Number of refs (water & deck) and timekeepers

A spin off from the glove colour debate...

I apologise for having read Duck's post too quickly and having missed the last two words of this sentence "the Deck Ref may not be near the sin-bin when the time penalty is over". Having read Tuck's post I understand now what he's getting at.
I think that a similar problem to Tuck's arouse in Bari...

For me this raises a new point: shouldn't the time keepers be refs as well (not necessarily international quality refs) or at least someone with a sound notion of the rules of the game (and why the rules can be important)? Wouldn't they then have the inclination and authority to remind deck refs to let players out when they wonder away from the bin to monitor the game and forget about the player who's free to go back in the water?

At many of the national and intenational comps I've been to, the deck ref has a walkie talkie and earpiece, so the desk can communicate with them. This allows them to pass on such info very easily.

Having said that - using timekeepers who a ualified Refs is a good idea for a lot of reasons. Just not always possible to do!!!

You may notice the word 'should' is used in these messages. Should is what someone else is supposed to do or how is it 'spoozed' to happen.

When the deck ref is across the pool and holding the penalized players, the persons at officials table seem to forget them - out of sight, out of mind perhaps. It is particularly tricky when there are multiple players with differing times from different teams who maybe have same cap number - is it black 5 or white 5? My eyes are on the game;in 2006, I cannot count the number of times I had to call the officials table and ask how much time left on XXX player(s)? and be told 'oh they can go.' Again this not entirely desk fault, they've got a lot going too. And the timing system in 06 worked against us.

In Canada, resting level 3s often assisted in controlling and timing penalties - sort of volunteered. We did the same in 2004 when players and deck ref adjacent to table; then for elite games, deck ref moved to center of pool across the water, but then I had one person on the headset - separate from table crew - who worked the penalties. I found someone I worked well with and bugged them to be on the other end of my games.

There is no one, easy solution but having an extra qualified body with deck ref is one. USA refs back each other. In 2000 some of the Aussie desk help was little taken back: 'who is in charge' they asked. I said, introducing my cohert in crime, Charlie (Joe, Glen) speak for me and will handle all penalties. We, my crime friends and I, had agreed how we would handle the deck - as in they would tell me what they saw, ie illegal sub, etc and I would control the game.

My yearly and WC experience should (that word again) give me creditability on this subject, but perhaps my gender works against me. C'est la guerre.

I think you really have to do a lot of deck refing to see the fine points; you get to know when to expect time outs, you get to know the slightly different ways water refs signal, etc - It is the fine points that make a good deck ref - the devil's in the details - the players certainly know.

__________________
Carol Rose

I fail to see why and how gender would be an argument working against you.

gender is certainly not an issue.... also experience does not guarantee a good deck ref. the players certainly do know who does a good job and who doesn't.... some refs have reputations for being good just as others have reps for being absolutely rubbish.

perhaps the ref feedback forms that were used in sheffield should cover the deck refs as well, so that they can get some feedback and be rated for their performances. fair for all.

__________________
it's more polite on the grating than on the subs bench

as I never saw the forms, never received any feedback on my refing (good, bad, indifferent), never heard of any ref seeing/hearing about their ratings .......... I assumed the forms covered all refs; didn't they? I know a US team filed a form regarding a deck ref. There has been a LOT of talk of transparency on this forum; the refing review in 2006 was totally black/dark/muddy/choose your word.

__________________
Carol Rose

i liked the fact we actually had an opportunity to give some feedback.

could be that the info is still being collated, or was used in an internal way, not necessarily providing feedback to the refs themselves but helping the tournament ref pick the refs to use later on in the comp.

__________________
it's more polite on the grating than on the subs bench

Hi Carol et al - I must respectfully disagree with you on the topic of Referee feedback forms!!!

We've been talking at Worlds rules meetings and referees meetings about using some sort of feedback/rating system to getting information on referee performance from the teams since at least 2002!!! The feedback forms used in Sheffield were presented by Woody, Murray, Rob Feist and Pizazz to all the Refs at the referees meeting at Sheffield before the competition started, and we definitely discussed them there - in fact from memory we made several changes to the proposed forms!! It definitely was NOT something that came from nowhere, as you suggest.

Agreed, the focus was certainly on water refs rather than deck refs (and Liam's suggestion on covering ALL refs is a good one), but I don't think that the ongoing 'feedback' from the forms was a secret. I know of several Refs who sighted forms that had comments on their refereeing, and worked on improving areas that were highlighted as 'deficiencies' by teams.

From memory, the refs used for finals were chosen to some degree from the information received on these, and although I know that it took Woody a long time to collate alll the results he received, I don't think that they were secret!

I personally thought the process was a very good one, both from the perspective of getting feedback on MY refereeing, and as a Masters player - being able to provide feedback on others (because I'm very shy, and unwilling to give it otherwise! :-) ).

I hope we use them in South Africa.

Cheers,

Simon

I would suggest that instead of getting more refs, getting a competent timekeeper is more important then.

I can't help thinking that this is way out of proportion. Admittedly I have not chief reffed at a Worlds, but have at club and tournament competitions. Piece of cake I thought... and I know the list of things that need to be taken care of, but... ahhh... piece of cake...

__________________
Faster than a speeding puck...

Woody Lee was not in Sheffield

__________________
Carol Rose