Association/Board Issues

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Losing younger officials to college.

I really, really hope you (and your association) don't consider this to be a "problem".

If anything, it should be seen as point of pride, in a "we're so good at developing new guys that they can move up to higher levels very quickly". If you approach it from that mindset, it could be a potential selling point to help with your "not getting enough younger officials" problem.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

I really, really hope you (and your association) don't consider this to be a "problem".

If anything, it should be seen as point of pride, in a "we're so good at developing new guys that they can move up to higher levels very quickly". If you approach it from that mindset, it could be a potential selling point to help with your "not getting enough younger officials" problem.

Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!! One of the main reason we had a bunch of turmoil in my local area was because the commissioner and some his main posse' resented college officials. It was an utterly ridiculous stance.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SC Official

...
Losing younger officials to college.

....

Maybe the association wouldn't be losing officials, but instead sharing them with college conferences, if they felt more welcome and appreciated for the availability they do give to the HS association.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by Freddy

When in Nome, be sure to do what the Nomans do.

Have you ever refereed in Nome? I have.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

Have you ever refereed in Nome? I have.

No. Kenai.
Heard stories about you Bering Strait School District referees from back when ShishmarefRef was active on this forum. Travel to away games throughout an 80,000 square mile school district? Wow!

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Maybe the association wouldn't be losing officials, but instead sharing them with college conferences, if they felt more welcome and appreciated for the availability they do give to the HS association.

Our problem is that some college officials (not all, not even most) feel they're too good to have to meet the requirements of membership of the HS association....the meetings/training requirements specifically. They want to be excused from those requirements so they only have to pay their dues and show up at games. That is not entirely wrong. But, as soon as you start giving exemptions for things, the problem just grows when everyone has a "good" reason to not be at the training.

[The_Rookie]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Maybe the association wouldn't be losing officials, but instead sharing them with college conferences, if they felt more welcome and appreciated for the availability they do give to the HS association.

It stems from Bitterness and Resentment...Many College Officials that do HS are the ones selected for playoffs and so others feel "Blocked" Its ugly and not right but it is the case

[SC Official]

Our state changed the "experience points" requirement of the rating system from seven years to now five years, in an effort to get younger officials calling varsity sooner. A valiant effort, but the better idea would be to pay more, overhaul the rating system completely, and stop discouraging younger officials from working in other leagues, college or not.

So, the powers that be in South Carolina do consider it to be a "problem."

[SCalScoreKeeper]

Our volleyball association has plenty of college officials and they are subjected to the same training requirements the rest of us are.It's not an issue here-why do your college officials make such an issue of the training requirements Camron Rust?

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by SCalScoreKeeper

Our volleyball association has plenty of college officials and they are subjected to the same training requirements the rest of us are.It's not an issue here-why do your college officials make such an issue of the training requirements Camron Rust?

Because they most likely already have to do enough training for the college leagues they work in. Granted there are some significant rules differences, but a lot of information given at training meetings can be used at both levels. I am sure most guys working at the college level are dedicated enough to learn the rules changes and POEs from the NFHS and apply them when and where they have to. I have been to 3 college conference meetings already and the NCAA meeting. As bad as it may sound, I really do not have the time or inclination to go to more meetings than I already have to and frankly, any HS meeting is going to be at the bottom of the priority list.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

It stems from Bitterness and Resentment...Many College Officials that do HS are the ones selected for playoffs and so others feel "Blocked" Its ugly and not right but it is the case

I have most heard of that when officials that do almost all college show up for tourney time. They're not really HS officials but take the playoff games. Some areas (states/association) have a minimum number of regular season HS games required in order to be eligible for post season assignments. I think that is a good idea. Our minimum is 10, which, I think, is still a little low but at least it is something.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SCalScoreKeeper

Our volleyball association has plenty of college officials and they are subjected to the same training requirements the rest of us are.It's not an issue here-why do your college officials make such an issue of the training requirements Camron Rust?

The time it takes. And the fact that much of it is more basic then they need. But, some of it is applicable to all.

Originally Posted by johnny d

Because they most likely already have to do enough training for the college leagues they work in. Granted there are some significant rules differences, but a lot of information given at training meetings can be used at both levels. I am sure most guys working at the college level are dedicated enough to learn the rules changes and POEs from the NFHS and apply them when and where they have to. I have been to 3 college conference meetings already and the NCAA meeting. As bad as it may sound, I really do not have the time or inclination to go to more meetings than I already have to and frankly, any HS meeting is going to be at the bottom of the priority list.

Pretty much that.

In a perfect world, proven officials, whether accomplished at the college level or even post-season achievements, would be given some credit and not be required to participate in all of the training.

However, once you go down the slope of excusing training requirements, you have more and more people wanting exemptions, some for completely unrelated reasons. We only have a couple of exemptions. College officials get credit for one meeting if they have a college game on a meeting night, but only one. We even have people that ask for exemptions because they had a game for a different sport. Some want credit because they had to work their regular jobs.

[SC Official]

In my association's most recent development, we spent half our meeting tonight talking about Arbiter blocks, ZIP codes, scrimmages, and Thanksgiving tournaments. When we were supposed to be discussing Rules 9 and 10 the entire time.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I have most heard of that when officials that do almost all college show up for tourney time. They're not really HS officials but take the playoff games. Some areas (states/association) have a minimum number of regular season HS games required in order to be eligible for post season assignments. I think that is a good idea. Our minimum is 10, which, I think, is still a little low but at least it is something.

That bolded portion easily takes care of the problem.

Also, blame the assignor, not the official, for the italicized portion. "Teddy V, if you want to work play-off games, you have to give us at least ## regular season games."

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The time it takes. And the fact that much of it is more basic then they need. But, some of it is applicable to all.



Pretty much that.

In a perfect world, proven officials, whether accomplished at the college level or even post-season achievements, would be given some credit and not be required to participate in all of the training.

However, once you go down the slope of excusing training requirements, you have more and more people wanting exemptions, some for completely unrelated reasons. We only have a couple of exemptions. College officials get credit for one meeting if they have a college game on a meeting night, but only one. We even have people that ask for exemptions because they had a game for a different sport. Some want credit because they had to work their regular jobs.

My primary HS association has 2 clinics & 4 meetings throughout the season. We are required to physically attend at least 2 events, one them having to be one of the clinics. The meetings themselves are recorded and streamed live. You have to sign in and watch the remaining meetings (either live or recorded). An outstanding use of technology, IMO, while also recognizing the need to have some level of in-person participation.