Coaches comments about 3 officials...

[Rich]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I have to agree with Nevada on this point. If you are overweight, too old, or too slow for 2 man, then you are overweight, too old, or too slow to work 3 man correctly as well.

You list 3 things -- isn't the third one (too slow) the only one that's really relevant here?

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Rich

You list 3 things -- isn't the third one (too slow) the only one that's really relevant here?

Yes, but usually the reason someone is too slow is the result of being too old or overweight. I will add a third reason that has already been brought up as well, too lazy.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Yes, but usually the reason someone is too slow is the result of being too old or overweight. I will add a third reason that has already been brought up as well, too lazy.

That 3rd ref will instead be occupying 1/2 of a 2-man crew somewhere else and will still be lazy, overweight, and slow.

Old is irrelevant if you are in shape and not lazy.

[OrStBballRef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I agree. Two can carry the 3rd with that big if....some just don't get it.

It is even rougher if you end up on a game with two "thirds"....and I had that happen. It made for a rough night. I was babysitting the coaches as much as I was calling the game due to their level of frustration over the officiating.

I noticed this a lot during the season there were two 'thirds' on a lot of crews (and several other people I talked to as well noticed this).

I wonder what the solution is? Or could our assignor should push for more varsity contests on non-Tuesday/Friday nights in order to not dilute the officiating pool so better 3 man crews could be available? I've seen several other commissioners argue for this in other parts of the state.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OrStBballRef

I noticed this a lot during the season there were two 'thirds' on a lot of crews (and several other people I talked to as well noticed this).

I wonder what the solution is? Or could our assignor should push for more varsity contests on non-Tuesday/Friday nights in order to not dilute the officiating pool so better 3 man crews could be available? I've seen several other commissioners argue for this in other parts of the state.

Might be too early, but one solution is to start having large school JV games down with 3. It will improve the talent pool as officials move into varsity games.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That 3rd ref will instead be occupying 1/2 of a 2-man crew somewhere else and will still be lazy, overweight, and slow.

Old is irrelevant if you are in shape and not lazy.

Which is exactly what I said in my first post back on page 2.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OrStBballRef

I noticed this a lot during the season there were two 'thirds' on a lot of crews (and several other people I talked to as well noticed this).

I wonder what the solution is? Or could our assignor should push for more varsity contests on non-Tuesday/Friday nights in order to not dilute the officiating pool so better 3 man crews could be available? I've seen several other commissioners argue for this in other parts of the state.

I think one of the primary issues is that he tried to move too many people into 3-person games in the first season....trying to spread it around. I think it would have been more effective and made a more positive presentation to limit the number the first year to those with 3-person experience elsewhere with just enough others to cover the spots....and use those same officials in 3-person all season. It would have resulted in faster learning for the group brought in this year and would have made a better presentation. Then, the next year, a few more could be put into the 3-person group.

Spreading out the games would help whether we have 2 or 3 person crews. We're really about 50-75 officials short of what we should have on a busy day. Too many people have to double up just to cover the games.

[BillyMac]

... You Might Just Get It.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

We're really about 50-75 officials short of what we should have on a busy day. Too many people have to double up just to cover the games.

Connecticut, especially my local board, is almost all two person, mainly, as I've posted in the past, because the most vocal (and the most successful, and the most powerful) coaches are defensively oriented and believe that a third official will lead to more fouls being called.

Our assignment commissioner has been an active advocate for three person games, yet, if he somehow becomes a successful three person advocate, I'm not sure that we can handle a three person schedule, even a schedule with a modest increase in the number three person games.

My local board has seen a decrease in the number of rookie officials in our training classes every year since the recession of 2008 when many unemployed/underemployed decided to officiate basketball to make same extra money. With the retirements of many baby boomer officials over the past few years, and with the addition of many magnet schools, and charter schools, to our schedule, we sometimes have trouble covering the games we now have with two person crews. Some middle school, and freshman, games have been scheduled as one person games.

Over the past season, several times, we received emails from our assignment commissioner begging us to open up any days (usually Fridays, but other days as well) that we may have blocked out on Arbiter. We were reminded that our first priority should be to our local board (interscholastic games) and not to recreation, travel, CYO games, etc. Varsity officials were asked to work subvarsity (including middle school) games. Varsity officials were asked to work junior varsity/varsity doubleheaders, something that I understand is very common in other parts of the country, but is frowned upon, and discouraged, by many coaches, athletic directors, and principals, here in Connecticut.

Our assignment commissioner has asked leagues, and conferences, to stagger their games, but most schools (both genders) want to play on a Friday night (and, very often, on a Tuesday night).

Moving from two person games to three person games is not just about the money in Connecticut.

“There's no limit to how complicated things can get, on account of one thing always leading to another.” (E.B. White)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That 3rd ref will instead be occupying 1/2 of a 2-man crew somewhere else and will still be lazy, overweight, and slow.

Old is irrelevant if you are in shape and not lazy.

Or that slow ref could be on a JV game as there could be enough people who are fit to staff all of the games with 2-man crews. Everything depends upon the number and quality of officials in a given area.

I hope to get people to understand that going to 3-man could improve the officiating OR make it worse. There are several factors which must be considered.

[Mregor]

The only valid comment is there aren't enough good officials to go around. We are hurting big time. We had to promote many who are not ready just to meet the number of games we need to fill. We couldn't fill 3 officials per game on Tues and Fri nights.

[Refhoop]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... You Might Just Get It.



Connecticut, especially my local board, is almost all two person, mainly, as I've posted in the past, because the most vocal (and the most successful, and the most powerful) coaches are defensively oriented and believe that a third official will lead to more fouls being called.

Our assignment commissioner has been an active advocate for three person games, yet, if he somehow becomes a successful three person advocate, I'm not sure that we can handle a three person schedule, even a schedule with a modest increase in the number three person games.

My local board has seen a decrease in the number of rookie officials in our training classes every year since the recession of 2008 when many unemployed/underemployed decided to officiate basketball to make same extra money. With the retirements of many baby boomer officials over the past few years, and with the addition of many magnet schools, and charter schools, to our schedule, we sometimes have trouble covering the games we now have with two person crews. Some middle school, and freshman, games have been scheduled as one person games.

Over the past season, several times, we received emails from our assignment commissioner begging us to open up any days (usually Fridays, but other days as well) that we may have blocked out on Arbiter. We were reminded that our first priority should be to our local board (interscholastic games) and not to recreation, travel, CYO games, etc. Varsity officials were asked to work subvarsity (including middle school) games. Varsity officials were asked to work junior varsity/varsity doubleheaders, something that I understand is very common in other parts of the country, but is frowned upon, and discouraged, by many coaches, athletic directors, and principals, here in Connecticut.

Our assignment commissioner has asked leagues, and conferences, to stagger their games, but most schools (both genders) want to play on a Friday night (and, very often, on a Tuesday night).

Moving from two person games to three person games is not just about the money in Connecticut.

“There's no limit to how complicated things can get, on account of one thing always leading to another.” (E.B. White)

Sounds like you have a real crisis brewing...
For what it's worth:
If you contact your local College or Universities about their rec sports leagues officials and their training programs; you may find that they have capable students you can help train or they actually have trained those students... Could it also benefit you/officiating associations to make a proposal to your state athletic board to create a state-wide training program that they charge a nominal fee for or fully sponsor to recruit college students ( to officiate 7-12 grades) and even some high school seniors to officiate the sub secondary (3rd-6th grades) leagues...?

The growth of any business can happen with a great vision and good people to help market that vision... so get some state-wide big shot to show up for the kick-off of the state sponsored training program and away we go...

If you really have a crisis - then I'd hope your state reps will provide "you" with the resources to ensure that all sports in your state are properly officiated.
Sports aren't going away - so they better help you get capable and competent folks to officiate!

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Rich

Who cares if officials can cover a court well in 2-person when the game is assigned as a 3-person game? Do we worry in a 2-person game if that official can work a game well alone?

When I hire, I only care if officials can cover the court well in 3-person. Running like a gazelle isn't a requirement to being a good official and neither is it a beauty contest.

If it adds a couple of years to the end of careers I consider that a POSITIVE, not a negative.

I've yet to see an argument against this. We have a few great officials in our association who are in their 50s/60s -- all have said they wouldn't still be officiating if it was 2-person. There's no one arguing with how good they are.

I'd take a 3rd who's never done 3person before. In fact, last year in a state game our 3rd had never worked 3person. We fit them in just fine and had a great game. I really don't think people understand how easy it is to move to 3 when 2 of the crew members know what they're doing. Is it hard to master? Of course. But that doesn't stop a 3rd from being massively better than running 2. I don't care how new they are.