaming you for their handbags!
The consistency is impossible, the games aren't consistent and players aren't consistent, not one referee gives a toss to who wins, lets make that abundantly clear. He'll try his best and will make mistakes.. stop focusing in on the ref, I've noticed the amount of gurning now is desperate! But I suppose the ref is the easier target, how making them professional will improve that, I don't know, would need to be decent money though for a man to leave his job
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 12:11:47 AM
Quote from: hardstation on July 30, 2018, 12:06:00 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 12:02:03 AM
Quote from: hardstation on July 29, 2018, 11:41:26 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 29, 2018, 11:38:52 PM
Today's ref got nearly all the right calls, you not being a hurling man, as you have said, know nothing about hurling. Any hurling man I've spoken to didn't once talk about the ref
Ref did well today. Though what do you make of his general suggestion of having 2 refs, milltown?
He has two linesmen, one refereed last years final (excellent too he was) who talk to him throughout the game, he has four personal friends doing umpire, whom he's talking to regularly..
Having another referee and people will still say the refs interpretation of the foul is wrong! It's about opinions. That's mine.
Can they advise on fouls in general play? A referee can find himself far away or have his view blocked very easily.
Did a match last year, was linesman, rigged up to the ref, before the game we were told to bring everything to the refs attention, the referee ultimately has the call but if he believed you were in better position he'll call it, based on the linesman's call. I don't know if that answers your question but I found it very good..
All umpires at that level go through a course on umpires Corn
All for this but is it permissible under the rules? My understanding is the rules only allow the other officials to bring aggressive fouls to the attention of the referee. Allowing more help for the referee may address many of the issues that currently exist.
It happens, I've brought to the attention of the referee if scores or wides I believe, me being in better position than the umpires (sun in eyes, angle of shot, not enough distance behind nets to gauge flight) is incorrect, again the ref can overrule linesman and umpire
It's in the rules, but the ruling is I may bring to the attention of the referee on an issue, it's up to the referee whether he goes with it,. I can't as a linesman stop play but I can inform him live, he can blow whistle if he wants. But trust me they are well informed. The good refs constantly talk
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 06:50:19 PM
It happens, I've brought to the attention of the referee if scores or wides I believe, me being in better position than the umpires (sun in eyes, angle of shot, not enough distance behind nets to gauge flight) is incorrect, again the ref can overrule linesman and umpire
It's in the rules, but the ruling is I may bring to the attention of the referee on an issue, it's up to the referee whether he goes with it,. I can't as a linesman stop play but I can inform him live, he can blow whistle if he wants. But trust me they are well informed. The good refs constantly talk
Would you ever criticise a referee?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 06:50:19 PM
It happens, I've brought to the attention of the referee if scores or wides I believe, me being in better position than the umpires (sun in eyes, angle of shot, not enough distance behind nets to gauge flight) is incorrect, again the ref can overrule linesman and umpire
It's in the rules, but the ruling is I may bring to the attention of the referee on an issue, it's up to the referee whether he goes with it,. I can't as a linesman stop play but I can inform him live, he can blow whistle if he wants. But trust me they are well informed. The good refs constantly talk
Oh I have no problem with it although i have never refereed in GAA matches I have in other sports and the more help that can be provided the better. The point I am making is that I would maybe expand the remit of the linesmen to give even more assistance and hopefully cut down on the do yer job linesman shouts that are often heard at games.
Quote from: Champion The Wonder Horse on July 30, 2018, 11:16:35 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 06:50:19 PM
It happens, I've brought to the attention of the referee if scores or wides I believe, me being in better position than the umpires (sun in eyes, angle of shot, not enough distance behind nets to gauge flight) is incorrect, again the ref can overrule linesman and umpire
It's in the rules, but the ruling is I may bring to the attention of the referee on an issue, it's up to the referee whether he goes with it,. I can't as a linesman stop play but I can inform him live, he can blow whistle if he wants. But trust me they are well informed. The good refs constantly talk
Would you ever criticise a referee?
If I'm watching my club as a supporter and when I took my senior team (I'd been refereeing 3 years at the time )I did it regularly, i tried my best not to be too critical but I'm a passionate clubman
Quote from: David McKeown on July 30, 2018, 11:30:58 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2018, 06:50:19 PM
It happens, I've brought to the attention of the referee if scores or wides I believe, me being in better position than the umpires (sun in eyes, angle of shot, not enough distance behind nets to gauge flight) is incorrect, again the ref can overrule linesman and umpire
It's in the rules, but the ruling is I may bring to the attention of the referee on an issue, it's up to the referee whether he goes with it,. I can't as a linesman stop play but I can inform him live, he can blow whistle if he wants. But trust me they are well informed. The good refs constantly talk
Oh I have no problem with it although i have never refereed in GAA matches I have in other sports and the more help that can be provided the better. The point I am making is that I would maybe expand the remit of the linesmen to give even more assistance and hopefully cut down on the do yer job linesman shouts that are often heard at games.
The above will happen when the technology is available, generally latter stages of the championship unfortunately
David Gough questions appropriateness of All-Ireland red card sanction
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/david-gough-questions-appropriateness-of-all-ireland-red-card-sanction-1.4138691
Meath referee gave wide-ranging address on rules at weekend's GAA coaching conference
about 10 hours ago
Seán Moran
All-Ireland football referee David Gough has questioned to what extent the sending-off of Jonny Cooper in last September's drawn final was justified by the nature of his conduct.
In a wide-ranging assessment of the playing rules delivered at Saturday's annual GAA Games Development Conference in Croke Park and expanded on with this newspaper, the Meath official explained how, under the current rules, the red card shown to the Dublin defender was correctly administered for three 'ticking' or 'noting' offences but queried whether it was a proportionate response.
The remarks were initially made during Saturday's presentation by Gough and David Hassan, chair of the standing committee on the playing rules.
Titled, 'Making playing rules easy to read, remember and apply,' it confirmed that significant proposals for change in how the GAA treats foul play are being drafted.
Hassan in his introduction, said that the rules committee (SCPR) was attempting to "make rules easier to understand and implement" and "to create conditions in which it no longer pays to foul".
He pointed out that the current playing rules were drafted 35 years ago and that they were overdue simplification or rationalising.
In his own words, the committee wasn't looking to "rewrite" but "edit" the playing rules of football and hurling along the lines of 'classification' rather than 'categorisation' – which he accepted mightn't sound very different but that the latter would be a broader heading than the current regulatory framework.
During his presentation, Gough compared the red card issued to Kilkenny hurler Richie Hogan for a head-high challenge on Cathal Barrett – an infraction assessed as 'dangerous' or 'reckless' play – with that given to Cooper for repeated fouling.
Asked on Monday was it not desirable that serial fouling needed to be deterred he agreed.
"Absolutely but it would be looking at a sinbin option [the recently-introduced punishment for a black card]. I'm sure that if three 'notings' were punished by the sinbin, a player would have the opportunity to go off, calm down and think about what he's doing before coming back onto the field of play.
"If it happens again, obviously he goes off for good but I'm not sure the punishment was proportionate in Jonny Cooper's case in the same way as when Richie Hogan was sent off in the hurling final for a head-high challenge."
Prescriptive language
He also supported Hassan's arguments to streamline the rule book and agreed with his distinction between classified and categorised fouls, outlining the benefit of the former approach compared with the current need to label all infractions by reference to 43 different rules.
"The advantage is that we don't have to think about the very prescriptive language of the rules on the field of play. We don't have to look at an incident anymore and see if it exactly fits the prescriptive language of the rule book.
"For example: 'to body collide with an opponent for the purpose of taking him out of the field if play' – so you have to have a collision and you have to deem that it's taking the player out of a movement on the field of play.
"Ideally we shouldn't be trying to fit incidents of foul play into one of 43 different rules. We just need to distinguish between rough, cynical and dangerous. A lot of fouls at the moment are cynical but don't fit into the current category.
"A player plays the ball off and goes for a return pass when bearing down on goal. He's held by the jersey so he can't get a scoring opportunity but we can only give that as a 'noting' offence because it's not a deliberate pull-down so it's not covered by the black card.
"There's any number of cynical fouls occurring at the moment but we can't give a black card because the language of the rules is so prescriptive."
Speaking from a personal point of view, he advocated additional sanction for any cynical play that takes place within 20 metres of the goal and intended to prevent an attacking player from creating a goalscoring opportunity.
"I may be the only one still banging on about this but I still have an issue with denying a team or player a scoring opportunity, particularly within the 30- or 20-metre line. Awarding a black card and free kick isn't adequate. The scoring opportunity should be given back; otherwise it still pays to foul.
Cynical fouling
"If you were to say that a black card within the 20-metre line results in being ordered off the field and a penalty, we're not going to see as many incidents of deliberate pull-downs, deliberate trips or body collides intended to stop scoring opportunities. We're at a stage now in inter-county football that it's 'win at all costs' – doing whatever you need to do, regardless of rules, to ensure your team wins.
"The GAA needs to counter this by saying that we equally will do anything we need to do, through the rules, to make sure that it doesn't pay to foul."
Also on the horizon are moves to deal with cynical play in hurling. When football's black card was introduced six years ago, hurling was exempted from the sanction because the same problem was deemed not to exist.
On Saturday, David Hassan revealed that match research by the SCPR had indicated that the level of cynical fouling in hurling was at least as high as in football – if not higher, now that the deterrent of the black card had been introduced to the latter game.
Any proposals on the matter are not expected before this year's annual congress in February but will have to be passed at some stage and there would be a high probability that any moves to extend the black card would meet resistance from hurling counties.