Referee shortage-why does it cost money to become a ref

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD stopped reffing because of scheduling conflicts with her soccer games and tournaments. She couldn't ref enough games to cover the recertification costs and make it somewhat worthwhile.

This is effectively why leagues don’t cover the cost of certification/recertification. They would end up with a bunch of people holding onto certifications indefinitely at the league’s expense when they don’t plan to ref enough to make it worthwhile.

That’s why I think reimbursing after X number of games completed is best.

The best would be to not require refs to be re-certified at certain ages and levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD stopped reffing because of scheduling conflicts with her soccer games and tournaments. She couldn't ref enough games to cover the recertification costs and make it somewhat worthwhile.

This is effectively why leagues don’t cover the cost of certification/recertification. They would end up with a bunch of people holding onto certifications indefinitely at the league’s expense when they don’t plan to ref enough to make it worthwhile.

That’s why I think reimbursing after X number of games completed is best.

Okay, but then they would need to decrease the pay rate to offset the cost of (re)certification.

They would not need to reduce pay rate. It could actually save the club money to pay up front certification costs if it results in more referees, so less need to pay extra last minute bonuses for uncovered games

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD stopped reffing because of scheduling conflicts with her soccer games and tournaments. She couldn't ref enough games to cover the recertification costs and make it somewhat worthwhile.

This is effectively why leagues don’t cover the cost of certification/recertification. They would end up with a bunch of people holding onto certifications indefinitely at the league’s expense when they don’t plan to ref enough to make it worthwhile.

That’s why I think reimbursing after X number of games completed is best.

Okay, but then they would need to decrease the pay rate to offset the cost of (re)certification.

They would not need to reduce pay rate. It could actually save the club money to pay up front certification costs if it results in more referees, so less need to pay extra last minute bonuses for uncovered games

This is a very good point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD stopped reffing because of scheduling conflicts with her soccer games and tournaments. She couldn't ref enough games to cover the recertification costs and make it somewhat worthwhile.

This is effectively why leagues don’t cover the cost of certification/recertification. They would end up with a bunch of people holding onto certifications indefinitely at the league’s expense when they don’t plan to ref enough to make it worthwhile.

That’s why I think reimbursing after X number of games completed is best.

The best would be to not require refs to be re-certified at certain ages and levels.

Actually, I think it's important for referees to retest every year. It's a great refresher and there are usually law changes to learn as well.

[Anonymous]

For a new young ref looking at mostly getting paid $15 a game to AR rec soccer that first season putting that much up front is prohibitive.

It's stupid and even as a senior ref it feels disrespectful. Have to work multiple games just to cover the registration fee--need a better system.

[Anonymous]

Its 85 + uniform, whistle, flag so easily $150.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD stopped reffing because of scheduling conflicts with her soccer games and tournaments. She couldn't ref enough games to cover the recertification costs and make it somewhat worthwhile.

This is effectively why leagues don’t cover the cost of certification/recertification. They would end up with a bunch of people holding onto certifications indefinitely at the league’s expense when they don’t plan to ref enough to make it worthwhile.

That’s why I think reimbursing after X number of games completed is best.

The best would be to not require refs to be re-certified at certain ages and levels.

Actually, I think it's important for referees to retest every year. It's a great refresher and there are usually law changes to learn as well.

For a U9 or U10 game, who cars if the ref is completely up to date on law changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD stopped reffing because of scheduling conflicts with her soccer games and tournaments. She couldn't ref enough games to cover the recertification costs and make it somewhat worthwhile.

This is effectively why leagues don’t cover the cost of certification/recertification. They would end up with a bunch of people holding onto certifications indefinitely at the league’s expense when they don’t plan to ref enough to make it worthwhile.

That’s why I think reimbursing after X number of games completed is best.

Okay, but then they would need to decrease the pay rate to offset the cost of (re)certification.

They would not need to reduce pay rate. It could actually save the club money to pay up front certification costs if it results in more referees, so less need to pay extra last minute bonuses for uncovered games

Does it really save them that much money if they pay to recertify a bunch of people who only ref 2-3 games a year? Are the last minute bonuses $30+ a game?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD stopped reffing because of scheduling conflicts with her soccer games and tournaments. She couldn't ref enough games to cover the recertification costs and make it somewhat worthwhile.

This is effectively why leagues don’t cover the cost of certification/recertification. They would end up with a bunch of people holding onto certifications indefinitely at the league’s expense when they don’t plan to ref enough to make it worthwhile.

That’s why I think reimbursing after X number of games completed is best.

The best would be to not require refs to be re-certified at certain ages and levels.

Actually, I think it's important for referees to retest every year. It's a great refresher and there are usually law changes to learn as well.

For a U9 or U10 game, who cars if the ref is completely up to date on law changes?

In my experience....everyone.

[Anonymous]

A club should offer to pay for the referee in exchange for the referee working for their games that season.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a bit put off by the $85 every year to recertify. I understand the very first time when you become a ref and you do field training and there are instructors present, etc etc but every year I pay the same $85 to take an online test. I always felt that they should somehow reimburse you for that fee if you referee so many games that year...say 10, so that you would get paid for those 10 games plus get your registration fees reimbursed.

Some leagues do reimburse you if you ref X games for them.

Can you share which leagues?

NCSL offers a bonus for working 25 games. Several clubs offer bonuses for working many of their games: McLean pays your ref fee if you work 20 rec or higher games, Loudoun offers a bonus if you ref enough of their games any league (SFL, NCSL, ECNL, EDP, etc…), SYA also has a sliding bonus scale.

[Anonymous]

Will outdoor field training still go forward Saturday with the frigid temperatures?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will outdoor field training still go forward Saturday with the frigid temperatures?

Wrong topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a bit put off by the $85 every year to recertify. I understand the very first time when you become a ref and you do field training and there are instructors present, etc etc but every year I pay the same $85 to take an online test. I always felt that they should somehow reimburse you for that fee if you referee so many games that year...say 10, so that you would get paid for those 10 games plus get your registration fees reimbursed.

Some leagues do reimburse you if you ref X games for them.

Can you share which leagues?

NCSL offers a bonus for working 25 games. Several clubs offer bonuses for working many of their games: McLean pays your ref fee if you work 20 rec or higher games, Loudoun offers a bonus if you ref enough of their games any league (SFL, NCSL, ECNL, EDP, etc…), SYA also has a sliding bonus scale.

These are bonuses to encourage referees to do more games for that league or assignor or even tournaments have bonuses. They aren’t repayment of recertification fees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its 85 + uniform, whistle, flag so easily $150.

That can easily be paid off in just 3 games.