Minnesota Assessment Program

transcript

January 15, 2012

Agenda

State Assessment Program Update

Expectations

Feedback

Game Rating Review

Match Assessment ExerciseBrief 2 – 3 Minute Presentations

State Assessment Team

Bob Petersen – SDAsda@minnesotasrc.comredcardnb@hotmail.com Bob Petersen @nationalrefNational AssessorNational Referee EmeritusAssociate Instructor

Kip Jackson – Deputy SDAjacksonk0001@yahoo.comState AssessorNational Referee

Responsibilities

Bob Petersen – SDATrainingAssignmentPrograms

Kip Jackson – Deputy SDAMentoring

Assessment Program Update

2011 Assessors

45 total assessors registered3 National Assessors

including 1 Referee Inspector2 National Assessors Emeritus14 State Assessors7 Referee Assessors19 Associate Assessors

Added Assessors

Artem Sher, new State AssessorKip Jackson, new State AssessorMatt Tiano, new Associate AssessorJohn Morstad, new Associate AssessorKyle Burkhardt, new Associate AssessorKen Lamb, returning State Assessor

Assessor Upgrades

Doug MarshakTo Referee Assessor

S. John HagensteinTo State Assessor

Sam TriguiTo State Assessor

2011 Assessor Training

State Assessors Course, Orlando, FLS. John HagensteinKip JacksonArtem SherSam Trigui

2011 Assessor Training

State Assessors Course, Orlando, FLS. John HagensteinKip JacksonArtem SherSam Trigui

State Assessor Academy, Developmental Academy Playoffs, Frisco, TX

Gentry Thatcher

2011 Games Covered

Minnesota Cup – 5 games including FinalMRSL Playoffs

Quarterfinals through Finals2 Developmental Academy U18

2011 Administrative Improvements

Most state assessors access to ‘Pro’ side of gameofficialsAdded and improved features on SRC site

Improved functionalityAssessor forms and guides added

Referee upgrade process strengthenedChanged again for 2012

Assessor game and mileage fees determined‘State Inspector’ list identified

Assist with assessor training and advanced referees

Referee Upgrading

Only for referees upgrading to grades 6 or 5Old process for 2011

Must pass two (2) mentoring reviews before next stepPotential to not move past mentoringMust pass required formal assessments

New process for 2012One (1) mentoring review before next stepEveryone will proceed to formal assessmentsMust pass required formal assessments

Needs and Future Plans

Ensure all assessors have website accessReferee & game rating conformityAdd and improve items to SRC site as neededMYSA MentorshipRegional and US Soccer event participation‘Remote’ assessmentsAssessor coaches for high potential refereesAssessor academy during State Cup

Games to Cover

Developmental AcademyMinnesota and Wilson CupMRSL PlayoffsNPSL – Men and WomenMN Stars FC ExhibitionsMidwest Regional LeagueMYSA State Tournament

Assessor Academy

During first weekend of State CupOlder age group games

Friday night through Sunday afternoonUp to 8 assessors2 – 3 assessor instructors7 – 8 assessments each assessorCritique of game observation and feedback methodsLet Bob Petersen know if interested

Expectations

Program Expectations

Quality of assessmentsMore discriminateUseful informationAccurate grading

Feedback to entire crewAll assessments entered into gameofficialsEmail copies of pdf to referees within 7 daysMaintenance and upgrade assessments, results in SRC site within 48 hours

Vernacular

Acceptable performanceUnacceptable performance

Do NOT use FAIL or FAILURE

Feedback

Feedback Preparation

The focus is always on the referees and their developmentDevelopmental issues AND positivesWhat are you going to ask about?Prepare questions on big incidentsHow player and referee actions affected the matchUse match factsDo not use own biases

Feedback Preparation

Assessors must be experts at ‘connecting the dots’If a referee has an area that is not acceptable, you must inform them and why

Individual criteriaTotal match performance

Terminology

Use terms described in the criteriaPresencePOE on elbowing (tool v weapon)POE on dissent (personal, public, provocative)Ask, tell, removeCareless / reckless / excessive forceOptions100% misconductPlayer needed / game needed

Feedback Session

Engage the whole crewFacilitate the discussion

Try get the crew to do most of the talkingAsk questions of entire crew

Different anglesDifferent points of view

Acknowledge positivesOffer suggestions and alternate methods of handling incidents as neededDo not get into extended debates

FC Dallas v Weston FC

1’, Red defender #4 runs upfield and commits a hard foul on White #244’, White #24 tackles Red #4 unfairly from behind

Simple foul called16’, Red #4 elbow on White #24 incident51’, Red forward commits a late tackle from behind53’, White forward jumps very late at opposing GK58’, White midfielder commits bad tackle at midfield

Referee briefly talks to player61’, Red midfielder runs over white player from behind at midfield

Referee briefly talks to player

Longer Postgame Method

3 positives3 negatives3 things referee will do differently3 action items

Newer Postgame Method

3 events in first half3 events in second half

Tie issues togetherPositive and developmental

Anything referee would do differentlyTime permitting

Do you have to give verbal feedback

immediately after the match?

Reporting

Written feedback must be close to verbalNo surprises!

Accurately critique ratingsAre your scores appropriate?

Same expectations of referees – timely

Game Rating Review

Unified Grading ScaleNot

Acceptable Very Good OutstandingAcceptable

69 or less 70 - 79 80 - 89 90 - 100

Competitive Difficult Very DifficultVaries

75 85 95Minimum 69

Difficult game but ref handled all

critical decisions80 - 93

Difficult managed to Competitive

76 - 84Low

70 - 74Very Difficult managed to

Difficult86 - 94

Starting point for performances in each game “difficulty” area.• Scores move

up/down depending upon ref performance and decisions.

Competitive game but ref handled all critical decisions

70 - 83

Scoring Range

Game Difficulty

Standard Performance

Performance or Game Critical

69 or less

What elements contribute to game difficulty?

Rating Questions

Does a low or easy game rating also mean a not ratable game or insufficient test?

What does a score of 95 mean?

What does a score of 50 mean?

Game Rating Example

U17 boysRelatively low foul count1 caution given plus 1 tough incident with player and goalkeeper that the referee handled well

Game Rating Example

What game difficulty do you expect?What referee scores would you expect?

Game Rating Example

AR2 (grade 8) given 85AR1 (grade 16) given 95Referee (grade 7) given 90Assessor rated as difficult based upon POTENTIAL of poor player behavior and incident

Game Rating Guide

How competitive was the game to expectations for that level?What elements were present before the game?What elements or events occurred throughout the game?How did any of these elements contribute to the competitiveness or difficulty?

Do not base rating on the referee gradeDo not rate a game based on how difficult the game would be for you

Low, Competitive, Difficult, or Very Difficult

U13 girls MYSAU17 boys MYSAU17 boys State Cup SemifinalU16 boys Mpls United v Mpls United PremierD1 MRSL Red Devis v TsunamiD1 MRSL Medtronic v JooGoo Road WarriorSporting KC v Houston DynamoChivas Guadalajara v Club AméricaUSA v México World Cup Qualifier

Match Assessment Exercise

Directions

Your table is your groupUse Game Data form for notes10 minutes to fill out formsRate game difficulty with reasons and notes on overall performance in first section3 comments in first 2 criteria for referee1 comment in remaining criteria for referee and all criteria for ARs and 4th officialScore referee teamBrief 2 – 3 minute presentation

Prairie Seeds Academy vBenilde - St. Margaret’s

Presentations

Game difficultyReferee scores3 positive comments on referee3 developmental comments on referee

Minnesota Assessment Program

Documents