Hmm, I thought it was a well-thought out article that had a number of good points.
First point - he didn't come right out and say the officiating sucks. If you read the first sentance, he says that is what everyone else is saying. And, that is what everyone else says on the men's side as well. I don't think anyone here can argue the fact that's the perception, right or wrong. Calls are scrutinized much more now than they were even 10 years ago, and the bad calls are magnified due to increased TV coverage, slow-mo instant replay, etc. He also mentiones the rhetoric is more heated on the women's side. I don't think anyone can dispute that either.
Second, Title IX exists not because women don't know how to organize and play sports, but because schools were operating as businesses and not paying for and providing those sports. If I have a product that brings in thousands, and in some cases, millions of dollars (i.e. men's basketball and football), I would do everything possible to keep that revenue stream. While on the other hand, if I have a product that costs money to produce and sell (women's lacrosse, swimming and diving), I would probably drop those products. Title IX tells the schools they need to provide the same opportunities for men and women regardless of the cost or income involved. My business sense doesn't agree with Titile IX, but my sense of fair play does. Clay's comment is the feminists didn't go far enough in supporting and promoting Title IX when it comes to female officials. The game needs more female officials; it's just that when they are found they are promoted quicker (and therefore less experienced than the equivalent men's official), and they are limited to only working on the women's game. If they are a good enough official, why can't they work the men's games as well? And, conversely, if the men's officials are good enough to work, why aren't they good enough to work women's games? That's what Clay says:
Quote:
Will this ever happen, either in the colleges or WNBA? No, because, on the men's side, the sexism of the coaches and athletic directors would derail it early on; and no, because on the women's side, female officials have it too good right now, and so do their supervisors, so there's no way they would want to give up what they have in order to advance the cause of the sport as a whole.
But it is important to remember that there is a way to improve the quality of officiating in women's basketball, and all it takes is eliminating the bias in favor of female refs on the women's side of the sport. If an official is good enough to do a women's game, she should be good enough to do a men's game; if she isn't, then she shouldn't do either.
The players and coaches deserve no less than that, and neither does the sport.
|
It was a good article, and promoted a novel idea. Will it happen? Probably not. Is it worth considering? Probably so.