Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rainmaker
I disagree completely. Tournaments are competitions for the players, and should not be for the refs. Anyone who is good enough should be able to have a turn. There's no rationale for sending the "best" officials to tournaments as often as they're eligible over 20 years, when other officials who work just as hard never get to go. If there are 50 who are good enough then over the course of several years all 50 of them should get to go.
|
I agree to a point... The players have to earn their spot in the tourney, not by being just good enough, why not the Refs too? The teams don't get an automatic spot just because they've worked hard and haven't been for a while (or ever). Being a competitive selection process gives the officials a reason and incentive to continue to get better and work to do thier best and not just be average and wait their turn.
Plus, we are service providers to the teams. Given that some officials really are better than others, do you really think the teams want to 40th best ref since the 20th best has his/her turn last year? Don't they deserve to hire the "best" available official? Sure, There needs to be a way to address inequities in the system to ensure that those that deserve to go get a chance but simply being an average offical for X number of years is not an adequate measure.
With our old system, we would be sending approximately the top 20-30% of our varsty officials (no less than 29 different people over a two year window...~10% of our entire organization from rookies to vets). That was already a pretty good number. It's not like it was 5-10 officials going every year. Now we'll be sending approximately the top 40-45% of our varsity officials to the tourney. I doubt you'll ever find a wider distribtion of tourney assignments in any other associatoin.