Do you, like me, sometimes wonder at the research subjects undertaken by
universities? There was one recently published about how to make stones bounce
on water. What we called when I was a boy, 'duck, drake, lardy cake'.
Referees and refereeing are believe it or not, a constant source of research by universities
all over the world. Sometimes the findings can be valuable for referees. For
instance, research carried out by Liverpool University in 1993, into the physical
activities of referees during games, helped devise a fitness programme for
referees. Another recent research project by Dr. Nick Neave and Sports
Psychologist Dr. Sandy Wolfson at Northumberland University in Newcastle,
tried to establish what makes referees continue to referee, despite the treatment
they receive.
The report said that referees and their assistants have been
punched, kicked, even shot to death by players, managers, coaches and fans, and
they routinely experience a high level of criticism and abuse. So the objectives
of the research was look at the stresses affecting referees, and examine how
referees coped.
They did this by getting some referees to give their views,
individually and confidentially. As someone who has been involved in market
research, I have to admit it was a small sample, only 42 referees took part.
Having said that, I know that if I had been asked the same questions, the
answers would have almost been identical. Those taking part were senior
referees, but not top men and they had been refereeing between four and twenty
five years. That is important because refereeing is not for everyone.
We find= that those who cannot cope with the stresses of refereeing drop out within the
first two years. So why did these referees say they took up refereeing?
Top of the list was the love of football and the opportunity to make a contribution to the
game. Close behind came pride in accomplishment, the challenge and
excitement, and then contact with people. What did not motivate them was the
so-called power and glory of being a referee.
All of the referees in the survey
felt that their involvement in refereeing was definitely worthwhile, despite fifty
per cent admitting it affected their occupation and thirty eight percent their
family commitments. In other words, they love refereeing.
I might argue with one answer that was given. Most of the referees said they
did not feel nervous or tense before a game. My toilet would tell a different
story. However, I agree with them when they said they looked forward to the
game and expected to officiate well.
Questioned after games, referees were
willing to admit that they had made mistakes, but they analysed what had
happened so they could do better next time. They retained their confidence, by
telling themselves that their errors were in fact rare and remembering all the
good games they had had.
Although seventy one percent said they were
physically drained after a match, most of them indicated only moderate levels of
stress due to verbal abuse. So how do they cope with constant, incessant abuse?
What psychological coping mechanisms did the researchers discover?
It's all down to what they called 'illusory superiority'. Not superior in intellect
although ninety four percent were educated to GCSE standard or above. It's
simply confidence in their own ability and being able to externalise everything.
In other words they put any hostility they received, down to others not
understanding the laws, and being biased. You only have to spend an afternoon
at the Madejski Stadium to see how true that is. 'If they didn't have this
confidence,' said Dr. Neave, 'they would wilt'.
I can't give you the results of the
duck, drake, lardy cake research, but you can find a summary of the referees
research on website: http://psychology.unn.ac.uk/nick/refereeslindex.htm
Dick Sawdon Smith