High School Refresher Exams.Why Do Some Boards Supply The Answers?

[Love2ref4Ever]

This is one I could never figure out.On Nov.14,00 my board had a mandatory metting. At this meting the 2000-01 refresher exam was handed out. Now we go through this every year this time,But for the life of me I never could figure out why they make the answers available at the metting!I can't see the reason for going through the trouble of preparing the exam for officials and giving out the answers before the deadline to send the exam in. Maybe some one out there can explain this one to me. I also would like to know if other boards do the same thing?

[mick]

Lov2,
U.P here, we used to call it "Scooping a Test" .
mick

[email protected]

[JRutledge]

If you want to know the truth, test have absolutely nothing to do with officiating. Who cares if you get the answers or not. Whether you understand the written definition is not going to help you when making calls and judgements. Test just make you look at the rulebook and force you to have a basic understanding. That is all.

Originally posted by Love2ref4Ever
This is one I could never figure out.On Nov.14,00 my board had a mandatory metting. At this meting the 2000-01 refresher exam was handed out. Now we go through this every year this time,But for the life of me I never could figure out why they make the answers available at the metting!I can't see the reason for going through the trouble of preparing the exam for officials and giving out the answers before the deadline to send the exam in. Maybe some one out there can explain this one to me. I also would like to know if other boards do the same thing?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by JRutledge
Whether you understand the written definition is not going to help you when making calls and judgements.

You've got to be kidding.

[JRutledge]

Judgement calls (in basketball especially) are not going to be helped much by what the definition is. Fouls and violations are always going to be based on what the official feels that happens, all the rules are going to do is give a basis. When it comes to fouls, the rulebook is very vague about what a foul is and is not. Because in the end, it is up to the officials to determine if contact affects the play or is just incidental. Now tell me how the rulebook is going to help you there?

Originally posted by BktBallRef

You've got to be kidding.

[Gary Brendemuehl]

Originally posted by JRutledge
Who cares if you get the answers or not. Whether you understand the written definition is not going to help you when making calls and judgements. Test just make you look at the rulebook and force you to have a basic understanding. That is all.

I care! In my 8 years of coaching I haven't had an official handle a correctable error situation correctly. Including one whose only response to my paraphrasing the rule for failing to award a merited FT (the book was being keep by HS kids from the other team and they didn't indicate that we were in the bonus) was "Im not going to give it to you coach". If you are not forced to look at the rule book and have a basic understanding of the rules, then you don't have a basis or standard on which to make judgements. I agree with you, that officating is more than just knowing the rule book, but please don't belittle the importance of knowing the rules. It is the proper application of the rules that make a fair contest.

[rpwall]

Certainly judgement plays a major role on the performance of an official, but that is not to the exclusion of a thorough knowledge of the rules. Many rules have nothing to do with judgement ... such as correctable errors ... and must be administered properly in order to conduct the game fairly.

We've seen many poorly-worded test questions that make getting a correct (or wrong) answer difficult, but that does not mean an official does not to understand the letter and philosophy of the rules.

Knowledge of the rules is a key factor in an official confidently adminstering the game. If we kick a call because of lack of knowledge of the rules in a key situation in a key game, we may find ourselves without a job. If we kick a block/charge or pass on a bump during a shot, that is a far different thing.

[Love2ref4Ever]

Please everyone lets not get away to much from the question, I am reading some good points to this topic,yet I seriously need to know why some of these boards take a meaning less aproach to the refresher exam. Maybe coaches and officials should speak out and start saying," Hey lets give the exam the way a test is suppose to be given or lets find a solution to something that seems like a joke! In my area.

LOVE AND RESPECT!

[JRutledge]

So what are you saying? Do you feel that they are important and need to be given or not? I just feel that test are not the end all be all of officiating. Yes, you need to know the rules, but knowing every situation under 2-10 is not going to make or break you as an official. If you understand what you are doing, 2-10 will never be needed. I have never had to use this part of the rulebook no matter how many times they put it on the test because I do the things to prevent it from happening. But that is me.

Originally posted by Love2ref4Ever
Please everyone lets not get away to much from the question, I am reading some good points to this topic,yet I seriously need to know why some of these boards take a meaning less aproach to the refresher exam. Maybe coaches and officials should speak out and start saying," Hey lets give the exam the way a test is suppose to be given or lets find a solution to something that seems like a joke! In my area.

LOVE AND RESPECT!

[Bradley Batt]

I agree that the rule book will not teach you judgement. However, successful officials understand the rule book - both the spirit and the letter.

Some people talk about officiating with your heart/gut/etc. - but that is impossible to do unless you have a complete understanding of the rules. For 99% of the plays - shooting fouls, out-of-bounds, etc. you will be fine. However, when a weird situation happens, you must be prepared. I would venture to say that half of all basketball officials don't know some simple case rulings - for instance, what happens when a jumper catches the initial toss? Most know that if the white team jumper catches it a violation, but they don't know that the blue team gets both the ball AND the arrow. That is a simple case which is clearly outlined in the case book, yet many don't know it.

So, what are those officials going to do when something really weird happens - like a foul, followed by a techinical for taunting, a fight, players coming off the bench, etc. If you don't know the rules you aren't going to have a clue as how to administer it.

On a side note - NBA officials get fined if they do not administer a play correctly - there aren't fines for judgment. Interesting, huh?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Bradley Batt
I would venture to say that half of all basketball officials don't know some simple case rulings - for instance, what happens when a jumper catches the initial toss? Most know that if the white team jumper catches it a violation, but they don't know that the blue team gets both the ball AND the arrow. That is a simple case which is clearly outlined in the case book, yet many don't know it.

Brad,
If half of those officials worked NCAA rules they would be
correct, wouldn't they. ;-)

But I do get your point & it is a good one. Know the spirit
& the letter of the rules. If you work at them those
tests are very valuable.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by JRutledge
If you understand what you are doing, 2-10 will never be needed. I have never had to use this part of the rulebook no matter how many times they put it on the test because I do the things to prevent it from happening. But that is me.

You have been very lucky then. No matter what you do, there are times that it can come into play.

I had a very close game a few years ago where there was a foul with 4 seconds left. I checked and double checked with the table on the foul count. 9 they assured me. A1 missed the FT, B1 rebounds the ball, outlets to midcourt and calls timeout. Near the end of the time out, the scorer sheepishly informs me that it actually was 10. GREAT!! Send A2 back to the line and shoot the last shot---made. B's play that was drawn up in the timeout was now worthless...the game situation had changed. B lost when they couldn't get a three off to tie instead of a 2 that they needed before.

It happens out of your control. You gotta know it.

[Love2ref4Ever]

Here we go again!
The feedback I am receiving is great, but is there anyone out there that can give me a straight answer to my question? I am familiar with spirit of the game,The intent,advantage,disadvantage,and all that other good stuff! But where is the point of taking the time and effort to prepare the exam,and the time and effort to get the officials together,If the last thing these boards are concerned about is preparing officials to the best of there abilities for the upcoming seasons!

[BktBallRef]

I can answer your question because you really haven't explained under what premise you get the test and answers.

What does your board do with the refresher exam?

Do you use it to study for another test?

Do you complete the test and hand it in for scoring?

Does the score count toward your rating?

Forgeting the answers for a moment, what is the exact purpose of giving the test to you?

We aren't all under the same system, so perhaps you would get the answers you're looking for if you explained the exact process in your area. Perhaps the purpose of giving out the answers in your area is just to get you into the rule book. I don't know. Have you ever asked anyone on your board?

I don't belong to a board. I belong to an independent association. We receive the NF Part 1 Exam and the answers as a study guide from our state association. We take Paat 2 of the exam as a closed book test that is scored and counts toward our classification with the state.

Hope that helps the discussion.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by JRutledge
Judgement calls (in basketball especially) are not going to be helped much by what the definition is. Fouls and violations are always going to be based on what the official feels that happens...

This is why Rutledge has difficulty discussing situations such as BC violations, three seconds, and team control to name a few. You can't call with your gut. You have to have a basic understanding of the rules in order to apply them properly and make the proper calls. In every rule book or case play discussion I've ever seen him involved in, his lack of understanding the basic fundamentals always gets him in trouble. And that's sad because all any of the rest of us have tried to do is explain things so that he could understand and get better. Yet he always ignores any opportunity to improve.