Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
Quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge
Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
If it's an area that does 3-person and you need coverage for afternoon games, maybe a better test would be to make sure someone has a pulse. :-)
Z
|
Well that might work with some of the teams you see, but if you work some of the teams I see, you better have more than a pulse and some energy to run up and down the court. 
Peace
|
Your part of the country doesn't have a monopoly on athleticism Rut.
My point is that there are lower level games that require coverage and from what I understand, most associations can barely cover those games as it is. Given the choice between getting them covered with some "slower bodies" and not covering them all, I say let's just stick with the pulse check. :-) If there are areas with a surplus of excellent referees with the athletic ability of Carl Lewis who are willing to do lower level afternoon games, then maybe those areas should implement that fitness test.
Z
|
What happens if a ref fails the test? You make a good point zebraman, but I think there should be some standard of fitness for the top V games. I would not recommend blocking a ref who failed the test from all games, but it can give an assignor ammunition for explaining why someone who has always been getting the top games is not anymore. It would be alot easier to say sorry you failed the test that saying sorry you got old and fat.
Of course only in areas that have enough refs that are qualified to handle the top games regardless of physical fitness. An experienced slow ref would be better than a fit bad ref.