Minnesota Assessment Program

2. Minnesota Assessment Program January 15, 2012

3. Agenda • State Assessment Program Update • Expectations • Feedback • Game Rating Review • Match Assessment Exercise • Brief 2 – 3 Minute Presentations

4. State Assessment Team Bob Petersen – SDA Kip Jackson – Deputy SDA jacksonk0001@yahoo.com State Assessor National Referee • sda@minnesotasrc.com • redcardnb@hotmail.com • Bob Petersen • @nationalref • National Assessor • National Referee Emeritus • Associate Instructor

5. Responsibilities Bob Petersen – SDA Kip Jackson – Deputy SDA Mentoring • Training • Assignment • Programs

6. Assessment Program Update

7. 2011 Assessors • 45 total assessors registered • 3 National Assessors • including 1 Referee Inspector • 2 National Assessors Emeritus • 14 State Assessors • 7 Referee Assessors • 19 Associate Assessors

8. Added Assessors • ArtemSher, new State Assessor • Kip Jackson, new State Assessor • Matt Tiano, new Associate Assessor • John Morstad, new Associate Assessor • Kyle Burkhardt, new Associate Assessor • Ken Lamb, returning State Assessor

9. Assessor Upgrades • Doug Marshak • To Referee Assessor • S. John Hagenstein • To State Assessor • Sam Trigui • To State Assessor

10. 2011 Assessor Training • State Assessors Course, Orlando, FL • S. John Hagenstein • Kip Jackson • ArtemSher • Sam Trigui

11. 2011 Assessor Training • State Assessors Course, Orlando, FL • S. John Hagenstein • Kip Jackson • ArtemSher • Sam Trigui • State Assessor Academy, Developmental Academy Playoffs, Frisco, TX • Gentry Thatcher

12. 2011 Games Covered • Minnesota Cup – 5 games including Final • MRSL Playoffs • Quarterfinals through Finals • 2 Developmental Academy U18

13. 2011 Administrative Improvements • Most state assessors access to ‘Pro’ side of gameofficials • Added and improved features on SRC site • Improved functionality • Assessor forms and guides added • Referee upgrade process strengthened • Changed again for 2012 • Assessor game and mileage fees determined • ‘State Inspector’ list identified • Assist with assessor training and advanced referees

14. Referee Upgrading • Only for referees upgrading to grades 6 or 5 • Old process for 2011 • Must pass two (2) mentoring reviews before next step • Potential to not move past mentoring • Must pass required formal assessments • New process for 2012 • One (1) mentoring review before next step • Everyone will proceed to formal assessments • Must pass required formal assessments

15. Needs and Future Plans • Ensure all assessors have website access • Referee & game rating conformity • Add and improve items to SRC site as needed • MYSA Mentorship • Regional and US Soccer event participation • ‘Remote’ assessments • Assessor coaches for high potential referees • Assessor academy during State Cup

16. Games to Cover • Developmental Academy • Minnesota and Wilson Cup • MRSL Playoffs • NPSL – Men and Women • MN Stars FC Exhibitions • Midwest Regional League • MYSA State Tournament

17. Assessor Academy • During first weekend of State Cup • Older age group games • Friday night through Sunday afternoon • Up to 8 assessors • 2 – 3 assessor instructors • 7 – 8 assessments each assessor • Critique of game observation and feedback methods • Let Bob Petersen know if interested

18. Expectations

19. Program Expectations • Quality of assessments • More discriminate • Useful information • Accurate grading • Feedback to entire crew • All assessments entered into gameofficials • Email copies of pdf to referees within 7 days • Maintenance and upgrade assessments, results in SRC site within 48 hours

20. Vernacular • Acceptable performance • Unacceptable performance • Do NOT use FAIL or FAILURE

21. Feedback

22. Feedback Preparation • The focus is always on the referees and their development • Developmental issues AND positives • What are you going to ask about? • Prepare questions on big incidents • How player and referee actions affected the match • Use match facts • Do not use own biases

23. 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 criteria • Total match performance

24. Terminology • Use terms described in the criteria • Presence • POE on elbowing (tool v weapon) • POE on dissent (personal, public, provocative) • Ask, tell, remove • Careless / reckless / excessive force • Options • 100% misconduct • Player needed / game needed

25. Feedback Session • Engage the whole crew • Facilitate the discussion • Try get the crew to do most of the talking • Ask questions of entire crew • Different angles • Different points of view • Acknowledge positives • Offer suggestions and alternate methods of handling incidents as needed • Do not get into extended debates

26. FC Dallas v Weston FC

27. FC Dallas v Weston FC • 1’, Red defender #4 runs upfield and commits a hard foul on White #24 • 4’, White #24 tackles Red #4 unfairly from behind • Simple foul called • 16’, Red #4 elbow on White #24 incident • 51’, Red forward commits a late tackle from behind • 53’, White forward jumps very late at opposing GK • 58’, White midfielder commits bad tackle at midfield • Referee briefly talks to player • 61’, Red midfielder runs over white player from behind at midfield • Referee briefly talks to player

28. Longer Postgame Method • 3 positives • 3 negatives • 3 things referee will do differently • 3 action items

29. Newer Postgame Method • 3 events in first half • 3 events in second half • Tie issues together • Positive and developmental • Anything referee would do differently • Time permitting

30. Do you have to give verbal feedback immediately after the match?

31. Reporting • Written feedback must be close to verbal • No surprises! • Accurately critique ratings • Are your scores appropriate? • Same expectations of referees – timely

32. Game Rating Review

33. Difficult managed to Competitive 76 - 84 Unified Grading Scale Not Acceptable Acceptable Very Good Outstanding Scoring Range 70 - 79 80 - 89 90 - 100 69 or less Game Difficulty Varies Difficult Very Difficult Competitive Standard Performance Level Minimum 69 75 85 95 Very Difficult managed to Difficult Performance or Game Critical Low 70 - 74 69 or less 86 - 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 Difficult game but ref handled all critical decisions 70 - 83 80 - 93

34. What elements contribute to game difficulty?

35. 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?

36. Game Rating Example • U17 boys • Relatively low foul count • 1 caution given plus 1 tough incident with player and goalkeeper that the referee handled well

37. Game Rating Example • U17 boys • Relatively low foul count • 1 caution given plus 1 tough incident with player and goalkeeper that the referee handled well • What game difficulty do you expect? • What referee scores would you expect?

38. Game Rating Example • U17 boys • Relatively low foul count • 1 caution given plus 1 tough incident with player and goalkeeper that the referee handled well • AR2 (grade 8) given 85 • AR1 (grade 16) given 95 • Referee (grade 7) given 90 • Assessor rated as difficult based upon POTENTIAL of poor player behavior and incident

39. 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 grade • Do not rate a game based on how difficult the game would be for you

40. Low, Competitive, Difficult, or Very Difficult • U13 girls MYSA • U17 boys MYSA • U17 boys State Cup Semifinal • U16 boys Mpls United v Mpls United Premier • D1 MRSL Red Devis v Tsunami • D1 MRSL Medtronic v JooGoo Road Warrior • Sporting KC v Houston Dynamo • Chivas Guadalajara v Club América • USA v México World Cup Qualifier

41. Match Assessment Exercise

42. Directions • Your table is your group • Use Game Data form for notes • 10 minutes to fill out forms • Rate game difficulty with reasons and notes on overall performance in first section • 3 comments in first 2 criteria for referee • 1 comment in remaining criteria for referee and all criteria for ARs and 4th official • Score referee team • Brief 2 – 3 minute presentation

43. Prairie Seeds Academy vBenilde - St. Margaret’s

44. Presentations • Game difficulty • Referee scores • 3 positive comments on referee • 3 developmental comments on referee