Why are referees not evaluated?

[attila]

Well in my humble opinion, varsity is about right, if not slightly overpaid. JV officials are underpaid. JV ball is harder to call than varsity ball, plus there are only two of them.

 

But the cold hard fact is that as long as colleges pay more than high school, then the good officials (the ones good enough to call college) are going to do college ball over high school. And who is left is who gets to call high school ball. That's the way it is, and there is now way around it.

 

As to more evaluations/evaluators, I would actually like that. It would do nothing bu make us better. But you and I both know the TSSAA is far to cheap to pay for MORE evaluators.

 

 

 

 

 

Actually, by TSSAA policy they are suppose to get the same pay as the varsity officials for a doubleheader, which for one game is $45 which many schools do for time reasons. 

[Play 4 Fun]

What would be wrong with a rating system? Honest Question. What would be wrong with a rating system in which the refs are rated after a given period of time (say a month, etc)? This is my thinking. I know all refs are going to get games, whether they are good or not, but my thinking is that if a ref has consistently bad reviews as an average across all the coaches reviewed then don't give them big games, close games, etc. For example, if Blackmon and Riverdale are playing each other...they should have the best officials that the area has to provide. Why? Because they are the top ranked teams and you know it is going to be a competitive, and intense game most of the time. Do the same with games like that across the state. If you have someone who is 0-23 and they are playing someone who is 20-4, DO NOT give that game the best officials as it should not be a good game (9 times out of 10). Will that eliminate all the problems? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Will there still be close games that probably have a less than great official? Absolutely, but that would not be the case nearly as often. In my opinion, there is nothing worse than coming into a game where the district lead is up for grabs...and then the crew comes in and its two officials that everyone knows not to be the best, and one official that is going to have to "carry the load" so to speak. 

 

I also think that the pay should be raised to $120 a night. That is $40 an hour. A good amount to be paid, but there is no amount of money that would make me want to be an official so maybe that would incentivize some. HOWEVER, if they raise the pay like they need to, then they must also raise the standard, implement some kind of rating system that officials would also agree on. (I think most officials would be okay with a system where coaches critiqued and then the average of everyone's was taken into account before assigning games). Let them know they will still get games, and that the coaches do not effect that. I think it would work, but someone may have an idea thats better??

[WarriorFan]

How are refs for post season tourneys chosen? They seem to be better.

[crazzyness]

The fact of the matter is if the TSSAA really cared about it, they would offer some free training to officials, or at least some that didn't cost an arm and a leg.

 

The summer officials camp I attended cost $175. There were 30-40 officials there, so went to the camp on their own dime to try to improve thenselves, so that's around $6000 they TSSAA made of that camp. You can't tell me that thing cost 6 grand to put on. Just more cash in their pockets. Registration fees with the TSSAA is 60 per sport. I would venture to say there are probably art least 1000 basketball officials across the state. That's $60K in they get just from registration fees. And they can't/won't give any free training from that.

 

People see officials as agents of the TSSAA. We aren't. The reality is we are just another source of income for them.

[crazzyness]

How are refs for post season tourneys chosen? They seem to be better.

Well one of the criteria is you must attend one of the State camps in the summer every so often (once every 3 years maybe?) So by that virtue, the ones who WANT to improve themselves and put the time/money into it are eligible for post season games. Plus the assigners generally have a good handle on who their "top shelf" officials are.

[tradertwo]

Referees are evaluated by their supervisor or whomever is over the officials, yes during the summer and sometimes during the season. My issue with refs are they are too inconsistent and nothing ever happens to the refs. The coach gets ejected = 2 games + fine, the player gets ejected = 2 games, the refs miss and make horrible calls that are game changers = nothing happens. Also, I disagree with your next to last sentence. I do not believe they do the best job they can and I also believe there is bias there sometimes. Whether it's helping the home team, helping the worse team, helping a team you have a relationship with, helping a team you don't like or don't like the coach, but they are human so there is some bias.

+1

[etownsparky]

I agree that officials are "evaluated". This evaluation is periodically performed by the local supervisors. However, this evaluation is as much a function of the evaluator as the evaluated. Supervisors often attain that position by virtue of longevity. That doesn't mean they were particularly proficient practicing officials, especially in all sports. So, the "best" officials within an association are not always the best officials. The criteria varies as well. Most supervisors are more concerned with mechanics than with the accuracy of the calls. This is disturbing because, while both are important, accuracy should trump mechanics in my opinion. This along with lack of accountability are my biggest gripes. No doubt being an official is largely a thankless job and most do a decent job.

[TheStuff]

In coaching multiple sports in high school and middle school for the last ten years, I have seen the entire spectrum when it comes to officials. I have had some of the most competent and professional officials all the way down to officials that saying they were incompetent would be a gross understatement. Any time I would speak to an assignor I would be sure to compliment the good ones, to which the assignor would always reply with a thank you and state it was always good to hear coaches compliment. In the same light, when I would voice a complaint or issue, the response was always abrasive, like they "didn't want to hear it" and, my personal favorite, "when you start recruiting young men/women to be officials in your area then you can complain". Assignors/supervisors should want input. I agree that the job is a thankless one, but I will never complain about an official that works hard and is professional, because those that work hard and remain professional work to get better and try very hard to call a good game.

 

The real issue, from my standpoint, is that the referee has all the power and recourse. If an official doesn't like the way you or a player acts or does their job, their recourse is the whistle. I am guilt of emotion and frustration, and have, deservedly, received the recourse from an official with a T or being restricted to the dugout. And an official can write a report to file with the state about a coach or players behaviors/actions. But there is no real recourse for a coach/administrator to report a poor official.

 

I have a difficult time believing the T$$AA would not be able to provide a "post-game" report for coaches or administrators to fill out about officials. Make the link open for a game 24 hours after the completion of a contest. Make a coach/admin have a "cooling off" period before they can access the report. Isolated poor reports can be attributed to "sour grapes", but consistent poor evaluations from multiple evaluators could be reason for a supervisor to take some type of action. Reward good officials, call to task the poor officials.

 

I know it is not an easy job nor an appreciated job, I have umpired baseball for several years. But I have always tried to be professional and communicate with coaches, and wanted to give the kids the best game I could. I have also had conversations with officials before, during, and after games where they would say they wouldn't coach because it is often as thankless a job as an official.

[RealisticFan45]

Your last paragraph says it all. You want to give the kids the best game you could. These officials these days look and gesture at some of these coaches like it is personal, and to the some of the kids too. These are kids, refs should not wear their feelings on their shoulder or treat kids how they do. They seem to make the game about them, trying to put on a show.

[PEARLBALL]

I would love to see some sort of evaluation put in place for officials from the administrator level. I don't see all coaches being able to give an honest assessment of officials, but the school administrator SHOULD be able to look at the ref's performance somewhat objectively. I also agree that too many officials are now becoming or trying to become "part of the show". Strangely, I don't mind this if they are a good official. A couple of refs from the 80's were good officials who just happened to be somewhat comical and entertaining. I never minded them because they generally did a good job officiating the game.

 

I also don't believe it is that hard to evaluate officials. In many cases, both the home and away teams know who the bad refs are. I hear it the stands from both sides - "oh here comes so and so, he's terrible"... However, some of the blame comes from we the fans. Many capable officials just won't do it anymore because of the grief they receive night after night. Funny part is, the abuse officials think they receive today is nothing like it was 15 years ago.That's part of the reason the officiating has declined. There are kids officiating today that I would have thought were players had they not been in striped shirts.

[etownsparky]

No doubt the system could be better. But neither the TSSAA nor the supervisors want any negative feedback regarding officials. There is an issue with getting officials, but I think the system is as much to blame as people not wanting to deal with criticism from fans (see my previous posts about evaluations). TN could learn from other states if there was an interest. My daughter's team has played a holiday tournament in SC the past two years and the officiating was very good both years. It wasn't perfect, but it was very good. The officials were professional and consistent.

[tninsider]

I also think that with the ever-evolving rule changes that officiating is very difficult. The hand-checking madness at the beginning of the year has slowly given way to more physical play as of late, at least from what I've witnessed. I have no dog in the fight, no school to root for, but it seems like the perceived "best player" for teams gets a ton of slack when it comes to fouls being called from what I've seen at games I have attended. They still also try to "even" the fouls out, which seems so absurd to me. Who cares what the ratio is if you're calling it correctly?

 

More than anything, all I want in an officiated game is consistency. If you're going to be good, then be good for both sides. If you're going to be bad, then be bad for both sides. I can handle a terrible official if they are consistent.