The Calling Head and Support Judge Role and Application Process
Hello judges and players! In this article, we would like to show you the selection system for the Flesh and Blood Calling Head and Support judges. The following also applies as a baseline for being a Head or Support Judge at a Pro Tour or World Championship.
This article is an updated version; the original version was posted in November 2024.
The positions of Calling Head Judge (HJ) and Support Judge (SJ) are vital to run events on this level of prestige and complexity, not only because they are responsible for issuing the final ruling on any judge call, guiding the logistics of the event and deciding in cases of cheating, but also because they set the mood, standards, and values of the entire Judge Program.
They represent Flesh and Blood at events and beyond, serve as role models for the community, and are the arbiters of a fair and fun weekend.
What do the Head and Support Judges do?
Calling Head Judge
Leads planning and the overall approach to the event, and coordinates with the tournament organizer (TO), team leads, and other relevant actors.
Calling Support Judge
Supports the Head Judge on selected tasks during preparation and provides input from additional perspectives.
During the event, for players and judges, both the HJ and SJ are interchangeable for any kind of ruling and policy-related topics, as well as logistical items or such. The following is not a total list but rather a selection of the most important ones:
- Pre-Event Planning
- Communicate with the TO about general event details after event selections are made
- Work together with the TO and the leadership team on the judge schedule (Scheduled Event Lead, Showdown Head Judge, HJ of special events like World Premieres or Pro Tours)
- Communicate planning and expectations with your team leads, as well as check in on their pre-event tasks, like team briefings
- Support and assist their team leads with what they need – you support them so they can run their teams to make the event a success!
- Facilitate and support feedback before, during, and after the event for your leads, HJ/SJ, and others.
- Closer to the event, check in with the Scorekeeper Lead and Coverage for any details and requests.
- During the Calling
- Coordinate with all stakeholders during the event (TO, SJ, HJ, leads of other event parts, Coverage, and more)
- Keep the event running smoothly and on time
- Defining priorities and relocating resources as needed during the event.
- Give the final ruling in cases of appeals and investigations
- Support and mentor your whole team while creating a great environment for them and the attendees
- Post-Event Duties
- Write a Calling event report with the Support Judge; this can already be started on the weekend!
- Write and submit any disqualification reports from the Calling; this can already be started on the weekend!
- Give and check on feedback that has not been given on the weekend yet.
There are many (potentially daunting) tasks and duties. Nobody came along and just mastered them. Every one of our current HJ and SJ grew into it and learned step by step. Even when someone passes the process and has their first event as an SJ or HJ, they will receive support and be able to ask for assistance!
But what qualities are we looking for and evaluating in HJ and SJ? Here is an overview:
Qualities of a Calling Head and Support Judge
- Investigations:
- Being able to investigate, in a timely manner, a broad range of situations regarding their infractions, advantage, and intent, while also being able to include involved judges.
- Logistics and Problem Solving
- Being able to spearhead tournaments with several hundred players for several different formats, including planning and execution during the event days.
- Being able to solve a wide variety of problems on the spot or with little lead time to deal with challenges and decisions during the weekend. Being able to prioritize and triage.
- Conflict Management
- Being able to handle and solve different kinds of conflict between yourself and others, as well as between staff or between staff and players in a positive and constructive way.
- Procedure, Rules, Penalty, and Policy
- Being up to date on the current PPG, TRP, CR, and other relevant documents, as well as being able to explain this to others. This also includes understanding the policies more deeply and arguing for potential deviations.
- Feedback and Development
- Being able and willing to grow and take feedback for yourself, but also help others in your event grow and learn from the weekend.
Process & Requirements for the Roles
When we designed the selection system, we had to weigh many factors to determine what makes a great Calling HJ and SJ, figure out how to qualify them, and, at the same time, create an evaluation system that is fair and reliable.
In the following lines, we’ll explain how the selection process works in its updated iteration. As we run the process and we gain expertise, we expect to keep adapting and improving it.
STEP 1: Baseline Experience Requirements
These represent the minimum experience a judge needs to have sufficient skills to serve as HJ/SJ at a Calling event. This does not mean that anyone with this experience is qualified for the position. Each human is unique; each has their own strengths and weaknesses and their own learning processes.
At the moment, the requirements to apply to the Premier Event HJ/SJ evaluation process are:
- Have the Team Lead Certification.
- Having been a team lead 5 times at a Calling, or higher FAB event, in the last 30 months.
We are constantly evaluating the criteria, but expect them to stay as such for the foreseeable future in 2026.
STEP 2: Open Text Questions
After verifying the requirements, the applicant will receive a set of 4 or 5 questions to answer, each to be answered on around 1 page, within a 3-4 week time frame. Those questions must be answered solely by the candidate without any input from others; the candidates are also not allowed to show the questions to anybody. Any questions they have must be asked in reply to the email from which they received the questions. The use of AI is allowed for grammar and editing purposes, but any incoherence introduced by the AI will be weighed against the candidate. If you use AI, give it a deep review afterwards.
When the answers are provided, they are checked and anonymized, and then sent to a selected group of evaluators, mostly current Calling HJ/SJ, to evaluate them anonymously. By design, each will evaluate the answers of all candidates to one or two questions. Multiple people will evaluate each question.
By anonymizing the answers, we aim to limit potential biases, even unconscious ones. Candidates must ensure their answers are anonymous when writing. A guide will be provided to the candidates with some baselines (like providing the names of Events and Judges to use in their text, instead of the real ones that could identify them).
By having all the answers to the same question evaluated consistently, we uphold consistency in the evaluation. If an evaluator has a tendency to give high or low scores, all candidates will be affected the same way in the same question.
By having multiple people evaluate each question and averaging their qualifications, we reduce the influence of each evaluator’s preferences or style on each question.
Qualitative feedback is not provided to candidates who do not pass the written section, but they will receive a range they landed in, compared to the average score for each question, to identify their weaker points. Additionally, candidates are able, after the full conclusion of the current eval for everybody, to request feedback on the questions from any current Calling Head and Support group member.
Example Question
The following is a question used several waves ago; the example is provided to give you an idea of the scope. Questions and design changes every wave. This is just an example; please be ready to expect questions on several different topics.
At the end of Day One of a Classic Constructed Calling, Player Alpha comes up to you and tells you that he just realized that his final round opponent won because they cheated in the final play of the match.
Opponent was playing as Azalea. In the second-to-last turn, Azalea defended Alpha’s attack with all cards in their hand and ended the turn on 1 life. On Azalea’s following turn, they activated Azalea’s ability and revealed an INFECTING SHOT that they immediately played without paying its cost.
Because Player Alpha had no way of surviving this Dominated attack, Alpha explains that they shook hands with Azalea and conceded. Afterward, Alpha was reviewing their match and realized that INFECTING SHOT costs 1, and Azalea couldn’t have played it.
Describe your theory, approach, and plan of investigation. Before talking to the players, what actions would you take? What questions do you plan on asking and why? What other relevant actions would you take?
STEP 3: Personal Interview
For candidates who successfully pass step 2, there will be an online interview tailored to evaluate the candidate’s weaknesses based on the written evaluation and other input. The content and shape of each interview will vary, but the ultimate goal of each interview will be to ensure the candidate is qualified to perform the roles of Calling event Head Judge or Support Judge.
This interview has around 2-3 interviewers and potentially a small number of spectators. This is made so consistency can be assured over several interviews, as well as avoiding any biases.
The duration is usually timed for around 90 minutes.
STEP 4: Probationary Phase
This is the final stage of the process. You will be able to get Calling Support Judge positions at this point. The first two shows will be part of your preliminary phase. This means that feedback on your performance will be provided by your Head Judge of the show. The focus here is on weak points from the previous process steps. This will vary a lot by candidate. After this step and its approval, the process is complete, and the next active tasks are to be done during the recertification process later on. This will be around 2 years after the initial interview process.
This step is meant to give you time to grow into the role and work on some edges, as we do not expect everybody to be “perfect” at the end of the evaluation. The learning process continues after the interview, as well as after the preliminary phase.
Please be aware that we cannot show the amounts or timings of any potential Calling Support Judge slots. There will also be shows in other roles in this phase.
Other Relevant Details
Failing the selection process: Retesting restrictions depend on the evaluation details and the process frequency. Our expectation is that a candidate can test for this once a year to gain new experiences and grow.
Feedback after the process: Running only the evaluation part is highly resource-intensive, as you can see in the above description. While we agree that the process would be purely better if we could provide personalized feedback and mentoring to each candidate who fails, unfortunately, this is beyond the Program’s current capacities. Therefore, this process must be understood as an evaluation process, not as a training process. We do hope that findings from the evaluation can be used to learn.
Selection process frequency: When the selection process will be performed will ultimately be decided by the Judge Program Manager based on Organized Play needs.
Judges will receive the “Calling Head and Support Judge” role in JudgeHub when they enter their probationary phase. Passing the evaluation does not automatically guarantee a show as a Support Judge or Head Judge.
Featured photo and photos in article taken by John Brian McCarthy at Judges at Work.
French 
English 
Japanese 
German 
Korean 
Italian 
Spanish 
Chinese 
Portuguese