European Volleyball Referees Seminar 2002

Transcription

1 European Volleyball Referees Seminar 2002 Montreux 7 th June th June 2002 Recorded by J. Pont and K. Tufektchev, compiled by F. Kröger and J. Rek In this edition, 29 Nations have been represented by 38 participants (see appendix). Agenda Friday 7 th June Welcome by the Organizer by the ERC-President by the CEV-President Presentation of the ERC Presentation of the Seminar Participants Seminar Administration and Organisation (REK & KRÖGER) Role and Functions of the ERC (REK) ERC-Vision (REK) General Information's by the ERC-President (REK) Review Appointments of Referees (VAN VELSEN) Main Rule-Problems, Refereeing Evaluation (SUPRANI) Departure to the Sports Hall / Dinner Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 29/05/02 Folie 2 The seminar starts with the welcome of the President of the Organizing Committee of the Volley Master 2002, Mr. J. Luthi. He also invites all participants to an official cocktail reception on Saturday evening. Welcome words from Dr. Jan Rek, President of the European Refereeing Commission (ERC) and Mr. André Meyer, President of the CEV, followed. Both Presidents welcomed the participants of the 14 th edition of this Referees Seminar and especially the first attended woman on it. The CEV President stressed on the importance of this Seminar as it improves the level of the European Refereeing and shared his opinion for the continuing this tradition in future. Thanks were expressed to Volley Masters organization and Swiss Volleyball Federation for their assistance in organization of the seminar and also to Mr. Dune (ENG) for the minutes from the 2001 seminar. The CEV President informed the participants that the CEV would conclude an Agreement for annually covering the Referee s Insurances for their respective appointments for the different CEV events. The negotiations with the P.O. Company concerning referees uniforms are still continuing and the contract between CEV and the Greek company will be concluded in the nearest future. Mr. Meyer introduced the new information strategy of the CEV which has to be much more successful in contributing the information for the Referees along Europe. The web site of the CEV will be reconstructed in order to facilitate the Referees. 1

2 . The CEV President outlined that from March 2002 there are new Regulations for the payment of the indemnities for the Referees i.e. 33 EUR per day during the Tournaments and 50 EUR per day for holidays and 60 EUR per day for working days during single matches. In addition Mr. Meyer stressed once more the importance of the compulsory Basic English language skills officially required by FIVB and CEV for the European International Referees. ERC President reminds that the main goal of this seminar is, that all persons present inform their National Federations and referees about the subjects discussed. Dr. Rek expressed his disappointment that furthermore the flow of information within the Federations is similar inadequate like within earlier years. Despite requests to Federations NO additions to the seminar agenda had been received. He advised the Referees to update often their information at the web site of the CEV. For better work he requested the participants to prepare preliminary the questions and send them prior the Seminar to the ERC so they could be discussed during its next edition. The ERC President encourages the use of the internet because from now on more and more things will be published on the CEV Page, so he invites everyone to visit it regularly. The CEV home page will be modified more and more often. Dr. Rek introduces the Members and Ad hoc Members of the Refereeing Commission: Members of the European Refereeing Commission President REK Jan SUI Secretary KRÖGER Fred GER Member DOGARIS Antonis GRE Member NÖEL Gérard FRA Member SUPRANI Umberto ITA Member VAN VELSEN Govert NED Member ZHARIKOV Gennady RUS Special Beach ILIEV Ilia BUL AD-HOC Members of the European Refereeing Commission DECLERCQ Georges BEL ILIEV Ilia BUL GROESCHEL Hans GER MAJERCAK Ivan SVK LECNIK Jozef SLO TARUM Nati ISR Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 20/06/02 Folie 11 Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 10/07/02 Folie 12 Then the ERC President continued with general information about the European refereeing. General Information's by the ERC-President Registration of European Volleyball Referees Referee Identification Record Referee Availability List Referee Medical Examination Review Competitions Period Replacements of Referees Travel arrangements Competitions Period Per Diem Referee s Uniforms CEV Homepage Obligations for European Cup Competitions Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 11/07/02 Folie 18 2

3 The annual registration of European Volleyball Referees is imperative for the update of the CEV database. Referees without registration will be no more on the list of active referees. In consequence, these referees will not have nominations for any CEV and FIVB competitions. Some referees include too many details in their Referee Identification Record form. Only one address is necessary. Maximum of one telephone number is necessary on each category: home, office, fax, mobile. The availability list of each referee must be updated whenever it is required. Withdraw caused by not reported changes of the availability will have serious consequences for the referees in question. In case of double appointments from the same country, both referee will be replaced by referees from other National Federation. The Medical Certificate is a very important requirement for the referees. The ERC will not consider for nomination any referee without this certificate. The referees are obliged to send their Medical Certificates directly to Dr. Dawiskiba. The Medical Examination is valid for two years, the end is always end of the period 2004,2006, Referee Identification Records, Referee Availability Lists must be send directly to the CEV Office, Medical Certificates directly to the representative of the Medical Commission (Dr. Dawiskiba). If a referee has to be replaced, he/she should inform the CEV Office and ERC as soon as possible. It would be easier for the ERC to replace the referee, if at the same time all available international referees of the country in question could be reported. The definitive nomination will be made by the ERC. After the new appointment the CEV office informs all involved persons, also the replaced referee. The referee asking for replacement must always have a confirmation about his situation. Despite the fact that each National Federation has a quota of international referees (the Candidate Referees are not included in this quota), all of them shall be registered with their ranking (i.e. should a National Federation have more active referees than their quota). In this way, the ERC has knowledge that they are there. Organization of travel: As an advice, do not pay your ticket even if the hosting club says that they will pay for it upon your arrival. Their obligation is to send the flight tickets in due time. The referee must receive the travel information 2 weeks in advance but at least 8 days before the competition. If not, be proactive don t wait until the last minute take contact through your Federation with the responsible persons. Should there be any problem, contact the CEV Office. Travel by car: If due to sensible reasons the referees are traveling by car the hosting club has to pay the value of train ticket first class for each of the Referees (even if they traveled by same car). Transport by hosting club: Dr. Rek informs about the danger of driving too many kilometers under rain, fog, snow If the distance between the airport and the host city is too long, the referee must inform the CEV. Check the official airport of the hosting team indicated in the official communications. Referees should not accept longer stays in the host city because the team wants to save money for travel costs. Arrival for European Cups: Referees must arrive the day before of the game and attend the technical meeting. Should the 2 nd referee be local, he/she must attend too, regardless if he/she stays overnight in the same city or not. The referee uniform for European Competitions can be Olympikus or PO. The requirement is that both referees use the same kind of sleeves during the game, long or short. 3

4 The Game Protocol, Refereeing Guidelines and Instructions have not been changed for All these documents are available on the CEV web site. The assistant scorer must check the replacements of the Libero on a separate Libero monitoring form (available on the CEV web site). It has been approved that in European Tournaments two of the International referees can act as line judges with two of the local ones. They will be in positions 1 and 3. It is, therefore, very important to have practice in this task. In future, before every competition, the referees will have to fill in a written test. A bad result will mean no more designations. The ERC has seen a test from a referee with 27 wrong answers out of 35 questions. Role and Functions of ERC Regulation of all Refereeing Affairs Representation of the Interests of the Referees in CEV by the ERC President The ERC meets periodically in order to Exchange Information's Make Decisions 3 meetings and 2 3 working groups per year Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 10/07/02 Folie 14 Main tasks of ERC (1) Appointments of Referees 600 matches European Cups 300 matches European Championships Evaluation of Referees and Division of them in Groups according their Performance Volleyball, Total 344 men / 10 women: 12 / 0 FIVB, 250 / 4 International, 82 / 6 Candidates Beach Volleyball, Total 62 men / 5 women: 4 / 2 FIVB, 54 / 3 International, 4 / 0 Candidates There are 344 active Volleyball Referees in Europe. 334 men and 10 women. Only 20 are considered under the group of the Top 20. Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 10/07/02 Folie 15 4

5 Main tasks of ERC (2) Organization of Courses and Seminars on a Continental Level Education of Referees World-Wide Consistency in Refereeing Affairs Work Out and Distribution of Regulations and other Informative Material to Referees To ensure that Latest Rules and Regulations are Known and Used around Europe Permanent Contact with National Refereeing Commissions (54 Federations) Interpretation of Rules in the Same Way Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 10/07/02 Folie 16 Main tasks of ERC (3) to approve competition sites and technical personnel for all Official CEV Competitions from a refereeing point of view to meet with the different European Commissions to ensure that all technical matters are discussed and agreed upon to create a Refereeing Commission roster list for European Championships and other Final Tournaments to ensure that best possible referees are selected to present the names of best European Referees for FIVB events registered in the calendar to the FIVB Refereeing Commission to keep an up-to-date database of all European active, inactive and retired licensed referees to provide financial incentives for the skill development and upgrading of referees to promote interest in refereeing around Europe and for studying and practicing it Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 20/06/02 Folie 17 ERC Plan : The ERC has a strategic plan to be developed and implemented for the period 2001 and The challenge of the ERC for the future consists of: Conceptual work on referee assessments Organization of administrative work New structure of the ERC with delegation of specific responsibilities and competences to the different ERC members Closer collaboration with the FIVB refereeing commission One of the subjects is to give more information to the referees and with a better distribution system (CEV web site). Not only about the nominations, but with any other item of interest. All important documents, actual forms and instructions will be available on the CEV web site. 5

6 Review of main rule problems , presented by Umberto Suprani: The main problems, which appeared during the last Final Four of the European Cups and the Qualification Tournaments of European Championships, are not so different than the problems during the common matches of the National Championships. Analysing the Judge Referee reports or observing directly the matches we realised the following main problems: SECOND HIT Discussing on this matter we must consider the indications and the instructions by the FIVB- Referee Commission, which are towards the spectacularity of the play. But despite this instructions it is not allowed to arrive to the opposite extreme. The rule speaks clearly that only the first hit is never fault except when the ball is caught. So, when a player is engaged on the second hit of his own team, the 1 st referee can (or must) consider some elements: lf the ball is easy to play (especially when the setter plays coming from a very good reception), the referee must have a particular attention at the moment of the ball touch and must apply the rule concerning double touch, carried or held ball. If the second hit happens during a long and spectacular rally and the player is obliged to jump or dive for reaching the ball, the referee applies the concept of spectacularity and whistles only if the fault is clean. BENCH DISCIPLINE The behaviour of the persons (players and officials written in the official score sheet) allowed to sit on the bench is becoming one of the most important problems. Only the head coach can stand up. The other members must be sitting not standing and neither protesting or crying against the referees. Sometimes, on the bench or immediately behind, are members of the delegations instead of to be sitting in the tribune. Normally this control is on charge of the Jury Member or of the Technical Delegate, but it is better and appropriated by the referees, before (and during) the match to check personally how many persons are allowed and are really sitting on the bench. ATTACK OF THE BACK ROW PLAYER We must apply the new rule an this fault must be whistled only by the 1 st referee. Now the problem (but with the flowing of the time the difficulty is going down) concerns the possibility by the 1 st referee to be sure that the player is a back row player. The 1 st referee has not the lineup sheets of the teams, in the contrary of the 2 nd referee, who can read them during the game for checking the correct position. So, it may happen, that the 2 nd referee is sure that the player is in fault, but he is not allowed to whistle. Like the collaboration for the touch of the block or for four touches, he must do, in front of his own breast, the (hidden) hand signal, so that his colleague can see what happens and whistle the fault. The problem arrives when (like the previous rule) the 2 nd referee whistles the attack fault of back row player. In this situation, the 1 st referee has to repeat the rally. But, if in this moment, the 1st referee realizes that the fault is real, he whistles the fault confirming it. COLLABORATION BETWEEN 2 nd REFEREE AND SCORER In certain cases the main problem of collaboration is the lack of knowledge of the English language by the scorer. For this reason the FIVB decided, that an interpreter must sit at the scorer s table to help the scorer. But the difficulties are involving not only for this fact. Sometimes, especially during the substitutions, the collaboration is not so strict like is required - both (2 nd referee and scorer) must do their own duty with calm and clearness, also for the teams and the public. It is also important to remain in contact by eyes for understanding that all is right. Another delicate moment is the delivery of the line up sheets, before each set. The check of this must be careful to avoid discrepancies, especially in the matches in which we need two or three copies. The scorer must (not can) advice immediately the 2 nd referee, if he realizes some irregularities or mistakes. 6

7 Supplementary Dr. Kröger reminded that during the match 1 st Referee is absolutely obliged to defend the Line-judges by applying sanctions over those players who offense them. Agenda Saturday 8 th June Education of Referees in Slovakia 1 st part Coffee break Test Theory Lesson 2 nd Referee, 1 st part Lunch Theory Lesson 2 nd Referee, 2 nd part Coffee break Theory Lesson 2 nd Referee, 3 rd part Explanations to the Referee Evaluations and Preparation of the Match Observation Departure for Match Observations / Dinner Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 29/05/02 Folie 3 Education of Referees in Slovakia The session starts with the presentation of Dr. Juraj MOKRY (SVK), regarding the system that the Slovak Refereeing Commission uses to evaluate and classify their referees, the observation form they use and how they do their administrative work. The Power Point presentation was done with a PC: Presentation of Slovak Education of referees in Slovakia Association of volleyball referees Juraj Mokrý, Ivan Majerčák, Peter Bajči 2002 AVR as a part of SVF Qualification degrees, licences Referee courses Referee seminars Selection of international referee candidates Website Test www. avr - sr. host. sk 7

8 Association of volleyball referees Membership in AVR Created in1998 Autonomous legal subject, professional association, contract with SVF Documents (charter, organizational rules, election rules, disciplinary rules, discussion rules) Active referees divided into licences Former referees over 60 years Others CONCEPTION... Conception of refereeing development in Slovakia until 2003 Today 181 members Structure of AVR Qualification degrees - licences Assembly Presidium President Vice-president 5 members (economics, tally, appointments, rules of the game, international, education, legislation, evaluation) Regional committees 4 regions, the head representative of each region is a member of Presidium AM international referees 10+2 A1 Top league (M+W) 20 A2 top junior league 15 B 2nd level 40 C regional D district TD technical delegates Qualification degrees international 1st class 2nd class 3rd class Referee courses Instructors Regional level for 3rd class National level for 2nd and 1st class Number of candidates Selection for international courses Course timetable... Group of instructors Head 5 members for rules 1 for scoresheet 2 for beachvolley All courses... section of the practice 3rd class course Regional level Four times a year Max. 15 candidates 2 instructors Theory rules, scoresheet, technical documents 20 hours Practice 3 hours (local level tournament) Test 1 hour 8

9 2nd class course National level Once a year Max. 10 candidates 2 instructors Theory rules, scoresheet, technical documents, cases 15 hours Practice 8 hours (national level tournament) Test 1 hour 1st class course National level Once a year Max. 8 candidates 2 instructors Theory rules, scoresheet, technical documents, cases 10 hours Practice 13 hours (international level tournament) Test 1 hour Selection for international courses Criterions Monitoring Support Seminars Selection Criterions for international refereeing course Age (24-38) English Good skills Practice min 2 years in A1 Behaviour Monitoring and support Appointments to friendship international matches Appointments with skilled international referees (instructors) Discussions in tournaments Selection Fulfilling of all criterions Seminar before each international refereeing course Individual interviews, motivation Test result in English! Referee seminars Each year before the start of season All referees destinations and appointments depend on tournament level and licence 2 instructors N o of referees according to tournament Theory (last season cases, new trends in refereeing, application of new rules, explanations, actual European referees seminar outcomes and conclusions) 5-7 hours Practice tournament, min 8 matches Test condition for licensing Referee seminars Practice min. 8 matches, as 1st, 2nd referee, linesjudge, scorer Videotape recorder Personal analysis and evaluation of the match by instructor with the related referees Basic principles in general for all referees participating at seminar 9

10 Education material Translation of official volleyball rules Translation of refereeing guidelines Translation of refereeing instructions with official playing protocol Methodical letters 2-3 x during season, one immediately before seminars with conclusions from European referees seminar Actualisation immediately after release Regular journal articles in SMEČ Extramural test Per mail All referees January, middle of the season 15 cases from actual season Rules, technical documents Part of seasonal evaluation After published on web Evaluation system Evaluation system Seasonal, for each licence separately Test results, extramural test, commute (absence, excuses), score-sheet mistakes, evaluation of TDs, evaluation of coaches Basis for license drop and advance Theoretical knowledge (Test results) 20% Commute (Presence at matches, excuses) 20% 60% Referee s performance (Evaluation of TDs and coaches) Theroretical knowledge Presence at matches Test results max 20 points, each lost point in test = 0.25 point in evaluation Obligatory for all referees every season Extramural test not sending = 5 points subtraction 100% commute = 20 points Subtractions: 1 excuse = 0.5 point 2 excuses = 1 point 3 excuses = 2 points 4 excuses = 4 points 5 excuses = 8 points Late arrival before the match = 2 points points to subtract number of excuses Automatic drop of license 6 and more excused absences Non-excused absence Veto by more teams (3 and more) Repeated match due to referee s mistake or detection of the facts, which could lead to match repetition Absences without point subtraction Higher appointment (by CEV, FIVB, SVF) Written apologize before an appointment (max. 4 per season) Disability to work due to disease Serious familiar matters (death of family member, marriage) 10

11 Príprava zápasu, hrací protokol, presnosť Osobnosť, vystupovanie, autorita, prijatie okolím, oblečenie Správanie sa voči hráčom, funkcionárom pred, počas a po zápase Ovplyvniteľnosť vonkajšími vplyvmi (diváci, hluk, situácia v hale) Používanie oficiálnej signalizácie (zrozumiteľne, dobre viditeľne) Reakcie (okamžité, oneskorené), riešenie sporných situácií Spolupráca s ostatnými funkcionármi Sústredenosť, dobré oko pri najrôznejších situáciách Nehľadanie chýb, radšej prehliadnutie ako unáhlené odpískanie chyby, ktorá nenastala Cit pre hru, najmä dotyky v ťažkých situáciách Posudzovanie čistoty hry, prvý dotyk vs. ostatným dotykom, jednotnosť v nasadenej úrovni Posudzovanie hry na sieti (útok, blok, dotyk siete hráčom, tečované lopty...) Použitie trestov správnym spôsobom Pohyblivosť, zaujímanie najvýhodnejšej pozície Dotyky siete, anténky, prešľapy na stredovej čiare, postavenie, chyby v postupe, chyby zadných hráčov Spolupráca a pomoc 1. rozhodcovi Pískanie dotyku lopty s podlahou Udeľovanie oddychovýc h časov a striedaní, činnosť počas nich Kontrola lavičiek a z n rozcvičovania výborne dobre dostatočne nedostatočne výborne dobre dostatočne nedostatočne výborne dobre dostatočne nedostatočne výborne dobre dostatočne nedostatočne Referee s performance Max. 60 points Evaluation by coaches 40% Evaluation by TDs 60% Evaluation forms TDs the same as for international matches Coaches - specific ASOCIÁCIA VOLEJBALOVÝCH ROZHODCOV HODNOTENIE ROZHODCOV V SÚŤAŽNOM ROČNÍKU AVR /2002 Funkcia Priezvisko a meno Licencia Číslo čl. preukazu 1. rozhodca 2. rozhodca Zápas Číslo: Domáci: Hostia: Mesto/Hala: Dátum: Ženy Muži Senior Junior Mládež Extraliga 1. liga 2. liga Meno trénera: Družstvo: Celkový dojem rozhodcu 1. rozhodca 2. rozhodca Zdôvodnenie pri hodnotení dostatočne a nedostatočne: Činnosť 1. rozhodcu Zdôvodnenie pri hodnotení dostatočne a nedostatočne: Činnosť 2. rozhodcu Zdôvodnenie pri hodnotení dostatočne a nedostatočne: Stupeň obtiažnosti stretnutia Veľmi ťažké Ťažké Normálne Ľahké Dátum stretnutia: Podpis hodnotiaceho: V prípade nedostatku miesta pokračujte na druhej strane Coaches evaluation form tout ensemble (image of both referees) performance of 1st referee performance of 2nd referee match difficulty Example: Difficulty Evaluation Image Easy Perf. Excellent 5 5 Good Satisfactory Not satisfactory 2 4 Normal Image Perf Evaluation system Evaluation system Sum of all evaluations is a basis for score-sheet mistakes subtractions Various subtractions for missing signatures, missing datas about team, incomplete scoresheet,... Result is divided by number of evaluations and multiplied by 6 Example: Test result 67 points = Commute 3 excuses = points points Performance: 40 evaluations = scoresheet mistakes = = / 40 = 9.67 x 6 = points Total evaluation = Ranking for next season According evaluation in all licence groups downward order Last 3 referees in ranking + disciplinary or age reasons A B Last 4 referees in ranking + disciplinary or age reasons B C Licence advance B A Best 3 ranked referees in B Age limit - 45 y. (can judge up to 50) If necessary, could advance more referees Test result before next season 85% Licence advance C B Test structure 45 minutes Best 4 ranked referees in B Age limit - 50 y. (can judge up to 55) If necessary, could advance more referees Test result before next season 80% Hand signals (15 points) Written answers (20 points) Multiple choice (35 points) Total 70 points (A1 = 90% = 63 points) 11

12 Test results levels % % 85% 80% 70% All the referees and Members of the Refereeing Commission take the written theory exam that is presented by the Slovakian Refereeing Commission. 0 AM+A1+TD A2 B C One of the licensing condition!!! Performance of the Referees by Dr. Jan Rek, the presentation is done with a PC, the basic points are: It is very important considering the age at which the referee starts his/her career vs. the performance. Depending of age, we can obtain three curves measuring quality of the different aspects: Performance Fitness Reaction Knowledge of Rules Know-How Theory Personality Experience Sovereignty Acceptance Performance of Referee (Demands) The referees must have certain qualities to fulfill the job: The referee must have: Talent Age The referee must bring: Commitment Willingness Fitness Shape Rule Knowledge The referee must develop: Personality Game Comprehension Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 10/07/02 Folie 20 12

13 The current R-4 form for evaluating the referees is not very accurate. The average points given in the praxis are between 8.8 and 9.4. This range of the assessments is too narrow to manifest real differences in the performance of different referees. The reason for this unpleasant situation is because many experts do not realize that the Notes in different assessments categories are affected by a factor depending to their importance. When you deduct the points for the performance in one special category from the total of max. points (already multiplied by the factor) instead of Note the deduction is not correct. Example: For a certain assessments category, the max. number of points is 20 (note 5 multiple by factor 4). If you deduct 2 points from 20 instead from note 5, the result is 18 points, instead of 12 points. Two examples of a possible paraphrase of the notes for two different appraisal factors: Application of Hand Signals (5 x 2) Note 5: The referee uses consistently and exactly the valid, official hand signals. Note 4: Like Note 5, however the referee is not consistent at the application of certain hand signal (in minimal number). Note 3: Like Note 4 with the difference that the number of inadequacies is bigger and the signals aren't always understandable or not well visible for all game participants. Note 2: Most hand signals are not clear and must be used repeated and explained in addition. Note 1: The referee uses unclear, unofficial hand signals or he shows nothing at all. Max. points = 10 1 point deeper Note in the judgment of this category causes a discount of 2 points in the final assessment. Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 11/07/02 Folie 22 Judgement of the Ball Contact (5 x 4) Note 5: The referee has a good feeling for the play, with regard to the technical ball handling, especially in difficult situations. The standard is constant and takes the current international trend into account. All ball contacts are judged correctly. Note 4: Like Note 5, however the referee is not consistent in judgement of certain ball contacts (in minimal number). Note 3: Some fluctuations in the judgment of ball handling (too strict or too generous, first/second hit) are obvious, primarily at the end of sets and in difficult situations. Note 2: Bigger fluctuations in the ball judgment. No difference between first and second hit of the ball. Note 1: The referee has no feeling for the play with regard to the technical ball handling. No uniformity of judgment is obvious. Max. points = 20 1 point deeper Note in the judgment of this category causes a discount of 4 points in the final assessment. Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 11/07/02 Folie 23 13

14 Some supplementary remarks concerning the assessments of referees : The referee should not be punished (minus points in assessment) because the game was easy. Deciding if the game was easy or not should be done after the game. The ERC considers only the observations made by its Members and persons appointed by the ERC. In the past, the Technical Delegates also filled in the R-4 form. In future this should not be done because most of the Technical Delegates do not have the necessary knowledge concerning the assessment of referees. A new simple form will be prepared for the Technical Delegates with highlights of what they should mark. From this observation, only the negative points will be considered and only to correct them. Task of the 2 nd Referee, presentation of Mr. Klas HEJDENBERG (SWE): In 1994 Mr. Hejdenberg wrote a book called The 2 nd Referee in Volleyball. Because of its importance and due to the interest showed by some countries and referees, he updated it and republished it in 2001, translated into English. All participants have received a personal copy of the book. The electronic copy is available on the home page of Mr. Hejdenberg: The use of his book is permitted to anyone provided that the name of Mr. Hejdenberg is mentioned as author of it and no one makes any money of it or with it. The participants are given the written test included in the book. From the first part of the book, Questions of the Rules, certain doubts come to the discussion: Question: Should the 2 nd referee whistle certain faults as ball out of the antenna on his side, ball touching the floor or the ceiling, etc. Decision: According to the Rules, the 2 nd referee does not have to whistle the ball out of the antenna on his side. For the other situations, the 2 nd referee should whistle only when it is very clear that the 1 st referee did not see the action and after the eye contact between them. Decision: For the line judges, they signal only when a fault has been committed. If the ball flies out of the antenna but can be played back, then no fault has been committed yet and they should not signal anything. Should the ball be returned incorrectly, then a fault is committed and thus signaled. Question: If a player loses his/her glasses at the moment of a team mate s set, is this action to be whistled by the 2 nd referee Decision: Depends on the situation. This is part of the art of refereeing. Question: Part of the foot touching the opponent s court and the projection of the foot over the prolongation of the center line. Decision: says that part of the penetrating foot (feet) or hand(s) remains either in contact with or directly above the center line. The prolongation is not part of the center line, therefore it is a fault. Note: modify the answer to question 18e on the book. Decision: Although the teams must deliver the line up sheet to the 2 nd referee or scorer immediately after the end of the set, if they don t do so, the 2 nd referee must kindly ask for it. 14

15 Question: What is the correct position of the 2 nd referee and where should he stay during the TO and TTO Facing the 1 st referee or the scorer Decision: It is not important provided that the referee can control the benches and the players. Both positions have things for and against. Question: Is it correct that the referee makes different kind of whistles i.e. different intensity, or duration Decision: The way of whistling must always be the same regarding whistling faults or interruptions. Of course, it can be necessary to draw the attention of the players in the warming-up area or moppers, etc. and then a more insistent whistling is required. Question: Is it correct that the 2 nd referee moves up and down while watching the rallies Decision: This is up to the referee. The important thing is that he/she moves to the correct side and back and forward to pay closer attention to the place where the action is. Decision: It is not written anywhere, but the 2 nd referee must always have his/her shoulders parallel to the sideline as well as his/her feet. Some referees still show their back to the serving team. Question: Where must the 2 nd referee be to signal the serving team after a fault Decision: Always on the side of the team that will receive the next service. Exception, when there are no line judges and the 2 nd referee moves a bit closer to the attack line, then he/she can do the signal from that position. Decision: The 2 nd referee does not control the attack of the back row player any more. Therefore, it is not necessary to look at the attacker, but to concentrate on his/her responsibilities. Question: What happens if there is a request and the 2 nd referee sees something wrong Decision: A request is legal when done with the official hand signal and by an authorized team member. If this is correct, the 2 nd referee must acknowledge the request. Then the 1 st referee will decide if something is wrong (no paddle, incorrect number, etc.) and will apply the necessary delay sanctions. Note: modify the book on page 22, request for substitution/time-out. Question: The scorer, must he maintain his/her hand up Decision: The scorer raises his/her arm to indicate that the substitution is correct. Then puts it down, writes the substitution on the score sheet and raises both arms to indicate that he/she is ready to continue. This is so because it is possible to have more than one substitution at the time. In this case, he/she can raise the arm again to signal that the substitution is legal while if maintained raised, there is no way to indicate that the second and subsequent substitutions are correct. Advice: Do not touch the players at any time, but especially during the substitutions. If the referee must stop them, do it whistleling, or with signs or telling them. Advice: The signs that all the referees do to authorize the substitution are not official, but they help to show the players what to do and specially when to do it. They can be done when necessary, but not during all the substitutions. Advice: It is very important that the 2 nd referee checks that the players on court are those on the line-up sheet. This must be done at the start of the set and it is an unacceptable mistake of the referee for not having checked it properly. Decision: The papers with the line-up sheets must be kept ONLY inside the pockets of the trousers. Other systems (as mentioned in the book) can be used, but not in the CEV. 15

16 Advice: Look at the other officials (especially the 2 nd referee) EACH TIME before making a decision. Presentation about the ideas concerning a New observation sheet (Dr. Fred Kröger): It is clear that the current R-4 does not reflect all useful information about the referee and his/her refereeing performance. The new form must reflect what is really important and what the observer would comment to the referee at the end of the game. A mark (number of points) is not requested, but an evaluation to obtain a profile of the referee is. The final part of this form will contain some boxes to classify the referees. At the moment, the idea is like this: Present Next Top 20 Next 30 Young referees with future Average Unknown The form has already been tested but has not been approved yet. It is the result of the studies from the observation forms used by some National Commissions ones. Departure for Match Observations Agenda Sunday 9 th June Education of Referees in Slovakia Test-Evaluation, Conclusions, Discussion Evaluation of the Match Observation (1) Coffee break Evaluation of the Match Observation (2) Closing Discussion Lunch (End of Seminar) Finale 1 st Place Dr. Jan REK, President - CEV Refereeing Commission Version 29/05/02 Folie 4 Results of the written test. Dr. Juraj MOKRY informs about the results of the test and a discussion starts about the answers to some of the questions. Because this test has not been used yet in Slovakia, it is not yet published. The questions and answers will be published on the CEV web site and Slovakian pages in October. The final ruling to certain questions that arose during the presentation will be discussed by the Members of the Refereeing Commission and the decisions published on the CEV web site. 16

17 Nevertheless, certain ruling is decided: Decision: If a server tosses the ball with clear intention of hitting the ball for the service, no matter what happens after (another team-mate or him/herself catches the ball to toss again, etc.) it is considered that the attempt has been made and the consequent fault of service should be called. Decision: If a player grabs the post to turn rapidly, it is not a fault if the player is not in contact with the post while hitting the ball (see casebook 4.33). Decision: A replacement involving a Libero cannot be made when the ball is in play. It is different if the referee has authorized the service but the ball has not been hit yet. This case has been discussed already in previous seminars and it is clear how to handle the situation. Decision: Any situation that is contemplated in the casebook must be followed without discussion. If after a replacement involving a Libero the players realize that this replacement is not correct and they replace back, this can be done even if there has been no rally between the two replacements (see casebook 6.13). Result of the Match Observations: Decision: The 2 nd referee MUST NOT make the signal of nothing happened. It is not in the Rules and must never be used, not even to help the 1 st referee. If something happens, the referee can show the official hand signal to his colleague; if nothing happens, then show nothing. Advice: To show OK to the 1 st referee do not use the screen signal. Showing the palms and with the arms slightly raise is enough. Advice: The 2 nd referee must move back, forward, side to side and even up and down, but this must be done in a natural way, not as a machine or with exaggerated movements. If the 2 nd referee is already on the side where he has to make the sign, it is not necessary that he/she moves again to another position. Getting closer to the net and touching it to signal a net touch is also not necessary. Advice: From the moment that the 1 st referee whistles until he/she makes the signal of the serving team, he/she must look to his/her colleagues to collect information for his/her decision. Advice: The tension during the games must be kept during all the rallies, no matter the result or the level of the game. A decisive decision at a crucial point will have the recognition of the teams only if the credibility has been gained during all the other actions. Decision: The 2 nd referee does not need to control the moppers. It is not his/her task. Advice: Although not written, the advice is that the 2 nd referee shows to the 1 st referee the signals that are not in his/her range of jurisdiction in front of the chest and not anywhere else. Decision: Paddles for substitution must be checked between the conclusion of a set and the starting of the next one. Should there be a reserve referee, he/she will do it. Advice: During TO and TTO, the players must move really close to their benches. At whatever the distance the benches are, they can never prevent the moppers from doing their job. 17

18 Closing discussion: The following case is presented to the participants (copied below literally from the document received): In the Nordic Championship for men in Finland, Denmark was playing against Norway. In 3 rd set, player no. 5 from Denmark get a red card (expulsion) at the score 15-8 to Norway (Norway lead 2-0 in set). The player no. 5 was, at the moment he was expelled, sitting on the bench, replaced by the Libero. At the score 10-17, the Libero rotated to position 4, and the coach from Denmark asked for a substitution of player no. 5 with the player no. 12, so that the player no. 12 can replace the Libero. The 1 st referee, at that moment, declared the team INCOMPLETE, because he said, that the Libero can only be replaced by the player whom he replaced and no substitution where allowed. The Norwegian team won the set (and the match 3-0). Is this a correct decision by the referee Decision: No! At the moment that player no. 5 was expelled the 2 nd referee and scorer should have asked the coach, which player on the bench should substitute the player no. 5. As well as the expulsion it should have been recorded on the score sheet. Only, if the Danish team was not able to make a regular substitution, the team has to be declared INCOMPLETE. Rule 8.3. Request: All the information regarding traveling, accommodation, sport hall, etc. has to be sent to the referees in due time. If not, inform the CEV. Decision: After the third touch of a team, if the ball goes out on their side, the hand signal will always be ball touched regardless if when landing the ball touches the stand, the spectators, the wall, etc. If it lands on the other side, then ball out. Dr. Rek informs that there are very few problems or suggestions sent to the ERC to be discussed during the seminar. He encourages everyone to contact the Refereeing Commission with such comments. Next year, Austria might organize the seminar. Among the items under preparation, some psychological work and study of videos is being done. Closing of seminar: Dr. Rek and Mr. Meyer thank the presence of all the participants and special thanks to the Organizers, to Dr. MOKRY and to Mr. HEJDENBERG for their presentations and to the Members of the ERC. Appendices: - List of participants 18

19 List of participants AND Juan PONT Participant AUT Eugen KULHANEK Participant BEL Jean- Claude BACCHUS Participant BLR Aliaksandr PIASSETSKI Participant BUL Konstantin TUFEKTCHEV Participant CRO Dravko STIPANICEV Participant CYP Pantelis TOFIS Participant CZE Milan LABASTA Participant DEN Aage CHRISTENSEN Participant ESP Jose GONZALO SANCHES Participant EST Toomas MURULO Participant HUN Monika UJHAZI Participant ISR Yousef NIJIM Participant ITA Achille VITO SANTE Participant LAT Ritvars ALKSNIS Participant LIE Philippe SHURMANN Participant POL Mirostaw STANDO Participant POR Helio Dinis AGUIAR ORMONDE Participant ROM Mihai ARMEANU Participant RUS Andrei ZENOVICH Participant SVK Juray MOKRY Participant SLO Peter KONCNIK Participant SUI Philippe WEINBERGER Participant SUI Michel HEFTI Participant SUI Adrian FLUECKIGER Participant SUI Jan REK ERC NED Goof van VELSEN ERC GER Fred KRÖGER ERC GRE Antonis DOGARIS ERC ITA Umberto SUPRANI ERC BUL Ilia ILIEV ERC Ad Hoc SVK Ivan MAJERCAK ERC Ad Hoc BEL Georges DECLERCQ ERC Ad Hoc SLO Jozef LECNIK ERC Ad Hoc SUI Georges SCHNEIDER Participant SWE Klas HEJDENBERG Participant TUR Ali OZARBOY Participant YUG Vladimir CUK Participant 19