THE DEMISE OF COLLEGE TWO-MAN

Some time ago I wrote that I would post a short piece telling of the demise of two-man officiating in college games.  Ed and I were involved personally and we regard our efforts as a significant contribution to the development of the sport in this country.  Luck, determination, professionalism, and a small group of good officials from North Texas all played a part in the events at the NAIA National Championships of November 1978 in Alabama . . .

The luck was that a college coach in North Texas—Howard Patterson of Midwestern State--was on the organizing committee for the tournament.  He recommended that the three-man system be used, and since the Dallas area had several officials refereeing and lining in the NASL, that they use them all for the games.  Patterson was familiar with the four of us: Manuel Ortiz (Sr.), NASL referee, Ed Bellion, NASL referee, Romie Ogbolu, NASL linesman, and yours truly, NASL referee.

After several years of arguing within NISOA about the superior efficiency of three officials when compared to two, we were determined to make the most of this opportunity to demonstrate it on the field in front of coaches who had been subject only to the old-fashioned and (in our mind) discredited system.  To satisfy ourselves, Ed and I ran a game at Southern Methodist University, trying to keep up with offside positioning and at the same time controlling the middle of the pitch, but, fit as we were, we soon learned that those two tasks were incompatible.  (And we ran a lot more than two-man teams of the time did.)  As most observers know, to make it work you have to have peripheral vision of a chameleon, and the legs of a cheetah!  Imagine a referee with rotating eyes like this or the photo.

All four of the officials had years in the NASL and had absorbed the professionalism that went with it.  We flew down to Alabama in our best bib-and-tucker, arranged a meeting with the eight coaches and quite simply, told them what we would be doing.  I acted as spokesman, since I was a Regional Referee Instructor.  The expressions on the faces in our audience were a mixture of shock and disbelief as I went through our policies: cautions for dissent, delay of the game, encroachment, tactical fouls, persistent infringement, rough fouls, etc., etc., all the things that competent officials should be doing for the good of the game, any game.

The coaches (of Davis & Elkins of W. Virginia; The King’s, N.Y.; Rockhurst of Missouri; Tennessee Wesleyan; Quincy, Illinois; Keene State, New Hampshire; Alabama-Huntsville; Simon Fraser of British Columbia) asked a few questions, perhaps skeptical that we would be united and consistent with the whistle as we had stated.  But there was no animosity or protest, because as all coaches know, a properly-conducted piece of officiating benefits everybody in the game.  Well, if not all, certainly most.

We recruited a few local officials to run line, gave a them a clinic in how to do it, and what we expected of them, and off we went.  Romie Ogbolu, an immigrant from eastern Nigeria after the Biafra conflict and the least-experienced of the four of us, did the first game in the style we said we would.  Early in the first half, he gave a free kick outside one penalty-area, and after the whistle, a quick-thinking defender, accustomed to cheating and getting away with it, clipped the ball over the boundary-fence to delay the kick and allow his team-mates to get behind the ball.

Small in stature but large in authority, Romie didn’t hesitate.  He walked up to the defender, said some terse words to him, and showed the yellow card.  At that, another player came up to him and started complaining about the decision and the card.  Again he didn’t hesitate, telling the complainant off in no casual way, and pulled the yellow card again.  Romie was setting the tone, indeed . . .

Manuel, Ed and I were sitting in the bleachers, with several of the coaches behind us.  We smiled as one of them said sotto voce, but clearly intended for our ears: “Well, that’s what they said they were going to do!”  And that was the tournament, clasped firmly in our hands for the remaining games.  Quincy college won the final over Alabama-Huntsville 2-0, and we endured no complaints about our performance.  Every one of the coaches was impressed, and as a result . . .

Within a short time, the NAIA went to the three-man system for all their games, and not long after that, resistance within the NISOA capitulated.  Four guys from North Texas, professionals all, had brought about a sea-change in the game in this country.  And there’s a lesson there for the learning.

Comments

[pat smith]

Bob you are so right,if i were an author i could write a book of horrors on the two man system. I started officiating the two man system in 1859. I can count on my one hand the number of games that had incidents with my fellow officals the i didnt agrre with. Perhaps being a stubborn Englishman man have been one reason, but i usually got my way, even if it didnt make me too popular with my fellow officials i didnt allow the game to be a farce.

[Pat Smith]

Sorry Bob I am not that old I meant 1959

[Jeff Forward]

I would like to tell everyone that secretly visits this site that I am no longer seeking the USSF National Badge.
I have had a great career, and will hopefully continue to referee youth, men's amateur, and college games.
However, the time has come to call it quits on any attempts to regain my national referee status.
I want to thank everyone out there who has helped me in my career.
People like Bob Evans, Angelo Bratsis, Scott Weyland, Dave Levin, Mr. Fernando Alvarez, Ken Baldeosingh, John Murillo, Joe Pimentel, David Bragg, Ricardo Valenzuela and many others who went out of their way during my career to help me learn about our profession as well as to improve as a referee.
Unfortunately, several things impeded my progress to the higher levels of refereeing - notably politics and the viewpoint that I was a fat, blubbering whale in an OSI outfit.
There are some great people in the US Soccer referee program, but there are also a lot of scoundrels, too. It's tough to figure out who are the good guys and who are the bad guys, which makes this profession so frustrating sometimes.
I don't want to write too much, but I also want to mention some folks who I feel are not only great referees, but people who are honest, ethical and did things the right way.
Arthur Hovanesian, Craig Smith, and Vince Cortes are and undoubtedly have been my best friends in not only refereeing, but life, too. I applaud them for sticking to their ethics and doing things right, even when it didn't work out for some of them in the end.
Here in Cal-North, of course Yader Reyes stands out as a good buddy and friend. I hope he continues to climb the ladder. Romy Kozak was also a great referee and she didn't get what she deserved in the end. Of course, others here are also great friends - Colin Arblaster and Veronica Perez - and have done a lot for the game. They know who they are.
Down south, the Anderson Brothers - Frank and Ian - have never been anything except great guys and awesome referees. I hope they someday make it into the MLS in the middle, because they deserve it.
Some of my favorite people in refereeing are very old school: Pat Smith, Angelo Bratsis, Bob Evans, Ed Bellion, Heinz Wolmerath, and many others.
I want to thank Heinz for sticking up for me at the 2003 Soccer Festival and trying to get me (unsuccessfully) into the middle of one of the final two international games. I appreciated your belief in my ability.
I would like to pass on a special thank you to Angelo for helping me learn to be better over the years. We first met at the 2001 Donnelley Cup and our relationship continued during other tournaments or academies or national camp.
I've been happy to meet some awesome referees from all over the United States, including Jeremy Schroeder, Doug Damico, Harlan Matthews, Hilario "Chico" Grajeda, Brandilynn Griffiths, Eric Bryan, Matt Grove, and many, many others.
I want to save the most influential person for last - the man who runs this site: Bob Evans.
I know I would not be the referee I am today without his help and teachings over the years. I was assessed formally and informally by Bob more than 20 times and each game he'd have a new nugget of info, or a bit of wisdom to pass on. I appreciated beyond words all the lessons he taught me on a weekly - sometimes more often - basis. Our regular coffee talks about the game helped me immensely. I honestly believe Bob wants the best for all referees. He wants us to serve one thing: the game and its laws. Nothing more, nothing less.
Too bad the people in power don't see it that way.
Anyway, thanks to all of you and I hope to see you somewhere out there!
Go Bucks!
Jeff Forward

[John P.]

I would like to personally thank everyone who contributed to the demise of the two man system.

[Mike Willard]

Sorry, gents, but TWO REFS IN THE MIDDLE BEATS ONE. You are doing the sport a great disservice by fighting this excellent system. For behind-the-ball coverage alone, the two man is brilliant. The number of times I've caught a player fouling when he thought the other ref was watching the run of play--that just won't happen with one center.

Don't send the sport backwards. Support the Dual System.

[anon]

No offense, Mike, but a properly run DSC will catch those fouls (the trail linesman will see them). A properly run dual, however, cannot physically call offside and fouls at the same time. You have to tradeoff between the two. That's why dual is unacceptable.

[Mike W.]

To "Anon":
The linesman can't catch fouls and misconduct behind the run of play when a) the one center ref is looking the other way, towards play and/or b) the infraction is so far away that the linesman has no authority or credibility trying to suggest the call.

Again, the solution is the SUPERIOR DUAL SYSTEM, where the play is never behind the center referees (two really are better than one, in so many ways). Yes, the Dual is physically demanding (despite the views of Mr. "Ask the Referee" on the USSF website--he obviously has no training in the Dual), but aren't we supposed to be in excellent condition to run the pitch? If so, offside and field coverage are certainly manageable. Fitness, anticipation, and an ability to read the run of play are the keys.

The proof is in the fact that multiple referees is the norm in most other sports. Why? It works.

[Jackson P.]

An amusing yarn about retreating from the two-man. You had me fooled for a moment into thinking you were serious. Good for you! But you cannot possibly be serious, my man. There is going to be a change in the One Chap in the Middle system sometime in the future. Two referees is a fine start; perhaps there are even better alternatives. But no sport uses one poor sole to do the job. Thanks for a good laugh, though.

[Ed Bellion]

"But no sport uses one poor sole to do the job. Thanks for a good laugh, though."

Perhaps competitive angling? (A real sport)
Or even competitive shoe-making or repairing?

Enjoyed the laugh myself!

[Damian]

I agree, I'm trying to decide which is the funnier joke, this blog entry or the one after it. Oh, the fond memories I have of refereeing in the dual system...NOT. Six referees dangling from ropes attached to the rafters could also have a better angle (no pun intended...maybe...) on some incidents than one poor sole in the middle. Happy Thanksgiving.

[Mitch]

I hate to break it to you, but even though many referees are too intimidated by the USSF into admitting they prefer the Dual Officiating System, the truth is, many do prefer it. And actually, if only two certified officials are available at a match, it's ridiculous to make one run a line and the other be the center. Good wishes to one and all this week.

[anon]

Mike, you're forgetting that the lineman has a voice. In the event the CR fails to look and the lead lineman fails to mirror, the trail lineman can still get the attention of the center by speaking his name. On the other hand, if the play is really that far away from the lineman, what's the center looking at?

What you describe is a failure of implementation, not a failure in the design. Unfortunately, with Dual, there are many situations which categorically leave something uncovered. Take for example, a scrum on the goal line. Both referees need to be near the box to judge the play, one on the goal line to see the line and one at the top of the box to see the fouls. However, when the defense clears the ball there's noone to judge the offside at the other end of the field no matter how good your fitness and anticipation. Further, no matter how fast you run if the players run just as fast you cannot catch up to get to the other goal line in time. In diagonal, you still get the two at the box to see the line and the fouls, but at the quick counterattack there is someone waiting at the far end of the field specifically for the counterattack. There are a number of similar situations where Dual leaves important plays uncovered but Diagonal covers it. The only examples where Diagonal leaves things uncovered involve the referees doing something wrong.

[RF]

Any one that thinks a dual is a better system is a fool. To manage players you have to be there. There are too many blind spots in a dual and too many different items to focus.

The only problem with the three man system is that the referees have to be fit. The AR's must be fit and can sprint, and the Center must be able to run for 6.5 miles. Duals are for the lazy and for the incompetent who can blame the other official for the missed call.

[RF]

Any one that thinks a dual is a better system is a fool. To manage players you have to be there. There are too many blind spots in a dual and too many different items to focus.

The only problem with the three man system is that the referees have to be fit. The AR's must be fit and can sprint, and the Center must be able to run for 6.5 miles. Duals are for the lazy and for the incompetent who can blame the other official for the missed call.

[John P.]

The NCAA has removed references to the 2 man system in the 2008-9 NCAA Soccer Rules Book. Yippee!