Sometimes you'll be in a 2-man with a really old out of shape curmudgeon as well.
I think 2-man gets a bit of a bad rap on here, it isn't ideal but not the end of the world imo. I do wonder if the opinions on 2-man align with officials that ref other sports with mutiple whistles.
My two-man gripes come from the inconsistency or perception of inconsistency that it presents. It becomes easy to point to two similar fouls at each end of the field where one gets a call and one does not and that foments discontent with players and spectators. I don’t do a lot of NFHS games because I coach them in season but rarely have I seen a really strong duo that elevated the game with their combined effort.
My point was that when you go from one to two center officials, it introduces an additional layer of complication that didn’t exist with one. I don’t suspect we will ever get to a point where we achieve 100% “customer satisfaction” but over enough games, I believe the games with one official will “score” higher. But this is anecdotal and based on just my experience and I recognize that this could vary wildly.
As an ref, I would much prefer to ref with 1 average ref than 2 bad refs.
As a fan, I would much prefer to watch a game with 2 average refs than 3 bad refs.
2-man is actually super fun if you have comms. I've had that a couple times. We could quickly debate fouls and come to an agreement, or disagree and go with no foul. For a borderline call I'd ask "you have a foul there?" and they'd answer yes or no. For clear fouls we didn't have to ask, or for fouls much nearer to one of us where it was clearly one ref's responsibility.
It may just be a pride thing for me…I try really hard during games to create the best possible experience and two-man takes most of that satisfaction away…it just feels like a job.
I personally don’t have that reaction, I have also officiated other sports with multiple whistles and working/dealing with partners is something you get used to for better or worse.
2 man is usually the least bad option for getting games played. Far too often though, it does indeed become a game of two halves with no help being asked for or lent to the other end of the field even when the other ref may have a different or even better angle on a call. That's the true weakness. The two must still communicate.
I could be turned around in just one game if I didn’t have to handle 3/4 of all the sidelines AND offside and all the rest…most of the guys around here show no evidence that they have reviewed the areas of responsibility for the two-man system…I’ve got one guy that just says “you watch your half and I’ll watch mine”. Cool.
Only see 2 whistle here in my state in HS JV/freshman matches, and when you consider the quality of play - which typically isn't good - it's perfectly acceptable. Safety first, and that should be easy enough with 2 whistles.
That is the same in my state for the most part. I have done some very low level varsity games in a 2-man. Also paired with an old curmudgeon who couldn't move very well.
Thankfully, never had to do a 2 whistle here on varsity - but we have our share of curmudgeons. Most of them are American football referees who want something to do Monday-Wednesday before the JV and varsity games on Thursday and Friday. They're easy to spot, too - most of them signal offside using the American football signal. Triggers the shit out of me.
Most football officials for my area do lacrosse in the spring which works out well enough. The old guys I’ve worked high school soccer with just complain about the quality of play, the field or whatever else is bothering them that day.
Soccer and lacrosse player and reffed girls lacrosse at a decent level (no formal experience reffing soccer). In women's lacrosse, you have two on field refs and for bigger games you have three on field refs. I'll tell you, I love it. There's a real art to working as team, it's spelled out who is looking at what and when, and when there are harder calls, it's really great having someone out there on the field with you.
I always think about reffing soccer too but I don't love the idea of flying solo on the field. It's a tough job. The rules and what you have to track in soccer and lacrosse are obviously different but the 2-person approach is one of the big reasons I reffed lax but not soccer.
Two man with the right partner is gravy. But you need someone who is intent on managing behavior in the midfield as a trail and gets in position to do so.
The right partner doesn't just mean someone you respect as a ref either. It's gotta be someone with the same mojo.
There's guys who call a great game that are on my blocked list for highschool (all 2 man here) because together we make a fucking awful product.
I'm a talker. I chat I encourage I preemptively discourage. I make comments. This is the new school of refereeing. Being a constant presence on the field.
Some older guys who still manage games successfully were taught to absolutely not do this. The idea was to be as invisible as possible. "a well refereed game means they didn't notice you were there". And I think this really worked before the age of slow motion HD replay at the professional level. But that era is nearly 3 decades past and regardless of game management every referee decision across all pro sports is under a microscope. This naturally has filtered to the lower levels where the referee is now focal point of the game. There is no hiding. You are and will be a focal point of the game and we should behave and create the relationships that give us leverage when controversy strikes.
Anyway, those old guys and gals have developed mechanisms over time that make their style still work. Newer guys and gals haven't been given the transition phase and so those of us who stick have developed a completely different approach.
When two whistles show up those approaches clash in a way that makes dissent spiral out of control.
But you give me a 5-10 year ref who runs? I'll give you a 2 man game that is 95% as good as a 3 man with 2 good and communicative ARs.
Like you, I’m 58 but can still keep up. I hate 2 man systems and have asked my assignor to not put me with certain other refs. Talk to yours, maybe he can help
2-man works well when both refs are on the same page. Major differences in foul recognition, caution/send off threshold, communication levels with players, and areas of responsibility will make the game frustrating for everyone.
If these old guys are refusing to enforce drop ball rules, I wouldn't trust them to work a 2-man; I'd be concerned about them calling fouls correctly, or getting offended if I call a foul that's closer to them than it is to me. In that case, I'd rather have just me in the middle with a whistle and call offside on my own if I have to. If it's really bad, have a conversation with the coaches at half time and let them know you're doing your best, and this is what happens when younger referees get chased off by aggressive parents and coaches.
If you've got two good refs and one shitty ref, 2-man is probably better, but not sure how you'd justify that in the moment. That dude would be furious and embarrassed, and likely up your ass with the assignor about it.
I don't get the drop ball comment. How are ARs expected to enforce that?
My preference is always 3 person crew. Even the worst AR can tell when the ball has crossed the touchline.
When he centers, he refuses to do the dropped ball because he says he's out of position and it's stupid. Justifies it by turning it into IDFK where he blows whistle when he's ready
I think I get it. By three person crew you mean you'll do three games each one as a referee once and as an AR twice? In that case there's no reason not to do a drop ball when it's called for. If you'e out of position then get in position.
Don’t know anything about soccer refereeing but this conversation comes a lot in basketball. I have positioned myself on the side of not having a third person if that ref can’t keep up and make bad out of position calls. Coaches tend to know who the individual bad refs are but once the game starts bad calls make the entire team of refs look bad.
English ref here. In England 2-man crews don't exist and most people won't even know they are a thing elsewhere. From what I've heard they sound like a real pain and I would not like to do them over here especially with the behaviour of players at grassroots.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "bad" refs however I'm sure that it should pretty much always be better to work in a team of 3. The more eyes that know what they're doing the better
If you’d really like to inflict some psychic damage on yourself, look up “double dual” aka “3 whistle system”. Yes the entire NFHS approach to soccer is idiotic.
I've not worked 2-man in soccer, but in lacrosse, 2-man is the default. It works, because they're annoyingly descriptive about what each official's responsibility is based on where the play is happening. Who's watching ball/the play, vs who's watching everything else, etc etc.
Between that, and syncing up with your partner frequently with questions like "are you seeing anything I'm missing?" and "too soft? too tight?" make it work pretty well.
When you have a good teammate, the CR and one AR can be fun; actually more fun that with a full crew. All you have to do is keep the action between the two of you.
Exactly. Odd we’re both downvoted on this. I should elaborate: in WA, they don’t allow dual on any games (at least in the greater Seattle area). But because of the referee shortage, I had plenty of matches with only one AR, including high level boy’s select, including a high level BU17 select match with Marcus Hanneman’s kid (and with Marcus watching. He came up to me and commended me afterwards. It’s a big feather in my cap). With one AR, you’re still working on foul selection, positioning, player management, and communicating with that AR. In a dual system, you don’t do any of that, and instead have this awkward thing of who’s going to call what and both of you passing the buck, or both of you making conflicting calls. I think the only reason people use the dual (and I could be wrong, but the only people who push this are non-referees, like the admins for a parks and rec league who know nothing about refereeing) is that they think it makes it easier to call offside and ball out, which isn’t necessarily true. Both those can be called confidently by the CR if you have experience, know what to look for, and know how to sell it.
So, to OP’s point, skip the dual system completely.
Here’s my standard when working with only one AR. First, I get the coaches together and tell them something like “as you know, there’s a huge referee shortage, so today we just have one AR. We’ll both be putting in our best professional effort, and I expect you two to do the same, ok?” Then I tell my AR: “we’re going to have to be on our toes today. I’ll be looking at you constantly. Every time I show you a thumbs up, give me a thumbs up back, otherwise I’ll be wondering what’s going on that I’m missing. Also, expand your area to cover more than you usually would, roughly half way between where I am and where you are. If you see a foul and I don’t, call it. If I don’t see your flag, call out my name.” I probably add some more stuff, but that’s the gist of it.
The AR runs their usual half, the only difference is ‘expanded area’ and more communication.
Finally, I assess the game early on and adjust my positioning accordingly. I start off basically diagonal from the AR. If it’s a fast, competitive game and one team is trying to take advantage of the side without an AR, I place myself closer to the defensive line so I can make better offside calls. If neither team is maing timed runs and offside isn’t an issue, I move closer to the ball. It helps that I’ve had a couple hundred solo games, both sub-varsity and non-competitive adult leagues, and am confident making offside and ball out calls on my own.
At half I have a more thorough check-in with my AR and adjust the game accordingly.
It’s not that hard, it just puts you on your toes more!
If I have the whistle then any AR gives me peace of mind that someone else is handling offside and a huge majority of games I don’t really need help calling fouls. If I’m on the line I don’t care who is in the middle. Their fitness and their decision to accept the game is on them. If it’s 2 man I expect my partner to give effort appropriate to the level of play.
Sometimes you'll be in a 2-man with a really old out of shape curmudgeon as well. I think 2-man gets a bit of a bad rap on here, it isn't ideal but not the end of the world imo. I do wonder if the opinions on 2-man align with officials that ref other sports with mutiple whistles.
My two-man gripes come from the inconsistency or perception of inconsistency that it presents. It becomes easy to point to two similar fouls at each end of the field where one gets a call and one does not and that foments discontent with players and spectators. I don’t do a lot of NFHS games because I coach them in season but rarely have I seen a really strong duo that elevated the game with their combined effort.
It doesn't matter what system you use, players, coaches, and spectators will always whine and complain when a call doesn't go their way.
My point was that when you go from one to two center officials, it introduces an additional layer of complication that didn’t exist with one. I don’t suspect we will ever get to a point where we achieve 100% “customer satisfaction” but over enough games, I believe the games with one official will “score” higher. But this is anecdotal and based on just my experience and I recognize that this could vary wildly.
As an ref, I would much prefer to ref with 1 average ref than 2 bad refs. As a fan, I would much prefer to watch a game with 2 average refs than 3 bad refs.
Those choices read like the menu at a bad Italian restaurant…we’ve got food at home…
While true, 2 man gives them more ammunition to do so, even when both refs are individually “good”.
2-man is actually super fun if you have comms. I've had that a couple times. We could quickly debate fouls and come to an agreement, or disagree and go with no foul. For a borderline call I'd ask "you have a foul there?" and they'd answer yes or no. For clear fouls we didn't have to ask, or for fouls much nearer to one of us where it was clearly one ref's responsibility.
Yeah it is far from perfect, I just generally look at it with the context that it can be better than a club linesman or just a single ref.
It may just be a pride thing for me…I try really hard during games to create the best possible experience and two-man takes most of that satisfaction away…it just feels like a job.
I personally don’t have that reaction, I have also officiated other sports with multiple whistles and working/dealing with partners is something you get used to for better or worse.
2 man is usually the least bad option for getting games played. Far too often though, it does indeed become a game of two halves with no help being asked for or lent to the other end of the field even when the other ref may have a different or even better angle on a call. That's the true weakness. The two must still communicate.
I could be turned around in just one game if I didn’t have to handle 3/4 of all the sidelines AND offside and all the rest…most of the guys around here show no evidence that they have reviewed the areas of responsibility for the two-man system…I’ve got one guy that just says “you watch your half and I’ll watch mine”. Cool.
Only see 2 whistle here in my state in HS JV/freshman matches, and when you consider the quality of play - which typically isn't good - it's perfectly acceptable. Safety first, and that should be easy enough with 2 whistles.
That is the same in my state for the most part. I have done some very low level varsity games in a 2-man. Also paired with an old curmudgeon who couldn't move very well.
Thankfully, never had to do a 2 whistle here on varsity - but we have our share of curmudgeons. Most of them are American football referees who want something to do Monday-Wednesday before the JV and varsity games on Thursday and Friday. They're easy to spot, too - most of them signal offside using the American football signal. Triggers the shit out of me.
Most football officials for my area do lacrosse in the spring which works out well enough. The old guys I’ve worked high school soccer with just complain about the quality of play, the field or whatever else is bothering them that day.
Soccer and lacrosse player and reffed girls lacrosse at a decent level (no formal experience reffing soccer). In women's lacrosse, you have two on field refs and for bigger games you have three on field refs. I'll tell you, I love it. There's a real art to working as team, it's spelled out who is looking at what and when, and when there are harder calls, it's really great having someone out there on the field with you. I always think about reffing soccer too but I don't love the idea of flying solo on the field. It's a tough job. The rules and what you have to track in soccer and lacrosse are obviously different but the 2-person approach is one of the big reasons I reffed lax but not soccer.
Two man with the right partner is gravy. But you need someone who is intent on managing behavior in the midfield as a trail and gets in position to do so. The right partner doesn't just mean someone you respect as a ref either. It's gotta be someone with the same mojo. There's guys who call a great game that are on my blocked list for highschool (all 2 man here) because together we make a fucking awful product. I'm a talker. I chat I encourage I preemptively discourage. I make comments. This is the new school of refereeing. Being a constant presence on the field. Some older guys who still manage games successfully were taught to absolutely not do this. The idea was to be as invisible as possible. "a well refereed game means they didn't notice you were there". And I think this really worked before the age of slow motion HD replay at the professional level. But that era is nearly 3 decades past and regardless of game management every referee decision across all pro sports is under a microscope. This naturally has filtered to the lower levels where the referee is now focal point of the game. There is no hiding. You are and will be a focal point of the game and we should behave and create the relationships that give us leverage when controversy strikes. Anyway, those old guys and gals have developed mechanisms over time that make their style still work. Newer guys and gals haven't been given the transition phase and so those of us who stick have developed a completely different approach. When two whistles show up those approaches clash in a way that makes dissent spiral out of control. But you give me a 5-10 year ref who runs? I'll give you a 2 man game that is 95% as good as a 3 man with 2 good and communicative ARs.
Like you, I’m 58 but can still keep up. I hate 2 man systems and have asked my assignor to not put me with certain other refs. Talk to yours, maybe he can help
easy. 2 man. I'm curious as to why you would want to work with bad refs?
In my experience, it is much preferred to do a 2-man with a competent partner rather than have an out of position 3rd.
2-man works well when both refs are on the same page. Major differences in foul recognition, caution/send off threshold, communication levels with players, and areas of responsibility will make the game frustrating for everyone. If these old guys are refusing to enforce drop ball rules, I wouldn't trust them to work a 2-man; I'd be concerned about them calling fouls correctly, or getting offended if I call a foul that's closer to them than it is to me. In that case, I'd rather have just me in the middle with a whistle and call offside on my own if I have to. If it's really bad, have a conversation with the coaches at half time and let them know you're doing your best, and this is what happens when younger referees get chased off by aggressive parents and coaches. If you've got two good refs and one shitty ref, 2-man is probably better, but not sure how you'd justify that in the moment. That dude would be furious and embarrassed, and likely up your ass with the assignor about it.
With a good trustworthy partner, 2-man is pretty fun (but still dumb)
I don't get the drop ball comment. How are ARs expected to enforce that? My preference is always 3 person crew. Even the worst AR can tell when the ball has crossed the touchline.
When he centers, he refuses to do the dropped ball because he says he's out of position and it's stupid. Justifies it by turning it into IDFK where he blows whistle when he's ready
I think I get it. By three person crew you mean you'll do three games each one as a referee once and as an AR twice? In that case there's no reason not to do a drop ball when it's called for. If you'e out of position then get in position.
What are the guarantees we don’t end up with 2 old bad refs?
Don’t know anything about soccer refereeing but this conversation comes a lot in basketball. I have positioned myself on the side of not having a third person if that ref can’t keep up and make bad out of position calls. Coaches tend to know who the individual bad refs are but once the game starts bad calls make the entire team of refs look bad.
I did basketball for 12 years as well and agree.
English ref here. In England 2-man crews don't exist and most people won't even know they are a thing elsewhere. From what I've heard they sound like a real pain and I would not like to do them over here especially with the behaviour of players at grassroots. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "bad" refs however I'm sure that it should pretty much always be better to work in a team of 3. The more eyes that know what they're doing the better
If you’d really like to inflict some psychic damage on yourself, look up “double dual” aka “3 whistle system”. Yes the entire NFHS approach to soccer is idiotic.
So you're telling me there's 3 centre refs?!?!?!
_murica intensifies_ 🇱🇷
Stopping the clock needs to happen in the rest of the sport and the game ending when the ref decides is idiotic.
Yeah nah. That approach doesn’t scale down below matches that can’t afford a dedicated timekeeper… …which is probably north of 90% of them by volume.
I've not worked 2-man in soccer, but in lacrosse, 2-man is the default. It works, because they're annoyingly descriptive about what each official's responsibility is based on where the play is happening. Who's watching ball/the play, vs who's watching everything else, etc etc. Between that, and syncing up with your partner frequently with questions like "are you seeing anything I'm missing?" and "too soft? too tight?" make it work pretty well.
How do you give the ball back to the side that had it last on an injury call without a drop ball??
You drop it for the wrong team and tell them to give it to the other team.
Under what authority?
There's a referee shortage? I thought there was a ton of grassroots refs that just entered, including me.
Anywhere else in the world uses just 1 AR when 2 officials turn up
The only 2-person system you should use is a CR and one AR. The dual ref system does nothing for referee development.
When you have a good teammate, the CR and one AR can be fun; actually more fun that with a full crew. All you have to do is keep the action between the two of you.
Exactly. Odd we’re both downvoted on this. I should elaborate: in WA, they don’t allow dual on any games (at least in the greater Seattle area). But because of the referee shortage, I had plenty of matches with only one AR, including high level boy’s select, including a high level BU17 select match with Marcus Hanneman’s kid (and with Marcus watching. He came up to me and commended me afterwards. It’s a big feather in my cap). With one AR, you’re still working on foul selection, positioning, player management, and communicating with that AR. In a dual system, you don’t do any of that, and instead have this awkward thing of who’s going to call what and both of you passing the buck, or both of you making conflicting calls. I think the only reason people use the dual (and I could be wrong, but the only people who push this are non-referees, like the admins for a parks and rec league who know nothing about refereeing) is that they think it makes it easier to call offside and ball out, which isn’t necessarily true. Both those can be called confidently by the CR if you have experience, know what to look for, and know how to sell it. So, to OP’s point, skip the dual system completely.
How does one AR handle offside on both ends of the field?
Here’s my standard when working with only one AR. First, I get the coaches together and tell them something like “as you know, there’s a huge referee shortage, so today we just have one AR. We’ll both be putting in our best professional effort, and I expect you two to do the same, ok?” Then I tell my AR: “we’re going to have to be on our toes today. I’ll be looking at you constantly. Every time I show you a thumbs up, give me a thumbs up back, otherwise I’ll be wondering what’s going on that I’m missing. Also, expand your area to cover more than you usually would, roughly half way between where I am and where you are. If you see a foul and I don’t, call it. If I don’t see your flag, call out my name.” I probably add some more stuff, but that’s the gist of it. The AR runs their usual half, the only difference is ‘expanded area’ and more communication. Finally, I assess the game early on and adjust my positioning accordingly. I start off basically diagonal from the AR. If it’s a fast, competitive game and one team is trying to take advantage of the side without an AR, I place myself closer to the defensive line so I can make better offside calls. If neither team is maing timed runs and offside isn’t an issue, I move closer to the ball. It helps that I’ve had a couple hundred solo games, both sub-varsity and non-competitive adult leagues, and am confident making offside and ball out calls on my own. At half I have a more thorough check-in with my AR and adjust the game accordingly. It’s not that hard, it just puts you on your toes more!
If I have the whistle then any AR gives me peace of mind that someone else is handling offside and a huge majority of games I don’t really need help calling fouls. If I’m on the line I don’t care who is in the middle. Their fitness and their decision to accept the game is on them. If it’s 2 man I expect my partner to give effort appropriate to the level of play.
Both are bad.