|
|
|
A GUIDE TO MARKING REFEREES
BY THE NATIONAL REVIEW BOARD
| Mark |
Criteria for award of
the mark |
| |
|
| 91-100 |
The referee was
extremely accurate in decision-making
and very successfully, controlled the
game using management and communication
skills to create an environment of fair
play, adding real value to the game. |
| 81-90 |
The referee was very
accurate in decision-making and
successfully controlled the game using
management and communication skills to
create an environment of fair play.
|
| 71 - 80 |
The referee was
accurate in decision-making and
controlled the game well, communicating
with the players, making a positive
contribution towards fair play.
|
| 61-70 |
The referee was
reasonably accurate in decision making,
controlled the game quite well and
communicated with players, establishing
a reasonable degree of fair play.
|
| 51-60 |
The referee had some
shortcomings in the level of accuracy of
decision-making and control, with only
limited success in communicating with
the players resulting in variable fair
play. |
| 50 and
below |
The referee had
significant shortcomings in the level of
accuracy of decision making and control
with poor communication with the players
which resulted in low levels of fair
play |
PLEASE THINK CAREFULLY BEFORE
MARKING THE REFEREE.
DO NOT MARK DOWN THE REFEREE JUST BECAUSE A
DECISION GOES AGAINST YOUR TEAM.
A mark within each mark range can be given to
reflect the referee’s performance e.g. a mark of
79 indicates a somewhat better performance than
a mark of 71.
A mark between 71 and 80 represents the standard
of refereeing expected.
When a mark of 50 or less is awarded, an
explanation must be provided to the League or
Competition by completing the appropriate
marking form. It must include comments which
could help improve the referee’s future
performances. Even where a referee has
significant shortcomings there will have been
some positive aspects which should be given
credit; extremely low marks (below 20) should be
very rare.
|