State Tournament Referees

[heyitsme]

The never-ending battle of officiating ........ :confused:

 

I didn't have a team or a kid playing in either state tournament, and I have to say that the officiating was 'reflective' of the play --- some good, some bad, and some fell inbetween.

 

I disagree wholeheartedly with 'CoachSH' idea that the coaches should 'rate' the officials and therefore determine which ones would officiate in the state tournament. That concept becomes a 'personality' contest, rather than an 'ability' contest. Most coaches can't keep their players, fans, and parents happy ..... much less the officials and their organizations.

 

If we used that philosophy and wanted to be consistent, maybe the coaches should let the fans and/or parents determine who will start, who will take the majority of the shots, and what kind of defense that should be used.

 

Before the 'flamers' start accusing me of being an official, let me assure you that I am NOT. I have seen good and bad officials, good and bad coaches, and good and bad players; all of which are a part of high school basketball.

 

Personally, when you consider the rate of pay for coaches and officials, I think that Tennessee has a pretty good product both in girls and boys basketball.

 

On the other hand, I find the officiating in the NCAA as a huge disappointment, especially considering most game fees are $1,000 plus $.50/mile travel fee, and a per diem fee for travel over 250 miles. The only thing that saves them is the fact that the quality of the athlete is so much better. I'd almost wager that a majority of the NCAA officials probably couldn't adequately work a high school game due to the difference in the talent level.

 

I believe that about half of this year's boys' state tournament officials are also NCAA officials. And after reading some of the previous posts, maybe I need to find someone that will take me up on that 'wager'!

[cobrafan90]

heyitsme ,

 

good post. sloppy play can make officiating look bad. the older and better quality(well coached and disciplined teams) the play the better the officials look.

 

the ncaa analogy was good.

[volfalcons]

And anytime anyone played at Elizabethton the calls went to etown......so give it a break.

[Knightcourt]

I've said it before and I will say it again, they need to send the best officials to the state each year. If we try to send the best teams then we should also send the best refs. They should be accountable to coaches in some way. We the schools (coaches) pay the officials for each game officiated during the regular season but have no input on evaluation except for a little ranking sheet used before the season. How is it they can be employees of ours yet we have no evaluation process? There has to be a better way!! As far as officials sent to the state tournament, the best should be sent, not those that have just "put in their time". I have been to camps in the summer where officials were being evaluated and they did a better job because they were constantly being evaluated. There has to be a better system somehow. Coaches need to have some kind of evaluation process. After all everyone involved in the game should be working for the betterment of the kids that play this game.

[tnwareagle]

Good and bad referreeing is in the eyes of the beholder. Referrees don't "cheat" as some of you insinuate and as some coaches and fans aledge. As long as a referree is consistent it is okay.

[BigOwl]

Knightcourt the officials are not employees of the schools. They are independent contracters. They are evaluated throughout the year by their supervisors. The supervisors then nominate officials to the state office for the state tournament. The state then comes and watches the officials and then they decide who to take to the tournament. It is not done on length of service. It is done on high school mechanics, judgment, and how they control a game. From your post, I assume you are a coach. How would you evaluate officials? Have you ever called a game? Do you know the mechanics etc so that you could evaluate?

[yodude]

Over the last several years, the process has been laid out to officials across the state. Referees are sent to an "invitational camp", usually only 2-4 per association, and evaluated. At the end of camp, supervisors across the state evaluate each official and will put them on "lists" of things like "ready now for state", "one to two years away", or "lets look at them again in 3-5 years. Once you get on the ready or 1-2 yr list, you are seen and evaluated many many times. In November of each year, supervisors send in a list of names from their association to the state of all officals who they feel are ready for the state. The TSSAA makes the decision from there after their own evaluations. Each year there are first time state people as well as officials who have been there before together. It is a long process!

[Knightcourt]

There has got to be a better way to get more consistent "judgement" calls from referees. On any given trip down the floor, there are any number of calls that are not made. There are walks, 3 seconds, illegal picks, and the infamous palming the ball. These are not called every time because refs understand that this would impede the flow of the game. But what about those calls that are not so common? Why does one referee call it while another does not? Why are they called against one team and not another? I am not saying that referees are intentionally biased, but they are seeing something. The state tournament is a place for referees that have consistent judgement about the game. I could care less about seeing a ref with perfect mechanics. I want to see refs with an understanding of the rules of the game. I want to see refs who understand that they are there for those players and the betterment of the game not the other way around. Perhaps we are evaluting the wrong things about referees.

[macintosh]

I am not a coach just an observer, but it does seems to me that referees can decide the game, but I was wondering if it is anyway possible for the state of Tennessee, to let referees from another neighboring state come in and do the games, that way there is fair calls for both sides.

[heyitsme]

Here's my additional 2 cents worth ....

First, you can't let officials from outside the state come and work the state tournament. While on the surface it appears to be an honorable suggestion, but it in the long-run it would probably be devastating. One of the leading motivating factors for high school officials is to have the opportunity to work in the state tournament. Take that goal away, and you'll see a gradual decline in the number of officials, and in turn, a gradual decline in officiating in general. (For those of you that think that it couldn't get any worse, trust me, IT CAN!)

 

Second, and this is strictly for "Knightcourt". After reading your previous two posts in this thread, your 'elitist', self-righteous attitude makes me want to puke! How dare you insinuate that a 'coach' pays the official the game fee? It's absolutely NOT your money that pays the officials -- its the school's money! Actually, its MY money!!! Referees are NOT your employees as you implied, but they are independent contractors. What credentials do you have in officiating, that could tell me that you can make adequate and proper judgement about the quality (or lack of quality) of an official? You probably have the same credentials that I have ------- NONE. Just because you are a 'coach' by title doesn't make you any smarter than any fan or observer when it comes to evaluating officials. You, like most 'elitist', want control, and you'll say anything to achieve it.

 

Additionally, you want 'accountability', well so do I. Officials, as I understand, have a pretty simple plan of accountability in place --- and if you think about it -- it works. Official's organizations as I see it, are basically broken down into 3 distinct sub-groups:

1. those that are good officials

2. those that are bad officials

3. those that are inbetween (average)

The ones that are good, usually will receive MORE games, those that are bad, will customarily receive FEW games, and those that are inbetween (average) will receive the average amount of games. So obviously it appears that officials are PAID according to their ability. You work more games, you get more money. You work fewer games, you make less money.

 

On the other hand, are coaches paid in a similar fashion? :confused: Of course not --- they get paid the same amount regardless of their ability, proven or unproven! Yep, bad coaches get paid the same as the good coaches. The coach that gets beat the first game of the District will get paid the same as if he/she had won the state championship, but you want accountabilty for the officials .......

 

I hope that within your own school and school system, that you are demanding the same type of 'accountability' of the administrators and educators. I hope that within your local and county community that you are demanding the same type of 'accountability' for the politicians, policemen, clergy, etc. These are the people that play the most significant roles in the development of our youth. Are you walking the walk, or are you just talking the talk?

 

For other posters, I apologize for the length of this post. As I stated in an earlier post, I'm NOT an official, nor do I have any desire to become one. I simply love the game on the high school level. But, as you can tell, I hate the crowd that has the 'blame everyone else' syndrome. Former UCLA coach John Wooden once said, "Even on my best nights, 'I' make too many mistakes to worry 'bout someone else's mistakes!"

 

Finally, not all of the 'best' teams make it to the state tournament. I think that we can all agree upon that. But why can't we accept it that not all of the 'best' officials will make it to the state tournament? That's one of the beauties of high school basketball.

[Opperman]

The main reason I don't think you can bring other states' refs is because states have different rules and points of emphasis. (Of course, it seems different associations have different points of emphasis, but that's beside my point...of emphasis, of course)

 

For example, Florida uses the NCAA women's rule on free throws, where everybody moves one spot further away from the basket (first defensive rebounder is above the block where the first offensive rebounder normally is). In Illinois, it's a tech if you try to check in with your jersey untucked, rather than the TN rule of not letting them in the game. And I think I've heard Maryland uses a shot clock, not that we need to debate the merits of that here.

[yodude]

Why need to bring in referees from other states? The referees at the state tournament DO NOT work any games in which a team from their area is involved. A official from memphis would not work any games involving teams from the memphis area which they work in the regular season. And the crack about the calls being fair to both sides, do you mean that all referees in Tennessee are crooked enough to call every game one sided? That is one of the most absurb things I have ever heard. I'll assure you that the referees who make it to the state tournament have been watched numerous times over several years BEFORE they are invited to Murfreesboro.

Knightcourt, yes some things may get missed in the course of the game. It's amazing that the same people who scream out to let the kids play and stop calling fouls are the same ones that yell "call the foul" or "you need to get control of the game" when the play gets a little rough. A referee is not going to make everyone happy with every call. Some people have nothing better to do with their lives but to go to a gym on Tue. & Fri. nights and yell at the referees just because it makes them feel better about their lives. Remember, it is just a game in the end and when when you, I, and others are long gone from this earth, THE GAME WILL GO ON WITHOUT US!