The USSF Reign of Terror continues

[tennbengal]

First changing it to birth year teams, now this:

http://soccer.nbcsports.com/2015/11/09/ ... th-soccer/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eh, I don't know that I have a problem with that - but having just watched my son go from U9 - U14 (currently U14) playing competitive club soccer, I don't know that I have appreciated that I apparently let him do something dangerous with respect to headers...

[A_B]

Well, that's consistent with what football studies have shown, no? that the brain isn't developed enough before that age and therefore tackle isn't recommended until 12 I think. I think it's a good rule.

And there is at least a chance that it will develop the dribbling and passing game more than it currently is in the US. My co-worker's son had a team that was really good, but their main attack was hit to the tall striker's head. Very boring to watch but it was effective. Won one state title and runner up in another.

[sancarlos]

I read the Deadpan article about it, and this factoid is key to me: It isn't head against ball that is the problem, it's head against head. I applaud this decision, as I expect other governing bodies to follow suit. A talented high school girl we know had to quit soccer because she had three concussions received during play.

The direct act of heading the ball isn’t necessarily a problem. The study found that only 4.7% of boys’ concussions and 8.2% of girls’ concussions were due to head contact with the ball. But overall 30.6% of boys’ concussions and 25.3% of girls’ concussions occurred on headers, mostly from banging heads with another player, but also from hitting the turf. Heading was also the “soccer-specific” activity that caused the most concussions, followed by “defending,” “general playing,” and “goalkeeping.”

And while that study only examined high school sports, a smaller study also in JAMA Pediatrics found that headers caused 30.3% of concussions in female middle school players, a broadly similar finding.

[Nonlinear FC]

First changing it to birth year teams, now this:

http://soccer.nbcsports.com/2015/11/09/ ... th-soccer/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eh, I don't know that I have a problem with that - but having just watched my son go from U9 - U14 (currently U14) playing competitive club soccer, I don't know that I have appreciated that I apparently let him do something dangerous with respect to headers...

My problem here is that I don't know if I've seen a study that proves concussions are coming as a result of heading the ball. I'm pretty sure it's the exact opposite in that it's rare for a header to cause a concussion.. particularly if it's done with proper technique. They are getting elbowed or kneed in the head. Happened to my daughter a month ago. Another had a goalie punt the ball off of her domepiece... concussion. Goalie got run and kicked while she was on the ground... concussion.

Here's my observation, having coached a couple hundred youth soccer games and watched a ton of high school soccer, both boys and girls... The refs are not up to the task, more often than not, of protecting the players. In just the last couple of weeks I've seen high school games, again boys and girls, where the goalie was run... BLATANTLY... and not only was there not a card, there was not a foul, and on instance the running of the goalie put the ball in the net... WHISTLE, goal! WTF.

I'm not a guy that is constantly bitching about the refs. I've never received a card as a player or coach for getting into it with the ref. That said, on Sunday one of my players got fouled (no call) and injured (ankle.) She's laying on the ground and the other team isn't kicking it out (because that's not supposed to be "a thing" anymore.) This goes on until we finally get possession back, and I'm yelling to blow the whistle, our parents are yelling and a number of players are yelling... Reluctantly, she blows the whistle.

As I'm trotting to my player, she is staying 30 yards away from my player, making no motion of checking on her (which she should've done while play was continuing) and I'm having to shout "You know the rule is that it's your discretion, right?" And she's talking over me and essentially telling me to shut up. So, yeah, I lost it and just over shouted her (I can get loud) and let her have it. Fucking idiot.

My point with that anecdote is that they're focusing in the wrong area here. The refereeing needs to be better informed. Protect the players FFS.

[tennbengal]

Having never played soccer and not having had to learn how to head a ball, not sure how hard that is to pick-up later. I would guess not that hard, but, I just have no frame of reference. Rest of world will still be teaching headers at those ages, presumably US kids waiting to learn how to correctly head a ball won't put them behind. The one thing it may cut down on is head to head contact at those ages, which is more likely to happen with the kids both going for headers, so maybe safer from that standpoint. Just not sure a properly headed size 3 ball at U10 is a concussion risk, but perhaps I have just not appreciated that data.

ETA: What nonlinear just said.

[sancarlos]

NLFC - as noted in my earlier post. The problem isn't heading the ball, per se, it is the head against head injuries that occur during attempted headers, primarily. And, many of those goalie injuries you note are incurred on corner kicks where the players are going for headers.

[Nonlinear FC]

I see the point about the act of heading (ie the 50/50 challenges) causing the head injuries. I'm not arguing that there isn't risk involved. And I like the idea of taking that out of the game up through U11 and easing it in at that point.

But, just to reiterate, they need to do a much MUCH better job getting this concussion message out to the refereeing community. I've seen some crazy shit go unpunished in just the last month, all while this has been a HUGE talking point in the US youth soccer community for well over 2 years. But especially lately. Coaches and players are going through training and (wait for it) being hit over the head and shoulders with this message.

The refs need to be given guidance that player protection, especially on 50/50 play in the air, is paramount. When in doubt, if a player is not going straight up, call a foul. If a player bumps a goalie on a corner/cross... call the foul.

Frankly, the refs USED to be that way when I played. You just didn't fuck with the goalie. Bumping me in a noticeable way almost always got a lecture and a lot of times a card. If you hit me while I was down, absolute card.

These days, I'm just not seeing that. Goalies are fair game, which is insane because of how vulnerable that player is in so many scenarios.

=-=-=-=-=

As an aside, I don't buy the notion that goalies are getting hurt on corner kicks at a high rate. I was rarely hassled or hurt on a corner, because if you are aggressive and smart, you are in control of that situation. Where I got hurt most often, and this carries through to those I've coached, is on breakaways. You are extremely vulnerable once you've committed to ground and you are pretty much at the mercy of the other player in that situation. Kneed and kicked in the face, ribs and balls countless times... The worst was a hyper-extended elbow, but that was more my fault for getting there a little late and having to contort and him kicking right when my hand got there. Nice save. Hurt like fuck.

[howard]

The direct act of heading the ball isn’t necessarily a problem. The study found that only 4.7% of boys’ concussions and 8.2% of girls’ concussions were due to head contact with the ball. But overall 30.6% of boys’ concussions and 25.3% of girls’ concussions occurred on headers, mostly from banging heads with another player, but also from hitting the turf.

Then what caused the other ~64% of concussions?

[mister d]

Running into the goal posts.

[elflaco]

upon further reading in the US Soccer site..
these are recommendations only as far as most of the youth soccer community is concerned.
NJ Youth soccer is in such state, that it will take them a couple of years to put anything into place.

i take back only 15% of my vitrol.

[Nonlinear FC]

The direct act of heading the ball isn’t necessarily a problem. The study found that only 4.7% of boys’ concussions and 8.2% of girls’ concussions were due to head contact with the ball. But overall 30.6% of boys’ concussions and 25.3% of girls’ concussions occurred on headers, mostly from banging heads with another player, but also from hitting the turf.

Then what caused the other ~64% of concussions?

I'm not a stats guy, BUT, I slept in a bed that is loosely based on the design of the beds found in a Holiday Inn Express, so...

I'm betting a high number of concussions are going to be found with the goalies. And I gave a number of examples on how you can pretty easily rack up concussions that have nothing to do with headers as a goalie.

I'd also really wonder how accurate the numbers are in terms of the specific play and how it is tracked. Going in on a bouncing ball is a 50/50 proposition where guys get elbowed in the head all the time. Whether that is classified as a play involving a potential "header" is going to be extremely subjective... Even moreso for someone that doesn't know the game very well.

[Shirley]

In my experience with youth soccer, heading isn't really a huge part of the game before U11 anyway. Hell, I bet the majority of kids that young wouldn't head it if you wanted them too. Even more, since headers are kinda rare, it's extra rare for two kids to aggressively go at a head ball and bang coconuts. I haven't really seen that kind of play until you are talking about 13-year-olds and up.

[DC47]

We taught girls heading starting around age 9. We gently tossed balls to head from five feet away. 100% of the emphasis was on proper motion and location of strike on head. We also prohibited heading in games, in which other teams did this. Same with slide tackles. The goal was to prepare them for the day when they would be heading and slide tackling. However other coaches in our league were already screaming at their kids to do both in games.

In my experience, the top 10% of club soccer teams are aggressively heading the ball by age 11. Their goalies can punt, and they can consistently put corner kicks in the box in the air. Since it's an advantage to head the ball in this circumstance, and coaches of such teams are overwhelmingly motivated to win at all costs, they scream at their players to head in almost every circumstance. So do parents and other players. My daughter headed the ball hundreds of times in games and scrimmages and training by age 13. I did as well, and with a heavier ball.

It is also my experience that refs allow too much contact and too much dangerous play. I doubt there is much that soccer authorities will do to correct this, though it is far from impossible. So I reluctantly reach the conclusion that heading should be outlawed up until roughly age 14. I think goalie punts should as well, as outlawing heading makes them even more tactically valuable and thus distorts the game. I like a no-punting rule as it would give defenders and midfielders more experience in playing the ball out of the back, and motivate coaches to teach it and select for this skill.

The inclusion of heading-related incidents of concussion (e.g., contact with other players and ground), rather than just ball strikes is obviously the right way to approach the statistical analysis of this issue. But further, I believe it's well accepted in the work on pointy football that chronic 'micro concussions' (brain trauma short of the standards for concussion) are a major issue, and perhaps more important than simple one-event concussions. If this is included as a hazard, then the hundreds of blows to the head by ball, players, ground, and posts that a player will incurr due to heading attempts is a very big deal.

[howard]

I actually clicked through to the medical paper and looked at the stats. http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article ... id=1812615" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not a great paper, only 59 cases of concussion broken down like this:



So, 18 concussions occurred during heading the ball. But 17 concussions involved the head hitting the ball. But, one of the conclusions drawn by the ussf using this and another study for support is it is banging heads while heading the ball that is a bigger problem than head/ball contact. And, 14 concussions (23.7%) under 'other'. Difficult to draw much from this data set.

And second non-linear's points about keepers, drawn from my brief playing experience. Against Mexican kids; yeah I took some (but I dished some too.)

…chronic 'micro concussions' (brain trauma short of the standards for concussion) are a major issue, and perhaps more important than simple one-event concussions. If this is included as a hazard, then the hundreds of blows to the head by ball, players, ground, and posts that a player will incurr due to heading attempts is a very big deal.

I second this too.

[wlu_lax6]

The twitter has been very interesting on this topic. I have caught it mostly via Taylor Twellmen and Alecko Eskandarian who both had their careers ended because of concussions (but don't end up on the same side of this issue). Twellmen has been very vocal in support and as a result is a target of the pro-header trolling type.

[Shirley]

I agree that banning punting makes a lot of sense in conjunction with this. In my experience, by the far the hardest headers (and the ones most folks shied away from) were off of punts. For youth players, it's probably good to have them work on passing out of the defensive end anyway. I'll concede that this probably helps stronger teams keep pressure on weaker teams, but that's a reasonable trade-off.

[HaulCitgo]

No way head vs. ball on a punt is causing a large number of concussions. I could believe maybe head vs head/elbow/shoulder on a punted ball but that requires an awful lot of skill and even then its mostly drifting/semi stationary players waiting on a ball to drop. Corners would probably be the worst. Semi sprint into the box with defenders/goalies moving in the opposite direction. Just dont believe this is a major problem amongst 90% of players until multiple players have the skill/ability to track the ball and attack headers. Even then youve got to have players with the heart to attack headers and kids arent idiots. They see what happened to the other kid and they damn sure remember slamming into another kids head. Then the dont attack it so blindly. They run to the ball get in the air and close their eyes and shy from contact.

[elflaco]

TEACH the kids how to head the ball.

don't ban (or suggests bans) activities based on questionable studies or in reaction to lawsuits.

DO the right thing (cause that always works out, right?)

at least our club meeting tonight will be in the backroom of the local pub. On the agenda.... Age changes and how they'll affect our 17 teams (main issue isn't whether little suzie or johnny may not have a team for sr year, but rather how many 'coaches' will be looking to poach players from other teams so they can carry on their 'winning' tradition,) and now this.. along with open position on player development and whether to renew contract with trainers (all of our teams must have a trainer 1x week at minimum.)

but seriously.. if they bring out the concussion helmets for all players, i'm done.

[Steve of phpBB]

TEACH the kids how to head the ball.

I have a problem with this approach, because it assumes that (i) the coaches know the right way to do it, (ii) the coaches are able to teach the right way to do it, and (iii) the kids are all able to learn it properly.

It makes perfect sense to me to wait until kids are older and then teach them how to head the ball.

[mister d]

but seriously.. if they bring out the concussion helmets for all players, i'm done.

That's a weird hill to die on.

[wlu_lax6]

So are we just more aware of concussions these days or have kids become better athletes (i.e. faster, bigger, stronger make incidents bigger)?

Also while we are at, are Gluten allergies just more common now or are we just more aware.....I am not even sure there was gluten when I was growing up.

[howard]

but seriously.. if they bring out the concussion helmets for all players, i'm done.

That's a weird hill to die on.

I will guess that is one way to prevent kids from learning how to head properly, if they spend a few years heading w/a helmet.

[DC47]

I don't know what form an effective anti-concussion helmet would take in soccer. But unless it's far different from the headband-style that is now used by a few players (and for which there is little evidence of effectiveness) then this won't be an issue. You have to do the right things to head the ball effectively, with or without a helmet.

Proper heading form involves the position and movement of the upper-body and neck, and the right area on the head to hit the ball. The goal is maximum power and accuracy. Strengthening neck muscles is also part of the package.

I believe this approach also minimizes brain damage (though who knows about micro trauma?) from head-ball contact. Though it won't do anything (perhaps other than neck strengthening) to reduce trauma from other hazards involved in heading attempts and defending heading attempts.

[Shirley]

I don't know what form an effective anti-concussion helmet would take in soccer. But unless it's far different from the headband-style that is now used by a few players (and for which there is little evidence of effectiveness) then this won't be an issue. You have to do the right things to head the ball effectively, with or without a helmet.

Proper heading form involves the position and movement of the upper-body and neck, and the right area on the head to hit the ball. The goal is maximum power and accuracy. Strengthening neck muscles is also part of the package.

I believe this approach also minimizes brain damage (though who knows about micro trauma?) from head-ball contact. Though it won't do anything (perhaps other than neck strengthening) to reduce trauma from other hazards involved in heading attempts and defending heading attempts.

I agree with all of this. My sense that this is a good ban is based on the idea of micro trauma. I'm guessing that most headers at the junior level aren't an issue even with micro trauma. Usually a ball just pops up for some reason and a kid heads it. No biggie. Heading a punt (especially) or corner kick is a different story. Even done correctly, those can hurt, so it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that there can be lasting effects.

[wlu_lax6]

Problem solved
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Nonlinear FC]

1) The new USSF guidelines actually do prohibit punting up to a certain age. I'm too lazy to go look it up, but I talked about this on another thread. There are pros and cons... The obvious pro is what we're talking about in this thread (safety), along with what was briefly touched on by someone here in that it will force the coaches to focus on teaching the kids to move the ball up from the back. DC and others hit it on the head, way too many youth coaches rely on a goalie punting to their fastest/biggest kid. They are playing on smaller fields, so it's the ultimate Route One and it's shitty for the game.

The con is that these same win-at-all-cost coaches are going to teach their kids how to defend in a way that will look like the New Jersey Devil trap, making it damn near impossible for some teams to get out of their own half. There's a line that the defending team has to stay behind, but once the ball is rolled out, it will be a bum rush. I predict that they move the other team to half field as a tweak to this situation in the next year or so.

2) And to answer WLU's question, yes, absolutely. We are 100 percent more focused on concussions than even 5 years ago, let alone back when we played sports. I think it is, overall, a good thing. But I do agree that we are going a bit overboard, and I think litigation/liability is a huge part of that.

3) I just want to be annoyingly redundant and stress what DC picked up on: A LOT of this would be mitigated with better, more consistent refereeing. One other observation: I'm convinced at this point that a lot of refs don't call as many fouls in girls games because they don't think girls are as rough as boys... Or some variation on that theme. Which is true if both teams stay relatively above board. But I will tell you, if stuff starts to get edgy... Girls don't fuck around. You've all seen the clip of that girl in college losing her shit and trying to yank her opponents head off. I'm not saying it gets to that level, but they will absolutely get into it. And refs quite often let it go WAY too far. That is, obviously, hugely anecdotal... But I've coached both and that's another aspect of refereeing that has bugged me for years.

[Steve of phpBB]

We need to hear from an expert.

Where's HOUND these days?

[tennbengal]

I hear nonlinear on ref'ing and its problems and fully agree that, at least around this part of the mid-atlantic - they truly suck. What's weird for me is seeing him complain about how much they let go when I have found that most of the refs for at least my son's games seem to have no clue at all about what is normal physical soccer contact and what is a foul. There are refs around here who view ANY contact as a foul, and it is a complete joke. The coaches in Quinn's club that he has had from overseas (british primarily) all universally laugh over how shit the ref'ing is when it comes to appropriate physical play. I have really not run into an instance where goalies are exposed in the games I have seen as officials are so damn quick to blow the whistle that if a goalie is remotely near a ball play stops.

Maybe it is simple sexism - the refs allow more contact in girls games because they are girls. In too many of the games on the boys side, it is a joke how often they blow the whistle. Unless, frankly, the center ref is hispanic. Then you get an actual legit soccer game.

[elflaco]

and if the ref is latino?

[tennbengal]

and if the ref is latino?

That too.

[tennbengal]

If the refs played (or play) soccer, they are pretty decent on when to call contact, as near as I can tell. It's the ones who look like they have only taken a class that seem to have no clue. And, around this part of Maryland/Delaware/PA, too damn many of those.

[Nonlinear FC]

I hear nonlinear on ref'ing and its problems and fully agree that, at least around this part of the mid-atlantic - they truly suck. What's weird for me is seeing him complain about how much they let go when I have found that most of the refs for at least my son's games seem to have no clue at all about what is normal physical soccer contact and what is a foul. There are refs around here who view ANY contact as a foul, and it is a complete joke. The coaches in Quinn's club that he has had from overseas (british primarily) all universally laugh over how shit the ref'ing is when it comes to appropriate physical play. I have really not run into an instance where goalies are exposed in the games I have seen as officials are so damn quick to blow the whistle that if a goalie is remotely near a ball play stops.

Maybe it is simple sexism - the refs allow more contact in girls games because they are girls. In too many of the games on the boys side, it is a joke how often they blow the whistle. Unless, frankly, the center ref is hispanic. Then you get an actual legit soccer game.

Your kid is playing Pipeline, right? EDP, if I recall? And you're still getting that quality of reffing?

That's a scary thought. For folks not immersed in this shit, EDP is for elite teams. Not the highest in the hierarchy, but it is marked step up from localized "travel" leagues.

And, yeah, I do think there's sexism involved. If you had seen the goalie stuff, your jaw would drop. I think I'm possibly being overly influenced by a couple of really blatant things I saw last week on that front. But I will absolutely stand by the overall impression of how refs treat the girls game.

[tennbengal]

I hear nonlinear on ref'ing and its problems and fully agree that, at least around this part of the mid-atlantic - they truly suck. What's weird for me is seeing him complain about how much they let go when I have found that most of the refs for at least my son's games seem to have no clue at all about what is normal physical soccer contact and what is a foul. There are refs around here who view ANY contact as a foul, and it is a complete joke. The coaches in Quinn's club that he has had from overseas (british primarily) all universally laugh over how shit the ref'ing is when it comes to appropriate physical play. I have really not run into an instance where goalies are exposed in the games I have seen as officials are so damn quick to blow the whistle that if a goalie is remotely near a ball play stops.

Maybe it is simple sexism - the refs allow more contact in girls games because they are girls. In too many of the games on the boys side, it is a joke how often they blow the whistle. Unless, frankly, the center ref is hispanic. Then you get an actual legit soccer game.

Your kid is playing Pipeline, right? EDP, if I recall? And you're still getting that quality of reffing?

That's a scary thought. For folks not immersed in this shit, EDP is for elite teams. Not the highest in the hierarchy, but it is marked step up from localized "travel" leagues.

And, yeah, I do think there's sexism involved. If you had seen the goalie stuff, your jaw would drop. I think I'm possibly being overly influenced by a couple of really blatant things I saw last week on that front. But I will absolutely stand by the overall impression of how refs treat the girls game.

Yes, Pipeline, EDP, and still getting that quality of ref'ing. They. are. horrible. Problem in Maryland is, regardless of EDP or, up my way the rec/travel leagues of CMSA or BBSL, all are drawing from the same ref group and they are all equally pretty much incompetent. Hell, at our away EDP game in Delaware against Delaware Rush a few weeks back that ref was so awful he warned the entire team that the next person who fouled was getting a card and thrown out. It was jaw droppingly terrible.

[DSafetyGuy]

We need to hear from an expert.

Where's HOUND these days?

Nice.

[DC47]

That's an interesting thought on the possibility that refs are more lax in girls' games. I have seen a million, at all levels, and it's crossed my mind. But I'd have to watch a lot of boys' games at the same level to make an informed judgment. I have noticed that girls do a lot of subtle fouling, where the boys are more likely to do things that are more over-the-top (often literally). My daughter used to mention how her own teammate (current ECNL player on a top 10 national team, headed to D1 school) would tap her achilles tendons and calves when she was defending from behind, during both intra-team scrimmages and drills. Often the taps weren't light. But the motion was subtle. The coach let it go, and during games referees let it go.

Over many decades, I have never said a word to a ref during a game about a call or non-call. Not as a player, coach, or parent. I've watched my then-eleven year old daughter get hacked down in the box with ten seconds left in a tournament final and not get a call. Not a word. I took my daughter out to breakfast where she had waffles with whipped cream, with naproxen and ice on the side, and then to the ER. Her call on the order.

Generally, I think that at least 90% of what is said to refs is either gaming, blatantly biased, or based on a lack of knowledge of the game.

But I certainly think the reffing in girls games is loose. That's at all levels, including ECNL. This is dangerous, obviously. "Even" girls will go right up to what they perceive the line to be. But it also changes the game. If coaches can't count on getting most of their games called in a way that allows players to use their skills, then it's just like having a schedule where they know that many of their games will be played in adverse weather. They will tend towards a higher degree of kick-and-chase + max defend in their tactics. That will influence the extent to which they play more defensive positioning, and who they put on the field.

Coaches without job security who have 'play to win' dialed way up, parents who can't distinguish winning from development, lax reffing -- all these things and more lead to kick-and-chase soccer.

Worse, there is a self-reinforcing cycle. Playing to win rather than develop and preferring some variant of the kick-and-chase + max defend style tends to under-develop players' skills. Those that prefer a more skilled game or are better at this style tend to leave the sport. The good players move to the 'better' (as defined by winning) teams, which get that way by playing kick-and-chase + max defend.

The result is that all but a handful of the top teams in virtually all states are characterized by a strong kick-and-chase + max defend style. This is a legitimate aspect of soccer, both in terms of players' talents and coaching strategy. But the extent to which it exists in high-level club soccer saddens me. Much of the beauty of the game is driven out.

I recall one of my daughter's final club soccer games. This U18 team (with some U17 players, and three U16 players) included several future D1 and D2 players, as well as a few who could have gone that route but chose to attend a school like Michigan State which was too strong in soccer for them to play more than club. The offense was stacked; the girl who would be named the top Michigan high school player the next year was not the best of them. The team was down by a goal late in the second half. They had a corner kick. The other team defended with all but their striker, who was at the mid-field line. She was a good but not great player. Our team's coach -- whose extensive experience included college and professional play as well as coaching at the ODP and college levels, and serving as the technical director at an elite club -- marked that single striker with three starting defenders (not subs), including the girl who was one of the team's most effective header in corner kick situations. Behind them he had the top goalie in the state. So his corner kick strategy was to run 6 attackers into the box against 10 defenders.

Note again, this team was down by one with only a few minutes left. It was near the end of the season, and since it was a U18 team there would be no relegation or advancement depending on the outcome. To me, this coach's obsession with defending -- combined with kick-chase tactics despite being loaded with skill players -- had reached the point of obvious insanity. But it was actually well within the range of elite coaching I have seen on the girls' side. Not a word was said along these lines -- then or later -- among the parents, most of whom believed they knew the sport pretty well as they had watched hundreds of elite youth soccer games by this time.

Just another elite club soccer match. The sad thing is that it really was.

[wlu_lax6]

As someone who was up to a few months ago VP of a local officials association here is the reality of it for your world (i.e. not college or pro)

Officials Assignors #1 priority--get games covered. Assignors are paid well (~7-15% of a ref fee per game assigned). It is big money, but a big pain. Turn backs, non-responses, etc make it very hard. Assignors hate when your availability calendar is not up-to-date

#2 priority--keep the person with the contract happy (i.e .usually the league). And they rank these based on prestige or the league and $$$ of the relationship

#3 priority--maintaining their control,power, and influence

#4 priority- getting the right officials on the right game

#5 priority- developing officials/creating opportunities for them to move up.

not generally a priority- ensuring officials are certified and up-to-date on training/testing requirements

Because #1 is such a big deal, officials who say yes and are willing to work, get LOTS and LOTS of games..probably too many. My in house rec league my son play in...a high school kid covers 8 games on Sat and another 8 on Sunday. He is not in enough shape and has not been trained. What we find is our best officials (i.e. the guys who do High School state championships, NCAA guys, etc) don't work too many youth games or such. They are just not whores for the $ and treat the job as an important job/craft. Your kids for the top club soccer leagues are generally getting one of two types of officials..people working hard to impress the assignors and move up....and folks in it for the money.

When we put officials on the field, there are guys who will do 8 lacrosse games. They lose focus and start going through the motions, quality suffers. Not good for anyone. We put in a requirement for our assignors to not work an official more than 4 games straight on 6 in a day with a break IF POSSIBLE (which is the key...games have to be covered).

Next time you are at your kid's game..just ask the crew how many they have today...will tell you everything you need to know about the quality you will expect.

[DC47]

One of several reasons I have never made a comment to a ref during a game, over several decades, is exactly what you describe. The system is not set up to provide quality reffing. Bad reffing is the outcome. One more guy yelling at a ref isn't going to change much that day, and isn't going to be a positive force in the system.

Assigning and training are two factors. Pay is another. But there are more. One is that refs take far too much abuse, particularly from coaches and parents. This increases the turnover level, which exacerbates the assignment and training problems. And the turnover is not just from the bottom. A ref who knows the game, and calls it the right way, will often have less tolerance for getting verbally abused in most of his or her games. Especially since much of the abuse is from people who are obviously biased and don't understand the game.

Here's an example of a systemic problem with reffing. Calling a game with a center ref and two assistants is quite feasible if they are highly trained, in good condition, and they know each other. But that is routinely true only in the very highest levels in this country. When centers are slow, they can't see the game well. When ARs barely know the game, they can't offer more than simple off-sides and out-of-bounds calls. When the center doesn't really know the ARs, and thus can't trust them or trust in communications that are terse, he or she will often just tell them to leave it at that. The result is that virtually all games are called by centers who are often out of position, and who have less help from ARs (reliable calls, indications of fouls, influence on coaches) than they do at higher levels. A three-ref system that works (barely -- they need technical help) at high levels, is bound to break down at lower levels. Structure, personnel quality, training, assignment, work load -- these things are all problems in club soccer. Often quite serious ones.

[Nonlinear FC]

1) I actually had an anecdote from last week where I do, in fact, feel justified yelling at a ref: When a player is down for injury and he/she is waving the play on. I hate that shit. If you think she is diving or playacting, card her. Otherwise, blow the fucking whistle so I can go check on her. And, no, dummy, no one needs to kick the ball out of bounds anymore. Blow the damn whistle.

2) In MD high school, up until the regional finals (!) they work a two ref system. It is absolutely the worst, for so many reasons. In fact, the goalie runs I'm talking about both happened with this system. The closest ref was 35-40 yards away, because these two guys have to cover both the offsides and touchline calls, so they are positioned almost like an AR. Fucking ridiculous.

[DC47]

In high-level games around here you can count on the ball being kicked out when a player is down. But if for some reason that's not on, you are of course right about the referee's lack of sense. Player safety is the first priority. In my experience, diving is actually rare. They pick that up in college. It might actually be better if they dove more, because it would cause defenders to back off a notch, especially in the box, lest they give a diver good cover.

My comments about the many ways in which the three ref system is a structural impediment to good reffing in youth soccer is not meant to endorse the two ref system. It is as bad as you say, and in addition creates another battle ground between coaches and refs as to whether the game is being called the same on each end of the field.

There are no cheap and easy solutions. You could get part of the way by spending money on training. Part of which would be on control of coaches and parents by using the red card for dissent more freely. Toning down the games would at least improve retention of qualified refs who were in it at least partly due to love of the game or to give back. It would also allow for more retention of female refs, who might be more willing to whistle a tight game with female players as they would have no illusions as to how rough they could be and diminished gender-related need to demonstrate that they were tough themselves ("That's not a foul" = "I am not a pansy.")

My daughter was a good referee. As she got older she was capable of reffing higher-level games, and moving to the center more often. But she drew the line pretty low as to age and competitive level. Making a little more money (typically with more travel as well), just wasn't worth it to her, given the abuse she knew she'd get, no matter how good she was.

I considered offering to attend higher-level games she reffed, at least in the beginning and for just the tough CR jobs. I met several parents of (mostly female) refs after games, when they thanked me for my civility, who were there for something other than the sunshine. But while I'm big enough to be somewhat imposing by merely standing next to a ref abuser, there are so many ways this can work out badly.

My daughter focused on calling the game the right way with the young ones, and at the same time providing some on-field guidance to those who were notably clueless (e.g., legal throw-ins). I was quite proud of her. But sad that someone like her, who could in theory have done a lot of quality reffing at high-levels, knew better than to try it.

A year or two sg a ref was killed by a player on a field near here. There have been several cases I know of where a parent with a weapon was removed from the sidelines by police. I've seen games suddenly end in forfeit when a coach threatened a referee. In addition to the typical referee abuse, this kind of behavior is going to suppress a whole lot of willingness to do this job.

[wlu_lax6]

So the ladies are suing for equal/better pay. What is cool is you can see the pay and incentives for both teams. And while yes the lawyers argument about equal work maybe true...I am guessing the FIFA TV money and sponsorship dollars weigh heavily to the men's team.
http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2016/03 ... -equal-pay" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;