Foul Problems ...
 

Years ago, if a junior varsity official didn't show up for a game (traffic, schedule error, etc.) and the varsity official was at the site, the varsity official had to get permission from both varsity coaches to jump into the junior varsity game.

The winningest, and most influential, coaches in the state coaches association, who play full court defense, and man to man defense, are erroneously afraid that their best players will get in more foul problems with three officials. The state coaches association has sway over the high school interscholastic sports governing body. A few urban rivalries have three persons crews, but otherwise three officials aren't used until the quarterfinals of the state tournament.

And, of course, it's a little bit about money.

Note: Officials fees, in all sports, are tied to the state average teacher salary increase every year. I've gotten a basketball fee raise every year for the past thirty six years. Next year, officials in all sports have decided to accept a fee freeze due to state budget reductions in local school funding.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3775/1...8029f778_m.jpg

This is an interesting perspective. In my side of Connecticut, we have a few preps and one postgraduate school which hire 3 officials for every game. But those games really are at a higher level than the regular high school game.

The fees are interesting. Basketball costs a LOT less to a school than football, despite the fewer games in football. That is because in football, each of the 5, 6, or 7 on field officials get the same varsity fee as any varsity official in any other sport, not to mention the equipment and larger coaching staffs. Plus schools hire another official to work the clock and pay him or her approximately 2/3 of a varsity fee. (If only we had paid timers in basketball!) Yet, football is not nearly the kind of cash cow in CT compared to some other states.

I have long advocated that schools hire 3 officials for soccer, basketball, baseball, and softball. The ADs I talk to are actually in favor of it. It is worth the money to them. Our local middle school conference even voted to have 2 officials instead of 1 for JV middle school games. At every level, the game gas become more of a wide open game, with teams spreading their offense, running the full court press on defense, and shooting more shots from outside the arc than working it into the post. I think most people would easily see the benefit of paying a 3rd official. The issue isn't the fees, it's lack of enough referees. It is the same problem in soccer, where the state uses 2 man until the state quarterfinals (I believe). Just not enough refs...

Two things here: First, are you saying that some think you can't work more than one game in a day and still be "fresh" enough for the second one?

Second, even if you only work one, you still have had all day to get tired doing something else. Most of us have day jobs, some obviously more strenuous than others.

The Times They Are A-Changin' (Bob Dylan, 1964) ...
 

1) Yes.

2) Then it would be day job, game #1, and game #2.

Things are slowly changing. Athletic directors, and coaches, are realizing that our local board is having trouble assigning officials to cover all games, especially Friday afternoons, and nights. Most are now accepting of officials covering freshman/junior varsity doubleheaders, and rarely, even junior varsity/varsity doubleheaders.

Coaches ...
 

With a few exceptions (money), it's the same in my little corner of the state. Most athletic directors like the idea. As I stated in a previous post, it's the coaches (I used to belong to the Connecticut High School Coaches Association) who are slowing the progress of moving to three man crews, and the CIAC (state governing body) listens to the coaches. If all the coaches wanted it, and if officials were willing to be a little flexible with fees (and if we could recruit more officials), it would eventually happen here.

The overall problem is that we are often an afterthought until something goes wrong. Then we are the problem and they treat us like we are expendable.

I only work varsity and college ball. I do not have time to work much else. Even when I work a lower level game, the problem is there are other games I can be offered or it interferes with may ability to work the games I wish to work. I work about 45-60 games a year and that is enough. Doing double headers is not something we do either when a varsity game is involved in this part of the state and with the style of play in many places, that is not something most would like to do around here.

I think pay should be considered if you want people to stay. But it is not what is going to get people out in the first place. Also 3 person here has helped keep people and get people motivated to continue.

Peace

Sort of....with the same number of games and the same number of officials, every official (on average) will have to work 50% more games under a 3-person system than a 2-person system. So, the overall freshness benefit is debatable. I do think it still leans in favor of 3-person, but it isn't as dramatic as it would be if the number of officials weren't constrained.

Well, it certainly creates opportunities for those who would struggle to get varsity schedules. For me it means I can work 3-person every day. The years where I worked only a portion that way were worse in that it was a different system every night, which was tough.

We still do a mixture of 2 and 3 man, it's strictly up to the home school. But one thing is changing: My last 3 dates have been all 3 man tripleheaders, JV boys followed by girls and boys varsity. Before this year, only once had I ever done 3 man for JV.

Conferences decide here. If you don't hire 3 you aren't getting the better officials as they aren't seeking 2-person assignments.

I do a lot of fastpitch and I really don't think we need 3. Maybe 5 plays in an entire year could have needed a third guy. To me, most softball games that have three are just for "looks". A lot of the rotations are just a guy who was in a pretty good position moving to another good position and being replaced by a guy to have the same look. And if it meant getting paid less, then absolutely don't want it. I just don't think it is necessary on a 200 ft field.

3 man is very helpful in a number of situations, especially with runners on base. The play at first base with the field umpire in C position is a difficult sell. Double plays can also result in difficult calls back at first. I had a couple plays last year with multiple runners on base and we weren't able to directly observe the tag at first on fly balls to left field. One in particular looked bad for us because we had a play at the plate after fly ball was caught down the line, and the field umpire was only able to get the runner leaving from 3rd. The ball got away from the catcher and the run scored. The catcher then tried to throw out the runner from first, who had tried for 3rd. The ball went out of play. The defense then appealed R1 failing to retouch. We called her out, but we were only guessing. She seemed to have never gone back because she got to 2nd very fast, but my field umpire visibly had no idea on the appeal. Thankfully, we were correct, according to both coaches.

So, I'm not saying that we need 3 umpires very often. It doesn't hurt, and sometimes helps in critical situations. The big problem in all of these 2 man systems (baseball, softball, and soccer) is we only go to 3 man in the later rounds of the playoffs. There, we screw up the mechanics because officials are unused to working 3 man.

I will freely admit, that in many games where I work 5 man in football, we could have gotten away with 4. When I work soccer in low level games, many times I could get away with just 1. The same is true in an uneventful basketball game. However, you never know when you'll need that extra official.

When working 4 man in JV football one game as the referee, we had a collision on a deep pass play in which the the wing official was blocked out, so he didn't have a flag for DPI. The coach was livid. All I could think was that it was a $60 call. That is, $60 would have gotten another official and we could have covered that play.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Not new. I remember hearing it hen I was there from 1999-2005. I made more than $50 when I was there. Think the Madison schools paid $55 back then. Outliers also pd travel. I've never worked a 3 hour basketball game. I'm not even there for 3 hours total wit evaluating sub varsity officials. Travel, yes but not working.

The Milwaukee area took a pay cut in order to get 3-person solidified -- it was never reinstated. That's how pay has stayed at $50 per official.

When I moved here in 2002, conferences paid $50 to $55 per person, but everything was 2-person. For about 5 years I licensed in Illinois in order to get 3-person experience and worked about 10 dates a year there.

Does the audience realize that if one buys a Lincoln one does not become Matthew McConaughey?