Women Refs in the NBA

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

...

On a different note, I am on board with good female officials advancing. The problem is when they are promoted because they are female rather than due to ability.

People have been getting promoted within the officiating ranks, as well as denied advancement, for reasons other than their ability or competency for decades upon decades.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

The problem is when they are promoted because they are female rather than due to ability.

While I like the idea of affirmative action for any underrepresented minority, I may have some issues with the specifics of automatic promotions for just being an underrepresented minority. I am 100% behind targeted recruiting of underrepresented minorities, but once in the system, promotions should be based on performance and ability, not on anything else (regarding gender, IAABO, from the international level down to the local level, has such a recruiting program in place).

I'm a semi-fan of the NFL Rooney Rule, a policy that requires league teams to interview ethnic-minority candidates for head coaching and senior football operation jobs, even though there is no hiring quotas, or hiring preferences, given to minorities, only an interviewing quota. At least ethnic-minority candidates get a foot in the door at interviews. The only problem that I have with it is that hasn't worked that well over time.

For me, it's a complex issue, with many layers to peel away from the onion, for example, if a private (maybe even a public institution) college or university wants to increase the number of minority students (race, gender, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, age, sexual identity, economic status (class), background (urban, suburban, rural, foreign born), etc.) because the administration sincerely believes that a more diverse student population will benefit all its students, both during their education, and after graduation out in the real world, as well as being a big "draw" ("We welcome everybody, we're very diverse, we get our students ready for the real world, etc.") that may increase overall student enrollment, both minorities and non-minorities, something that all colleges and universities are now struggling with, I'm pretty much all for it. Only pretty much because isn't that in itself a form or racism, sexism, or some other ism? Can "reverse ...ism exist? Is there something unfair to the rich, white, straight, Christian, American, boy who, while very deserving (grades, test scores, extracurricular activities, recommendations, etc.) doesn't get into his first choice college because a minority student took his "spot"? I wish I had the answer, but I don't, because I'm not smart enough.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

People have been getting promoted within the officiating ranks, as well as denied advancement, for reasons other than their ability or competency for decades upon decades.

Exactly, not sure why people are upset now? Most officials that get hired by a lot of other reasons at all levels. Nothing new, but when it only benefited certain people it was not a problem. IJS.

Peace

[Matt S.]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And you work with officials that are better trained, understand the philosophies of the people they work for and you do not have to discuss things that you do with high school only officials. That is not to say that you cannot have issues with college officials, but if I am the Referee on the game, I can answer directly to the supervisor and fill out an evaluation of all the officials I work with that night. They know this so they follow what is the protocols or might get called on it by either the Referee or the Supervisor wondering what took place. More accountability IMO.

Peace

Might be the case with your coordinator/gender. I've worked more Saturday D3 women's games with a U2 that has no business being on that game, other than the fact that he/she was available. I'm all for women advancing, but any official needs to see more that 3 seasons worth of plays before being put into a college environment, IMO.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Matt S.

Might be the case with your coordinator/gender. I've worked more Saturday D3 women's games with a U2 that has no business being on that game, other than the fact that he/she was available. I'm all for women advancing, but any official needs to see more that 3 seasons worth of plays before being put into a college environment, IMO.

Any female with an inkling of talent will get into women’s college basketball and move up very quickly. Not saying that’s right or wrong but the stakeholders in women’s basketball have made very clear they want women officiating those games.

There are some clowns on the men’s side but generally you will get exposed quickly if you can’t handle the college game, and the coaches won’t put up with it. HS officials get away with all sorts of stuff that would earn you a short stay at the college level.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Exactly, not sure why people are upset now? Most officials that get hired by a lot of other reasons at all levels. Nothing new, but when it only benefited certain people it was not a problem. IJS.

Peace

Men’s college officials certainly have no room to complain about women getting opportunities at other levels/genders.

People that don’t realize officiating is not a pure meritocracy have been living in the weeds.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Men’s college officials certainly have no room to complain about women getting opportunities at other levels/genders.

People that don’t realize officiating is not a pure meritocracy have been living in the weeds.

This is not a Men's college issue with what women work Men's college basketball. There are other issue with Men's college basketball and it is not the amount of women getting those opportunities.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is not a Men's college issue with what women work Men's college basketball. There are other issue with Men's college basketball and it is not the amount of women getting those opportunities.

Peace

In case you didn't realize, I was actually agreeing with you.

And there still are not that many women in men's college basketball. Only two work a significant amount of Division 1. And honestly, why would any woman with talent go the men's route when the money is the same on the women's side and the opportunities are so much more vast?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

... why would any woman with talent go the men's route when the money is the same on the women's side and the opportunities are so much more vast?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... like the challenge and so do others.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

In case you didn't realize, I was actually agreeing with you.

And there still are not that many women in men's college basketball. Only two work a significant amount of Division 1. And honestly, why would any woman with talent go the men's route when the money is the same on the women's side and the opportunities are so much more vast?

Didn't say you were disagreeing with me. Just stating that the issue is not specific to one side or the other. I am just addressing that there are many officials that are around that look different than the actual players getting high-level opportunities. I was making a larger point, not just about gender. Sorry for the confusion.

Peace

[Player989random]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I've met a woman or two who thought there was a glass ceiling to break, but I've also met a lot more D1 women (and men) who said the main reason not to do men's was "Why work 5 years in D2/D3 when I can make D1 in 2-3?"

Honestly, would you apply to work at a job with an uncertain promotion rate and pays you in $100s while another job with similar skills is giving anyone with a modicum of interest and talent $1000s?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Player989random

I've met a woman or two who thought there was a glass ceiling to break, but I've also met a lot more D1 women (and men) who said the main reason not to do men's was "Why work 5 years in D2/D3 when I can make D1 in 2-3?"

Honestly, would you apply to work at a job with an uncertain promotion rate and pays you in $100s while another job with similar skills is giving anyone with a modicum of interest and talent $1000s?

If you never desired to work the other level, why does someone have to settle. I get no enjoyment out of watching women's basketball. And for the record, there are D1 officials that did not take 5 years to work Men's basketball. It is all about perspective and willingness.

Peace

[RefRich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Exactly, not sure why people are upset now? Most officials that get hired by a lot of other reasons at all levels. Nothing new, but when it only benefited certain people it was not a problem. IJS.

Peace

When I first started refereeing in PA, I was told by an AD, "I wasn't experienced enough." I had been working in the state of IN for 5 years and transferred by license to PA. He pointed out the two varsity officials and said like these guys. One he was old friends with and had about 15 or more years in, the other guy was my age and had been officiating 2 years. I looked at him and said, "yep, got to have that experience." I never worked another game for him at any level. Once he was gone, I was good to go.

Favoritism has been around since people have been around. It never ceases to amaze me people think it only occurs when it's a minority getting an early opportunity.

[ilyazhito]

I don't think that favoritism occurs only with respect to minorities getting early opportunities. That said, there should be a line between recruiting and supporting minority officials, and promoting minority officials solely because of that status (without reference to criteria such as evaluations, camp attendance, varsity/playoff experience, etc.). Favoritism occurs in other contexts as well (nepotism is quite common in officiating), and probably is there to stay, whether we like it or not. That said, I would be willing to work with any official good enough to do the job, whether they be male, female, or extraterrestrial.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RefRich

When I first started refereeing in PA, I was told by an AD, "I wasn't experienced enough." I had been working in the state of IN for 5 years and transferred by license to PA. He pointed out the two varsity officials and said like these guys. One he was old friends with and had about 15 or more years in, the other guy was my age and had been officiating 2 years. I looked at him and said, "yep, got to have that experience." I never worked another game for him at any level. Once he was gone, I was good to go.

Favoritism has been around since people have been around. It never ceases to amaze me people think it only occurs when it's a minority getting an early opportunity.

There is a major conference in this country that hired officials that either had graduated from one of the schools in the conference or had direct ties of coaching or playing with individuals in that conference. And I am not at all talking about basketball. Look at the NFL and see how many sons of former NFL officials there are working? And for the record, there are not women or Black guys in those situations. And football is a sport that literally does not have the camp system or evaluation system that basketball has to evaluate you onsite or during games. Football is often a recommendation or someone that is in power asking you to work college football.

I worked D1 baseball for a very brief time and the only reason I got my first game at that level was because I worked a basketball game with a person that is at the time a Minor League Baseball Umpire. That person is now at the MLB level for several years now. That person worked a basketball game with me in like December, we got along very well. That spring the Minor League Umpire's Union went on strike and many of the those umpires were working college games to get some games and income. Well this official could not work the Sunday of a series and he called the assignor and gave him my name and I worked my first D1 baseball game as a result. That D1 Baseball supervisor was also the basketball supervisor of that very same conference and even did not charge me to go to his camp before he was fired from both positions a few years later. I had a window then to maybe get looked at seriously at the D1 level and all of it was because my original relationship with a guy that is now an MLB Umpire and I just happened to get along with him and had a side conversation about my baseball background. He never saw me work a single baseball game. I benefited from a nice interaction from a person moving up the ladder and having the right contacts. That is how many people get opportunities at all levels of officiating.

Peace