Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
1. So let me get this straight. You are saying that you did VARSITY high school games when you were 15 and 16 and you claim that you were fully ready and capable of running the show? That's hogswash, and you know it. You had some other officials there who were adults that carried you. You made a few calls here and there and likely did a serviceable job, but didn't have an ounce of game control. Someone else did that for you. BTW times were vastly different forty years ago!
2. The people who start officiating youth games at 12/13 do gain some valuable experience, however, it is not proper to contend that they have 8,9, or 10 years of experience by the time they hit 21. Those early years of kiddie ball just don't equate the same way as someone who was 25 and started working freshman and jv games with local HS association. There is a big difference in the environment.
3. In fact, the hard time getting and retaining officials is the very reason that most of these people are still out there. If there were greater numbers of officials and stiffer competition for games, this issue would take care of itself, but instead I see many associations pander to the older veterans for fear that they might quit if they aren't still being given the "big game" thus leaving the association short-handed the next season. I've argued that watching these old-timers continue to get the premium assignments year after year is a greater problem. The younger officials become discouraged and call it quits after five or six years of being stuck behind the old guys. IMO that is the biggest cause of the lack of retention of officials. There was a discussion on here not so long ago about female officials up in the Portland area quitting because they felt that they couldn't break through and get playoff games. One poster wrote that many were just on the verge of receiving those assignments when they quit. Clearly a case of dissatisfaction with paying their dues and waiting their turn. How many officials are lost in this manner because the "experienced" official was chosen for the semi-final?
It has been my observation that once an official goes to the top, he never goes back down. Most associations are very good about promoting deserving officials, but are very poor at demoting those who no longer perform as they once did. This creates a blockage at the top. Something must be done to relieve it.
|
1) No, I'm saying that I was
ready by age 21 to be fully capable to officiate varsity games. And I was given the opportunity because other local people thought that I was ready. And the reason that I was ready was that I was allowed to gain the necessary experience and knowledge through the help of veteran officials who wanted to develop younger officials. I was
taught how to be an official, and I was also working my azz off at the same time doing what I was being taught. I listened and learned because I
wanted to be a good official. Using your recommended procedure, that just ain't ever gonna happen. And that's exactly why your proposed age limits might be the most ridiculous thing that you've ever written here. And for you, believe me, that's saying something.
As for not happening now? Our association regularly tries to recruit local high school students in the 15-16 year old range. We train 'em and use them in local house league and kids rec programs. If they go away to college, we'll find an association nearby that they can join to keep officiating, and also help get them into an intramural program. Hopefully, we'll get some of them back eventually with their love of officiating intact. Others that might not want to go to college still officiate locally, and they proceed up the ladder as they gain skill and experience. We always lose some, but the ones that we manage to keep are nothing but a help to our association. Of course, some never turn into good officials, but that doesn't mean that they don't turn into serviceable officials. I know that we aren't the only ones around doing that either.
2) Howinthehell can you be a spokesman for people that you know absolutely nothing about? You don't have a clue as to what each
individual official is going to be like at any age or stage of their development. They're people, not cloned robots. They're all different and they all develop and mature differently. And that's why what you're proposing is so damn ridiculous. It assumes that every person is exactly the same, learns at the same rate, develops at the same rate, etc. That's nonsense and that's why you'll never see anything like what you're proposing ever happen. Sheer doodoo!
3) Didn't get picked for the big games again, did you?
Of course cronyism lives. The idea though is that you try to fix that problem, not something that is completely different and maybe isn't a problem. You don't fix that problem by installing hairbrain programs that have got diddley-squat to do with the problem. Yup, let's limit the opportunities of two different groups of officials by installing artificial age barriers. It doesn't matter how good of an official they are either. Or what kind of physical shape that they are in. All that matters is their birth date. I really hate to break this to you, Nevada, but if there is favoritism and cronyism present in an association, it's going to be used with 25-45 year old officials too. Someone in that age group might be going to State even though a 24 or 46 year-old official might be doing a much better job. You are just incredibly naive imo.
Nevada, you should evaluate and judge each official by what they can
do on the floor, not by numbers on a birth certificate. Maybe in the Reno, Nevada area, every
single official over the age of 50 is no longer competent to do the big games and no official under 25 is ready to do those big games either(as you are intimating), but I really don't think that holds true for the rest of the country-- and world. JMO of course.