The local season is fast approaching its crucial stages when the male teams will be gearing up for the final straight, i.e. the play-offs, even though there will be the secondary competitions going on at the same time and the major teams will also aim for a success here as well.
The female league campaign is on the other hand practically over. In fact the championship will be decided either today or next Sunday at the most when games 4 and 5 of the final series are respectively programmed. There will then be a temporary stop of over a month as the national team will be facing a very tough hurdle at the Commonwealth Games and then the secondary competitions will be played in the final two months of the 2005/2006 season.
As interest rises and games increase in importance, teams will be battling hard for wins and as a consequence certain arguments (one always hopes for sportsmanlike arguments and not vicious and aggressive ones) will naturally occur. Thus I am dealing with this topic in today’s article whereby I am mentioning certain points adapted from other articles written on specialised publications as well as experience, both personal and that of fellow seasoned international referees I had the pleasure to meet and discuss matters with.
No one can deny that it is instinctive in human nature to argue. When someone challenges your authority, your opinion or your knowledge, it is absolutely normal that your first reaction would be to assume a defensive posture or attitude.
How enthusiastically and determinedly you defend your point of view usually depends on how sure you are of yourself or how persistently and actively the other person raises the question.
Referees are not expected (some would say that they are in fact allowed) to argue. In all but the rarest of cases, referees are supposed to turn a deaf ear to negative criticism and arguments, thereby letting all the comments eventually bounce off them like bullets off a bullet-proof vest.
This is definitely and without doubt (and has also been at times proven to be), one of the most difficult aspects of refereeing. It takes a thick skin and a strong character to sometimes turn a blind eye to insults, jeers and fallacies said about you when , on the other hand, you are totally certain to be 100 per cent concentrated, doing the right job and taking the right decisions.
In everyday disputes, it is satisfying for an average person to get in the last word or come up with a statement that leaves the other person speechless. If a referee takes that habit onto the court or field of play, he will soon develop a somewhat bad reputation.
Right or wrong, referees are instead expected to be above such stinginess and small-mindedness.
In reality, absorbing a certain amount of verbal abuse from coaches and players is considered part of the job. I do not want to b misunderstood whereby somebody thinks that the referee has to withstand all that is directed towards him. What I am stating here is that the referee should have a good feel of the game and thus could accept certain instinctive, not totally over-the-top, reactions. It would be wonderful to know exactly how much to take, but that is not humanely possible. The best a referee can do is end the argument as quickly as possible before things could get completely out of control.
A phrase, learnt form my peers, that I found out can end many arguments regarding judgment calls is, "Coach, if it happened the way you say it did, then I got it wrong." It works because the referee is not admitting a mistake, putting up a defence or ignoring the coach completely.
Only a coach who wants to argue for the fun of it or is trying to intimidate a referee will eventually continue an argument after hearing that phrase. Any coach with those motives then deserves to be ignored or be dealt with according to the game rules.
Whether the issue is a rule or a judgment call, the coach may also ask you, as the referee, to get help from a partner or any other member of the refereeing team. My advice is not to be bullied into such a type of discussion, but if you are unsure and believe another official can help, go for help.
In these circumstances always be sure that the conversation is as brief as possible and takes place out of the coach’s earshot. When the discussion is over, explain to the coach why you are sticking to your guns or are changing your call. In the latter case, be sure to explain the ruling to the opposing coach.
It always pays to develop a good rapport with all the game participants. However one does not need to be overly friendly.
The following excerpt from a referee magazine fits neatly in today’s article: “A referee should always think about perceptions. If you, as a referee. are talking extensively and laughing with coach A like you are longtime friends, what does coach B think? This example highlights the fact that one should keep conversations professional and brief. If a coach or player has a legitimate question or concern, take the time to explain the situation. Above all, do not try to avoid and dodge all questions because as the saying goes, ‘the longer you ignore it, the longer it lasts’”.
Before concluding I am must highlight also that there is another factor involved, the player. As important as it is for a referee to learn how to handle an argument, it is equally important for a player to learn how to argue.
It is no secret that players must learn. Certain forms of arguing are not acceptable at any level, regardless of the sport. The most obvious is making physical contact with a referee during an argument. Other no-no’s include: Using the words "you" or "you’re" in front of a negative term or swearing loudly enough for fans, etc. to hear or even tossing around any of the game equipment.
[email protected]