League will allow unqualified volunteers to take charge of matches

[Ross]

UNQUALIFIED volunteers will be taking charge of games when no referee is available as of next season.

More... (http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/sundayfootball/League-will-allow-unqualified-volunteers.4212394.jp)

[n j titman]

"PSMFL will allow unqualified referees etc"

"The Leagues' insurance covers providing a pitch inspection is carried out"

Issues are

1) Child Protection

2) Player to player liability Clubs and/or players MUST ensure they have acceptable insurance cover, and I hope the PSMFL insurers have been made fully aware of this rule change.

3) With the smallest league I can recollect and only a maximum of 18 referees required, what has happened to the retention and recruitment of these referees?

4) Once again players can enjoy the benefits of non reportable disciplinary offences as non registered officials very rarely send reports to the County FA and do not attend personal appeals by players.

5) The useage of such unqualified officials tends to make the matches a matter of lottery; I sincerely hope that players, spectators, and club officals treat the official with some respect.



5)

[Back of the Net]

Nik, didn't think it'd be long before we heard from you on this one mate, it was yourself after all that lead us into only playing games with official refs last season wasn;t it?
The bottom line is that 99% of local Sunday leagues accross the UK operate the same rules as we've switched back too for a very good reason - it's a back up in case you dont haver a ref available but both teams still want to play and can find a mutually agreeable person to do it, what's wrong with that if both teams agree beforehand and sign a form saying so??
For a few seasons we were told the FA would force Sunday leagues to only allow games to go ahead with official refs, it never happened and is likely to never happen (in the near future anyhow) so the league have only switched BACK to how it was beofre and we got a lot more games that way didn;t we?
Of course problems may arise but they'll get dealt with, better those than no games and we all voted that way at AGM so why go on about it? it's our leagues and we decided as a group to have the insurance of being able to play if we agree it between ourselves etc etc...

try to adress your points Nik from my perspective:
1) I believe if you have under 18's in your team now you should have child welfare certificates within the team? that should take care of that one? if not then nothing has been said from the FA's officially against the PSMFL vote of non-official refs so they'd be partly liable also? worth debate though...

2)We dont have Player to Player liablilty from the FA so what has that to do with anything? if clubs have it then fine good for them, if not then tough luck, we actually have PUBLIC liabilty insurance from the FA's and that stands as ling as a pitch inspection takes place etc, so I cant see an issue.

3) There may well be enough refs to go around, it's only an insurance policy to have this rule in case we dont with county cups etc taking refs, better to have the option than not too surely? as for smallest leagues, well maybe a few left due to lack of games last few seasons due to the stupid binding rule in the 1st place???

4) hahahaha Nik dont make me laugh, I've played and managed in many games where refs dont send cards in or sometimes say they wont and then do etc, so I very much doubt there will be any noticeable difference on that front? both teams sign to agree the mutual ref if needed and he has FULL powers, up to him to send cards in etc as any other ref so dont knock there character before seeing it in action mate!

5) clubs agree beforehand and sign to say they do, if they cant agree it's postponed until a ref is found, makes this point null and void?

[n j titman]

Hi Sean

It was my suggestion to the PSMFL committee and all clubs voted at the AGM for the "no affilated ref" rule change. If that is me "leading" it is an insult to all Clubs as well as the rest of the Committee!!.

Quick response

Point 1

Child Protection-speak to your CP Officer for facts Certainly not the FA liability

Point 2

Player to player claims are through the roof nationally. No offical referee makes defence of such claim difficult

Point 4

Noted with interest


Point 5

Respect to the official is required.

Best of British next season to you all

[Back of the Net]

mate, the point is this... you yourself put it to the PSMFL and it's member clubs that the FA would soon introduce the rule of NO OFFICIAL REF = NO GAME, so we should instate the rule to be in line with their plans, thats why we voted yes to it... BUT we were mis-informed as 99% of the UK stuck with having games reffed by agreed people if no ref could be found and they got their fixtures fufllied whilst we struggled and lost no end of people/players that got hacked off with it all.... What we should have done IMO is to have to stuck with this back up rule to allow games to go ahead if both teams agree and thereby we avoid p*ssing lots of teams off with no games all the time, it eases the pressure on the PSMFL and refs also...
I disctintly remember yourself stating at an AGM that we must follow this NO REF = NO GAME rule as the FA's were about to introduce it so thats why it was voted in...
Good dialogue though Nik and it's good to talk hahaha..

Point 1
As I said mate, if you play under 18's it's the clubs responsibilty to look after the child protection issues, not the refs....

Point 2
If you have insurance you're covered, it's simple.. if you dont then you aren't, if insurers try to back out of a claim using no ref rule then it's something yet to be tested isn't it? have to wait and see but as far as we're aware the pre-inspection of pitch and agreement by all concerned gives the person full official powers thus negating the insurance worry...

Point 5
agreed mate, and that's why they sign to agree it before kick off, any arguments afterwards are null and void as they've agreed it beforehand...

bottom line Nik is that it's an insurance policy to allow the PSMFL to get fixtures played, I cant see any sensible argument against it, we all supported AGM so end of story... best of luck everyone.

[Raph]

All clubs now need to have someone with the child welfare certificate. Under 18s are not allowed to shower with 18 and over either.

[n j titman]

Hi Sean

Interesting response!!

Not my problem as clubs voted for this, simply an opinion


There is no point having to respond further to your first para as the transcript of the AGM does not show this to be accurate!!!

[Raph]

Good to see two sides of the argument anyhow . . . let's keep it friendly though, now we've kissed and made-up! Nik, you coming down to Bushfield on Saturday to see a couple of friendlies?

[Back of the Net]

hahahaha Nik that's a poor response mate, you, I and everyone else know that EVERY single word spoken is not entered into the AGM notes, it's an impossible task... however myself and many others VERY CLEARLY recall you stating to us all that the FA's are about to intorduce the rule of NO REF = NO GAME therefore we should pre-empt it and bring the rule in, come of it mate, it's no big deal but denying you said it and that it helped push the ruling through is a bit petty???
The ruling back-fired on us all badly and we lost loads of fixtures whilst taking out our insurance policy of allowing some games to be reffed by agreed people... it's sorted now though and we have that back in place thank god..
you crack me up mate - glad we can now talk openly on here and sensibly for a change though.

[Gordon Gekko]

All I can say is common sense has prevailed and the rule was unanimously accepted by all the clubs at the AGM. It will be very rare cases where a manager/coach will ref becuase of shortage of refs. However, it was happening happening in your time on the committee Nik. I played a couple of matches where our gaffa ref'd the game because no ref showed and both teams agreed they just wanted to play football. I think they may have been 2/3 of the most enjoyable games i've played in, and the LEAGUE SANCTIONED IT on the phone that morning. "Just put a ref's name down was the comment and ill pass it through"...

The vast majority of local FA's in this country would like to see all games ref'd by official ref's. BUT MOST ARE REALISTS! Many games take place across the country each weekend without qualified ref's and without problems too. Local FA's were approached i'm being told by committee members to ask for there opinions on reinstatin a rule along the lines of which we are talking about. FA's as realists had no objections and agreed 100% with rule introduced. At the end of the day, many blokes just want to play football, there not interested in red tape, political issues and certain individuals who are power hungry and not interested in whats best for people who actually just want to play football

[Gordon Gekko]

well enough said about the transcripts from agm's & monthly meetings!! Plenty was said according to certain individuals and certain comments usually missed off!!

[n j titman]

Last response!!

to Sean

Verbatum transcript prepared by colleague, but now the matter is closed.

Reason you lost matches was non show of referees, non availability of referees, etc

The PSMFL broke its own Rule Book by allowing matches last season to be refereed by unaffiliated persons, as you have confirmed!


Re FA etc Watch their space!!



to Geiko ?

I am astounded by retrospectifly not surprised if your statement is true particularly the "League snactioned it". Thank God I am out of it!!




to Raph

Sadly I am back in Prison from tomorrow evening until the 1st July so will be many miles from Bushfield!!

Hope this Prison is better than PDH!!!!

[Back of the Net]

I didn't confirm the league broke rules allowing games to go ahead with no ref, that was GG mate...
The reason we lost games was because we had few refs but if we had the option of allowing non qualified refs do it then we wouldn;t have lost as many and that's the fact of the matter you're seemingly ignoring in your comments? as you say it's done now, we're back on track..

good luck with the sex change....

[Gordon Gekko]

common sense Nik, thats all it takes!!!

"Thank God I am out of it!!" DITTO NIK, DITTO!!!!

I'm fully aware of what the NFA has been attempting to do Nik. Most of the other county FA's as well as HQ do not agree with your proposals!!!

RE: insurance and Child protection - there are no issues, contrary to the bull you and Redgate spun in previous years!!!

[n j titman]

Dear Mr Gekko

There are no proposals that I am aware of from NFA, so obviously you know more than me!!!

Obviously these "other CFA's" whoever they may be, cannot disagree with non existent proposals!!

Re Child Protection and Insurance Liability, your opinion is of interest but incorrect.

However there is no point responding further

[Gordon Gekko]

Well at least you got my name right Nick!

IF!! there was an objection along the insurance or child protection issues, then local FA's or insurers would have commented. THERE ISN'T... Sorry Nik, but recently I've enjoyed a couple of your comments on here, but it does really wind me up when you start commenting and speaking bull! I HAVE PERSONALLY contacted insurance and THERE IS NO ISSUE regarding no official referees!! END OF! I ask you a question tho Nik, if ther were issues with under 18's + insurance, why do the majority of local FA's allow this rule nationwide?????

[Back of the Net]

lets not fall out over it ladies...
the AGM went VERY smoothly for a change and Tony Nash as the NFA rep (I think) stated very clearly that everything is above board and correct and they have NO issues with anything the PSMFL have put into place for the 08/09 season.

So with that said it's a happy ship within the PSMFL and the NFA/FA that attended, If anyone outside of that lot (Nik?) has any issues at all that they would like addressed, then they should write to the league secretary - make sure it's signed and dated correctly though, wouldn't want your letter returned or ignored or you fined etc hahahahaha.... sorry been dying to use that on you mate!!!

[moe]

Sean, you are such a little stirrer,lol.
personally I think it is a very good idea to use whoever is available if they are willing and both teams agree before the game maybe agreed on the back of the team sheet of the home team or something.
That way there is no argument after the game as to everyone agreeing.
Nik, some valid points on both sides me thinks but you must admit the more games that go ahead on schedule the better.
As I have been on both sides of the fence in my opinion the good out weighs the bad.