Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Official
I don't think it's unreasonable that coaches get some say in who they feel the "best" officials are. After all, they are the ones that have a stake in the game. Sometimes I don't think we as officials give them enough credit to be as fair as they can in their evaluations (I'd rather have coach ratings than peer ratings which is what we have in SC). What there needs to be is a "check and balance" to throw out the "extreme" ratings on the high and low end of the spectrum.
But a 100% coach-driven rating system? That might be more ludicrous than the system we have where I live.
|
Whatever that supervisor told the officials, it is probably a line that is used to make a point. I doubt the coaches actually pick the officials that deeply. I bet the officials are ranked and that is used by the supervisor as needed. I think sometimes we get caught up in certain things when those things are not as deep or as important as stated.
All systems have flaws. People always complain in our system and coaches ratings are a small part of what we do or how we are considered for postseason games. And one person does all the assigning and he or she can make all kinds of decisions and do based off of things that clearly have nothing to do with ratings.
Peace