Girls games
 

Our group leaders recently noted that some experienced / veteran refs are preferring to work only boy's games instead of girl's games--even at the varsity and state playoffs levels. This poses a problem bcuz: 1) it reduces the pool of available refs who are officiating them, 2) it diminishes the mentoring capacity in that veteran refs can't be paired with novice refs if the vet doesn't do girl's, 3) it possibly decreases the quality of girl's games. However, the game fee of $90 is the same for both types of games. I haven't had the chance to ask them why they do not want to work their games, but I will work either type of contest. What, if any, would be a reasonable explanation for not doing girl's?

If I were generous, I'd say they are simply aware that they are better at officiating boys basketball. (I fall into this camp, in that I find myself much less sure of my calls during high level girls games).

I think we all know why these gentlemen don't want to work girls games. It's sad and shouldn't be allowed. Girls teams deserve the same quality of official, period. Of course, if these refs think that little of girls games, it's likely a net positive that they aren't on those games.

Simple, because they do not want to. And that is their right. I do not work any girls games either and one reason is I have enough days of the week I am out of the house. I do not want to add more games or debate of which game I will take. Also not the same assignors as well, so I have fewer people I have to deal with.

Also, girls basketball is not boys basketball. What I mean is there are things that happen in girls basketball that do not happen in boys basketball from a contact standpoint and a reaction standpoint. The culture is just different and I have enough time trying to figure out the levels I work, then to add some stuff that I never have to see or deal with in boys basketball. Also, I do college ball, girls basketball would just cause me some bad habits and some standards that I would have to constantly adjust to. Boy's basketball as the HS level is very similar to Men's basketball in college. I do not have to do many adjustments.

Finally, we are independent contractors. I have the right to decide what I want to do when I leave my house. We do not do this for charity or for some altruistic reason. We get paid to do a service and if I am going to get paid I am going to do what I want to do. Same with middle school or adult league games. I have only so many days to do things with a family and with a job.

We need to stop acting like this is an obligation. Just like there is an obligation to work all levels of basketball. Either we accept some things or people will stop officiating and that will take down the pool even more.

Peace

How are you going to make someone do something they do not want to do? We cannot make people travel for games. I work college ball, I am not giving up a college game for some girl's basketball and you could not make me without violating some basic laws. And then instead of losing an official for girls basketball, you lose and official period.

Peace

When it comes it comes to working extra nights, turning back higher level games, it's an entirely different issue than the one presented, at least as I read it.

Where I work, girls and boys do not have different assignors. And I've heard countless official complain about girls assignments vs boys or refer to them as "just" a girls game. FWIW, to work the postseason here in Colorado, you are required to work a certain number of both boys and girls games.

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.

Adjustments ...
 

Agree.

My toughest adjustments were when I worked a girls varsity game on a Thursday night and then a boys varsity game on a Friday night. It was like going from "slow motion" to "fast forward". Sometimes it took me almost the entire Friday night first quarter to "wake up and smell the coffee".

I remember that there was one year, where for some unknown scheduling reason, I was assigned several girls preseason scrimmages and no boys preseason scrimmages.

My first "real" game was a boys varsity game that included a state finalist from the previous year. That was a very rude awakening.

I can still vividly remember an "over the back" call that I probably missed very early in the game, with the offended coach having the same exact view that I had as the trail.

It was all happening so fast.

For some reason the opposite (boys to girls) adjustment isn't as difficult.

OK, but that is where you work. Yes, we have some assignors that assign both, but that is not common. And if they tried to give a boy's official a girl's game, they would get some blowback. They would from me. And one reason I do not take girls games is because I do not want to constantly be turning back games. Or asking can I work another game, so why would I want to make myself available for that headache?

They even tried in our area to play back-to-back games with girls and boys and found out how much no one came to watch the girls games. They would literally play the girls games last and everyone would come for the boys game and leave when it was over. It was actually demoralizing, so they stopped doing that after a year or two. So if you cannot get fans to come and watch the games equally, how are you going to get officials who are largely male to do the same? And when you have female officials they move on to the college ranks because that level scoops them up.

Not trying to debate the overall gender preferences, just saying that if you "make" someone do something then they will find reasons not to do that. You cannot tell me when I am available for something or why I do something else. We are not paid enough to have that kind of information to some guy that is not paying a pension or health insurance.

Peace

It is very simple for me. Compared to boy's/men's basketball, girl's/women's basketball sucks. I would not officiate a women's game if the pay was double what I could get for a men's game.

At the high school level where I live, 95% of assignments are G/B doubleheaders. They play on the same nights and at the same location. Being a “boy’s only” official isn’t an option.

Quality ...
 

Agree in theory, in a "Pollyanna", rose-colored glasses world.

My local board used to have an incentive to work both genders throughout the season because our local board (the only local board in the state to do so) allowed us to work both genders in the state tournament if we were selected (votes) by the both gender coaches.

Now, if selected for both genders in the state tournament we have to "declare" which single gender we will work in the state tournament. This allows for a much larger "pool" of local officials getting state tournament games, which, in theory, is good news.

Note: This created a lot of discord at our local meetings, with many veteran officials complaining that they deserved to work both genders in the state tournament games if they were selected by the votes of both groups of coaches.

With the change, many of our local officials (especially female officials working only girls games) have opted, as is now allowed, to become "boys officials" or "girls officials" for the regular season, figuring that the more games they work for single gender teams the more "votes" they are likely to get from single gender coaches for selection for the single gender state tournament.

I travel all over my small state observing a dozen or so boys and girls state tournament games involving my local officials every year.

I can definitely tell you with great assurance that since we changed to "pick a single gender state tournament games" (and pick a single gender regular season games) the quality of officials in girls state tournament games has greatly suffered, all the way to the semifinals.

Has the change allowed some younger, less experienced officials to have a state tournament experience? Yes, and that may be a good thing.

But it's comes at the expense of girls getting lower quality officials for both regular season games and state tournament games.

To me it was quality. After my first season of officiating, I was no longer doing it for the money. I didn't mind doing decent-to-high quality girls games, but I had no desire to drag myself to gyms in the cold of winter to referee bad basketball. I put myself in a position that my HS supervisors wanted me on their boys games, especially games where they needed a strong presence to keep things in check.

The first half of my career I was a single parent of 2 with a 50% custody schedule. I didn't want to spend my free time officiating games I didn't enjoy.

I can mentor and teach without being on the court with someone. I mentor a few officials now who work NCAA-Women's basketball. My first mentor when I started out was a female who is now a D1/D2 women's conference supervisor.

I also have a lot of the same thoughts Jeff has on the subject that carried over to what games I would work in the off-season, boys or girls.

I've never been picky, and as I've settled into quasi-veteran status, I'm happy to earn a HS game check on either side.

Do I prefer boys basketball? Depends on the quality in the area I'm working. In SE Virginia, I'd agree with Raymond; there are very few quality girls teams in that area. Luckily the supervisor I had there the last few years had a healthy roster of female officials plus those that just preferred girls, so I got an exclusively boys schedule without even asking. But in some other states I've worked where the quality of girls basketball is much better (e.g. Wisconsin and Kansas), I was always happy working both genders.

There are some places in America where girls basketball is quite putrid. 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.

I've never really suffered from "change-of-pace-itus" from one night or level to the next. I can spool up or down pretty easily. I know that's not easy for everyone, so I guess I'm lucky in that regard.

For some officials this is a math problem. In Ohio to be tournament eligible, you have to do 14 boys varsity games to be elible to do the boys tournament(same game reequirements for girls only). Or You can do 10 BV and 10GV to be eligible and do one or both tournaments

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.

I get 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. That is OK. But if you start making everyone have to do both you will lose the some you have IMO. At least if that is a cross-country thing. Not every school plays boys and girls at the same location at the same night.

Peace

I never turned down a game based on sex. Girls games in general were less enjoyable due to the skill disparity between teams. Blowouts are quite common. In my very rural area, scheduling is tough and I am not aware of officials focusing on boys or girls. I could see the advantage of specializing if working college games. I know regional college officials typically work only boys or girls.

If it does become a problem here in the future, I would support my local school district in paying more for girl's games officials.

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:D

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

Connecticut Girls Basketball ...
 

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)

Pick Up A Stick ...
 

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.

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

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

Per Capita ...
 

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.

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

Blowouts ...
 

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.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...6923c938_m.jpg

Long Bus Rides Worth It ...
 

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.

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.

Running Up The Score ...
 

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.

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.

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

I have thoughts on this, but they're really not important.

Officials have every right to choose to not work on the boys or girls side here.

Assigners have every right to choose not to use those officials, then. I'm about 10 years into assigning varsity for 24 schools, girls and boys. There are some officials I assign only boys to - they work a college schedule and we have a prearranged agreement.

Some other officials have tried this and frankly I would rather hire a dependable crew for more games who will work on both sides. Giving too many crews boys only means I have to give a lopsided numbers to other crews, and I don't want to do that, either.

And we pay the same on both sides, obviously ($80 this year, $85 next year), and use 3-person crews for every game.

Well, here we have a lot of assignors that only assign one gender. And many of them that assign boys do not give a lot of first opportunities to girls officials or officials that work a lot of girl's games as their primary. Now with the shortage, we might not have as much of that as an issue, but I never get asked to work girl's games anymore because I said long time ago what I was going to do and not do. I even interviewed for an assignor's job this past year and they were going to keep an assigning job with both genders they separated them after some interviews when they realized there were potential assignors that might not have the footprint with certain gender officials.

I am so glad honestly that we have a choice. At the end of the day, no one is going to make me work on something when I leave my house. If you cannot use be because of the choice, I can stay home.

Peace