Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
Can you name the refs? The game? The sitch?
No, but I bet the coaches involved and all the referees in that conference (including the evaluator/assignor) can. And I bet it reflected on all three refs in the crew.
Actually, I got sidetracked from my original point which was to just have a little fun with Rut since he has been known to rail on the "presence" side of "presence vs. rule knowledge" a few times.
None of us can recite the rule book verbatim and none of us are above getting caught on a once-in-a-lifetime situation where we weren't sure of what rule applied. Anyone who gets to a final four is obviously a great ref. However, it has been my experience that some veteran refs quit doing a yearly rule study once they have reached a certain level. Then they get caught with their pants down. When given the choice between a partner with great rule knowledge or great presence, I would feel much more comfortable being teamed up with the partner who has great rule knowledge. Just my personal preference.
Z
|
This is what is so frustrating about talking to some here or any board for that matter.
The Presence vs. rule knowledge discussion was about what I perfered in an official. What "I" wanted if I had to choose for a partner. Most of the time I do not have any choice in who I get to work with. But I when I can choose my partner and when I can choose who I work with, I do not want a guy that can just quote rules. If that is all you have to offer, then I will pass. I want an individual that can actually handle themselves under pressure and deal with coaches and players in an appropriate manner. I do not want someone that can quote the rules, but T the entire bench because they gave him or her some crap. I want someone that would know how to deal with the situation without anybody really knowing about it, but me and another partner.
Rules are the foundation on which we all have to build on. I for one know the rules, but applying them is another story all together as far as I am concerned. Things I used to call in my first few years of officiating, I do not even call anymore because I know how to prevent these things from happening now that I have been around the block.
And finally if rules were at the most importance as you think Z, tell me why I have never seen an D1 official in any of the sports I do (Football, Basketball or Baseball) lost or gained assignments based on a test score. College rules are always very different from HS rules. Why would you not have to take a simple qualification test like you do for HS? And BTW, show me any place that requires it other than HS? That also includes Junior High or AAU (rec. league type ball). Why are these officials that do all these other levels not required to have a 80 out of 100 like the NF levels usually have to?
Peace