[Camron Rust]

Taking this to a new thread....replying to http://forum.officiating.com/showpost.php?p=445881&postcount=53

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Camron, the problem is that there are certain "top" (and it's interesting, isn't it that all the top folks are guys?) who simply can't believe anyone could possibly be as good as they are, and they don't even try to help. They are polite and "encouraging" to your face, but what they tell you is meaningless at best or downright unhelpful. I know you don't believe this. But the fact of the matter is, it's true.

First, you show me more than 1-2 women who have spent 15-20 years officiating…the amount that those top guys took to get to the top (and the same amount of time that ten times as many men spent and never reached the top) and we’ll talk about that point. The fact is, most new officials (both men and women) want a quick jump to the top and aren’t willing to work their way up the same as the guys at the top have already done. They claim it is unfair after 2-6 years and quit.

The women that do spend the time find bigger opportunities that just aren’t open to men and just move on...a good thing for them. You can’t deny that women’s college assignors will hire a female over a male just about any day if the female is merely in the same ballpark as the male.

You also talk as if everyone should be obligated to teach and be helpful. In a utopian world it might happen. The fact of the matter is that some people don't care about you or anyone but themselves and their closest friends. They have no obligation to association, you, or anyone else. While they (most) don't try to harm anyone else, they have no interest in helping others. Would you rather them just say "You suck" to someone that asks and walk away? How would that be any more helpful?

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I've seen them roll their eyes behind backs, and I've had a few things said directly to my face about myself and about others. The things I'm talking about aren't meant to give the official real advice, just to get themselves away from the "plebes". Comments like, "Just keep working hard", "Well, you just have to keep watching others" and "You need to really think about your goals and dreams." How is that gonna help me get better? Or anyone?

On more than one occasion, I've tried to offer solicited advice only to be met with argumentative disagreement. It's all too common. Such behavior makes those initially willing to help stop trying. It’s not worth the headaches to many.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Then they say that people just don't improve enough to "keep from embarassing the association at the tournament."

Again, people go through the motions of asking for help but then discount everything they’re told. Asking is not enough…listening and believing is required.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Sorry, you pushed my buttons. The bare fact is that there are some terrific people in our association who really want to "give back" and help people get better. Those folks tend to move up eventually and move out. People like Lea, Spitz and Hefty. There are other helpful and encouraging folks who haven't moved out, but they tend to be busy, and aren't always available to help. A couple notable exceptions are Simshaw and Frostad. Then there are others who simply want to stand on the pedestal, and stomp on the fingers of those who are trying to climb up the mountain. I won't mention names, but I'm sure you know a few of who I mean.

Sure there are great people who want to give back. You're never going to get everyone in that boat.


Sure, some people don't want to help others topple them from their perch…insecure in their ability to keep their place on merit. That's their choice...nothing says that they should be willing to help anyone that asks. How many teams see their opponents struggling and give them pointers on how to beat them? It is a competitive field.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I know there are those who don't move up and just complain about how it's all politics and they don't take responsibility. But some of those who complain, have a legitimate beef. I'm thinking of a particular person who has been in the association 17 years, has worked a D2 national semi and only just this year made it to a hs tournament, and then only 2A. Ya gotta admit, that doesn't look good for the assoc. And you can't say his race wasn't a factor in that issue.

I know exactly who you are talking about. Having been in the association since 1993, I only first met the guy about 1-2 years ago....just never crossed paths. I had never seen him work a game at all, ever. I don't vote for people who I've never seen work. Since I saw him work a game, I've voted for him ever since. There are several reasons he may not be noticed. Among them are that he seems like a quiet guy that keeps to himself...something that would work against him in a voting system. He also works a limited HS schedule (less than 1/2 the number of games of the average varsity official)...making few chances for others (officials and coaches) to see him and know who he is or how good he is. I've never seen him in a spring, summer, or fall league game....maybe he does a few but Can't vote for a guy that you don't see work.

Was race a factor? Could be. More than likely the larger contribution was his lack of visibility. If race was really the factor, why did he and another minority make it at all...2 out of 19....a more than representative number....both by vote the vote of the rest of the association.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

If the point had really been to send "only the best refs" to the tournament, and to "protect the reputation of the association" this person would have gone to 6A this year, and a certain person who went to 6A (girls) wouldn't have gone at all.

There were certainly several officials better than some of the ones that did go. But that was what the association wanted. They gave the commissioner explicit picks to the tourney so he could send some women (as well as minorities) even if there were 30-40 men that were better. The association wanted the commissioner to send people just like the one you're refering to...people that are (were) really good but were not appropriate recognized by their peers. Some even believe that there were people in the 6A boys who were in over their head.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

It's NOT just about being the best ref. Association politics, gender and race and other outside issues do enter the equation. There's no way you can deny it.

In fact, the current system favored the very groups of people you're refering to....minorities and women were represented among the tourney selections at greater numbers than thier membership in the association.