Girls games

[thumpferee]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

Obviously I'm not suggesting people be forced to work girls games if they are opposed. Just pointing out that in a lot of cases, the reasons for not wanting to work girls games is sexist and insulting. This isn't always the case, but it's a prevalent enough to discuss.

I agree! Demanding to work boys/MENS games simply because you're a woman is sexist. But, what is insulting is, assignors still giving them games because they're afraid of being called a sexist

Question! What % of WNBA officials do you think would quit if they were given the opportunity to work in the NBA? Sexist?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I really would like to be informed where those great games can be or desirable enough for someone like me to work is wanting to work them .... It is mainly girls that get scores like 78 to 10 where I am from ... we are trying to have this reasonable conversation where we all love both sides of the game, but many simply don't. And it is not just the officials, it is the fans.

While this post will not convince JRutledge and others that girls games are desirable, or even tolerable, to work, I would still like to make some points.

Probably due to the University of Connecticut Women Huskies being "worshiped" throughout the state, Connecticut is a "hot bed" of girls basketball (and I fully realize that other parts of the country may not be the same). Little girls start playing in town sponsored recreation leagues while in elementary school. Almost all towns will also sponsor travel teams for the more advanced girls. Summer camps sponsored by high schools, colleges, or private entities are usually filled to capacity (I've coached and officiated at such). Almost all school systems have middle school teams. Most high schools have freshmen, junior varsity, and varsity programs (exceptions for some of our smaller schools).

We normally don't see the lopsided scores that JRutledge has described due to the way our local area leagues and conferences are set up, one league has mostly small rural schools, and another has mostly large suburban and large urban schools.

While there isn't a major difference in fan attendance for mid-week games, boys crowds are slightly larger on Friday nights, mostly due to long lived rivalry traditions.

But the most important thing is fairness. Shouldn't girls get the same high quality officials as boys? Right now, they don't in Connecticut.

On the the hand, do we want officials in girls games that don't want to be there?

"Ay, there's the rub.” (Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

You can tell places where there is a proclivity for girls to eschew picking up a basketball until their freshman year in high school. Why that's a phenomenon in some places and not in others, I'm not sure. When it comes to sports participation, it seems like there are geographic feminine sub-cultures in this country.

Same thing here in Connecticut for field hockey. Few, if any, town programs or interscholastic middle school programs.

Outside of Connecticut's southwest "Gold Coast", it used to be the same for lacrosse, for both boys and girls. But more and more towns throughout Connecticut now have town sponsored lacrosse programs.

Similar to the way soccer, both boys and girls, suddenly became "hot" in Connecticut about forty-five years ago. Before that it was considered a "fringe" sport.

I predict that the next "hot" sport in Connecticut will be rugby, both for boys and girls. Some high schools now have interscholastic "club" teams, with a few student athletes receiving partial college scholarships.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Same thing here in Connecticut for field hockey. Few, if any, town programs or interscholastic middle school programs.

Outside of Connecticut's southwest "Gold Coast", it used to be the same for lacrosse, for both boys and girls. But more and more towns throughout Connecticut now have town sponsored lacrosse programs.

Similar to the way soccer, both boys and girls, suddenly became "hot" in Connecticut about forty-five years ago. Before that it was considered a "fringe" sport.

I predict that the next "hot" sport in Connecticut will be rugby, both for boys and girls. Some high schools now have interscholastic "club" teams, with a few student athletes receiving partial college scholarships.

Once people figure out you can get scholarships in those off sports they explode. Golf and fishing have taken off here. Golf especially.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

While this post will not convince JRutledge and others that girls games are desirable, or even tolerable, to work, I would still like to make some points.

Probably due to the University of Connecticut Women Huskies being "worshiped" throughout the state, Connecticut is a "hot bed" of girls basketball (and I fully realize that other parts of the country may not be the same). Little girls start playing in town sponsored recreation leagues while in elementary school. Almost all towns will also sponsor travel teams for the more advanced girls. Summer camps sponsored by high schools, colleges, or private entities are usually filled to capacity (I've coached and officiated at such). Almost all school systems have middle school teams. Most high schools have freshmen, junior varsity, and varsity programs (exceptions for some of our smaller rural schools).

We normally don't see the lopsided scores that JRutledge has described due to the way our local area leagues and conferences are set up, one league has mostly small rural schools, and another has mostly large suburban and large urban schools.

While there isn't a major difference in fan attendance for mid-week games, boys crowds are slightly larger on Friday nights, mostly due to long lived rivalry traditions.

But the most important thing is fairness. Shouldn't girls get the same high quality officials as boys? Right now, they don't in Connecticut.

On the the hand, do we want officials in girls games that don't want to be there?

"Ay, there's the rub.” (Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1)

Why doesn't UConn have a single Connecticut player on their Women's team? So if it is taking off unlike where you think I am, I would be there are many more D1 players in girl's basketball just from Illinois alone. That being said this was not about what each state might do. When there are reports of massive blowouts that result in a coach or school in some kind of suspension, those are often if not always girl's games. Now I think girls are often not taught fundamentals like dribbling which makes the disparity as big sometimes.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by thumpferee

I agree! Demanding to work boys/MENS games simply because you're a woman is sexist. But, what is insulting is, assignors still giving them games because they're afraid of being called a sexist



Question! What % of WNBA officials do you think would quit if they were given the opportunity to work in the NBA? Sexist?

WNBA refs are part of the same program as NBA refs. It would be a promotion to go from the WNBA to the NBA. The veteran WNBA refs are past the point where they're being considered for the NBA. Younger WNBA refs are hoping to get to the NBA.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why doesn't UConn have a single Connecticut player on their Women's team?

Because Connecticut only has three million residents. Only half are women. Many are too old, or too young, to play high school or college basketball.

UCONN only recruits the best of the best, not just the best of Connecticut. This year UCONN has players on their roster from Portugal, France, Hungary, Canada, and Croatia.

There are six other Division I women's basketball programs in Connecticut, most with Connecticut natives on their rosters, as well as Connecticut natives on many other Division I, Division II, and Division III women's basketball programs all over the United States.

Connecticut is a "hot bed" of girls basketball talent. It's not the only "hot bed" of girls basketball talent in the United States, but it is a "hot bed" of girls basketball talent.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Because Connecticut only has three million residents. Only half are women. Many are too old, or too young, to play high school or college basketball.

UCONN only recruits the best of the best, not just the best of Connecticut. This year UCONN has players on their roster from Portugal, France, Hungary, Canada, and Croatia.

There are six other Division I women's basketball programs in Connecticut, most with Connecticut natives on their rosters, as well as Connecticut natives on many other Division I, Division II, and Division III women's basketball programs all over the United States.

Connecticut is a "hot bed" of girls basketball talent. It's not only "hot bed" of girls basketball talent in the United States, but it is a "hot bed" of girls basketball talent.

But the flagship university cannot get one or two from the state? Usually that is bad for a state run program, but UConn Women's has been the pure class of the NCAA Women's side.

There are more than 3 million in the Chicagoland area and still a lot of mismatches in girl's basketball which was my only point. I doubt it is any different in any state as national stories have shown.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... still a lot of mismatches in girl's basketball which was my only point. I doubt it is any different in any state as national stories have shown.

The reason why we have few local blowouts is due to the way our conferences and leagues have evolved based on “sports culture” and enrollment size. Geography and proximity of schools is only the third consideration.

We have five leagues in our local area. The largest, by far, includes both large urban schools and large suburban schools. We have a conference that consists of very small, very rural schools (I often joke about John Deere tractors in the parking lots). Another league consists of very small suburban schools. We have two leagues, a technical school league and a magnet school league, that both consist of very small mostly urban schools. Other parts of Connecticut have similar league and conference setups.

Many outside of Connecticut think of the state as being very small in area (a very correct assumption), with no extremely large cities (also a very correct assumption, no Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, etc.), but having a very concentrated population in a small area (somewhat incorrect). Lots of people live in the central part of the state and along the shoreline, but the northwest and northeast corners of the state are mostly rural and forested.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Our few local blowouts are due to the way our conferences and leagues have evolved based on “sports culture” and enrollment size. Geography and proximity of schools is only the third consideration ... a technical school league ... magnet school league ... very small mostly urban schools.

The technical school league completely avoids the concept of geography and proximity of schools. It's state-wide league. Some schools in the league are over 110 miles apart.

Before they formed their own league, these very small technical schools, not very sports oriented, but with goals of providing Connecticut with future electricians, plumbers, carpenters, machine operators, welders, mechanics, chefs, practical nurses, cosmetologists, etc., were always getting blown out by other schools in their previously "geography and proximity" based leagues.

Same thing with magnet schools. When these small academically oriented magnet schools (some without gyms or athletic fields) started "popping up" about twenty years go, they first joined existing "geography and proximity" based leagues. That didn't go so well. Now most have their own league, not many schools in the league, but it works.

Before the magnet schools formed their own league, I remember officiating a girls varsity game between a very small urban magnet school for college bound students (played their home games in a nearby middle school) against a large urban public high school. The score got so lopsided that the losing coach asked if we could switch to a running clock in the second half (no mercy rules in Connecticut basketball). I replied that we couldn't but that we could shorten the last two periods with the agreement of both coaches and the referee (NFHS), so we did.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If there is that good of girls basketball in the country, please tell me where that is. And honestly, that is not the point of why some never want to work girls basketball. When I work small college games, often there is a girls game before our game and they look undesirable most of the time. So if there is an abundance of girls games that people are working 30 and 40 a year consistently, I really would like to be informed where those great games can be or desirable enough for someone like me to work is wanting to work them. I say that because we have many D1 players in this area and they often do not play each other or they the majority of teams cannot compete with teams with those kinds of players on any level. It is mainly girls that get scores like 78 to 10 where I am from. A bad boys game might be 78 to 50, but it is not common to get that kind of score in most cases. And we have a running clock rule if you are 30 points in the 4th quarter which in my experience rarely happens. Even the game I did yesterday afternoon, the teams were widely different in talent and we never got to at 30-point differential in the game.
...

Peace

Last night was an example of something that happens frequently in the region I'm in.

I went to observe GV/BV doubleheader last night between inner-city, archrival schools. The GV final score was 103-9, and the winning team had lost its previous game by 30 points. BV was 65-63 in OT.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

The GV final score was 103-9 ...

Wow! Any chance the winners were running up the score. We had such a game last year, also with girls, made national news, coach was suspended for a game.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/06/n...all-coach.html

Connecticut had many problems with running up the scores in football games about fifteen years ago. The CIAC responded with guidelines and penalties for such football situations.

One comment on the article, while it's true that Connecticut doesn't have any "mercy rule" for basketball, the article fails to mention that the NFHS does allow periods to be shortened with agreement of both coaches and the referee.

Here in Connecticut private Catholic high schools, such as the high school in the article, are grouped with public high schools in leagues, conferences, and the state tournament. They are quite often accused of "recruiting athletes" (technically not allowed) because they are allowed to enroll students from across town boundaries.

With the recent rise of "specialty" magnet high schools, also allowed to enroll students from across town boundaries, there have been a few accusations of "athlete recruitment" with magnet high schools, but just a few, not very widespread.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Last night was an example of something that happens frequently in the region I'm in.

I went to observe GV/BV doubleheader last night between inner-city, archrival schools. The GV final score was 103-9, and the winning team had lost its previous game by 30 points. BV was 65-63 in OT.

The score you first posted is not typical of my area, but the 30-point deficiet is often very common or something like it for sure.

To be fair, there was a score in a boys game a few weeks ago that was something like 101-24 (I will have to look it up). That was very unsual and it was noted that is not a score you see all the time.

I did in my very first post-season back in the 2000s have a game where the score was 101-41. I have never had a outcome that large in any post season game and almost never had one in any other boys varsity game since. Oh that was in 2004 and my very first Regional (everyone plays in the Regional in IHSA Basketball).

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The score you first posted is not typical of my area, but the 30-point deficiet is often very common or something like it for sure.

To be fair, there was a score in a boys game a few weeks ago that was something like 101-24 (I will have to look it up). That was very unsual and it was noted that is not a score you see all the time.

I did in my very first post-season back in the 2000s have a game where the score was 101-41. I have never had a outcome that large in any post season game and almost never had one in any other boys varsity game since. Oh that was in 2004 and my very first Regional (everyone plays in the Regional in IHSA Basketball).

Peace

Unfortunately, those types of scores are seen weekly on the girls side around here. And we're talking about conference games here, not a situation where a lot smaller school is playing against some powerhouse from out of district. We have one boys team that is susceptible to big blow-outs, but those are in the 40-50 point range, not 70-90 points.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Unfortunately, those types of scores are seen weekly on the girls side around here. And we're talking about conference games here, not a situation where a lot smaller school is playing against some powerhouse from out of district. We have one boys team that is susceptible to big blow-outs, but those are in the 40-50 point range, not 70-90 points.

I know and I have had on the boy's side only 1 running clock game between 2 states. Illinois has a 30-point deficit in the 4th quarter and Indiana has a 35 running clock in the second half (I believe). Neither has come close to happening in any game.

I hear all the time there are 50-point games on the girl's side.

Peace