[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef


"I think he got a pretty big punishment" by not working the final, Barakat said.

Karl Hess worked the final for the fourth time, while Reggie Cofer and Jamie Luckie each worked their first ACC final.

Rose, who could not be reached for comment Tuesday, is one of the league's most respected officials. He has worked nine ACC Tournament title games -- tied for second behind Lenny Wirtz' 13 on the all-time list. He has worked four Final Fours (1993, '98, '99 and 2003). He was named the Naismith Men's Official of the Year in 2002. He also is pictured in the ACC media guide with the list of ACC title game officials.

[/B][/QUOTE

So who gets punished in this case??

Yes Rose got punished, but the Final game was officiated by 2 officials working their first ACC final. They put 2 green officlas in to ref such an important game.One one hand he says 20 years experience means alot then assignes two rookies.

So because of one "questiobale by the book call" the assignor removes the best overall official available to officiate the final.

I just don't get it. We know he's going to be back next year doing the same level etc?? Why wouldn't he be kept in the final?

Probably due to that spineless evaluator.

Cofer and Natili are more than deserving of officiating the final. I wouldn't call them green.

Point taken. On the other hand, those two "green" refs are better for having done an important game. Green doesn't necessarily mean they can't do the job.

Excuse me, Luckie. Same thought applies. Those guys can officiate the big games.

Thier First tounry? how does that make them green? They've obviously been in the ACC for awhile...

I guiess my point is this.

If I was a coach would I rather have

"one of the league's most respected officials. He has worked nine ACC Tournament title games -- tied for second behind Lenny Wirtz' 13 on the all-time list. He has worked four Final Fours (1993, '98, '99 and 2003). He was named the Naismith Men's Official of the Year in 2002. He also is pictured in the ACC media guide with the list of ACC title game officials."

Or

"Reggie Cofer and Jamie Luckie each worked their first ACC final."

Yes they are in the ACC and can ref that game, but the perception is we didn't put the best overall ref into the title game.

If this whole scenario wouldn't have happened would Rose be the better official or would Luckie / Cofer.

Answer seems clear to me.

Just out of curiosity... How does one obtain varsity games in your area... based on preformance or because they've been in the chapter longer?

It's not quantity, it's quality. One call does not make or break a ref.

In our area, we don't look at the last game to determine who get's the next game. WE look at the body of work over the year, development opportunities etc.

Rose's history and performance (remember he already had the last game assigned) speak volumes as to his abilities etc.

Are you a proponent that he should never get a final again because of this call. I think not.

As an aside , who did replace rose, one of the first timers or the tenured ref.

experience or ability?
 

Under your logic, an official would never work a final that hasn't done one before. So when all the guys who have worked the finals for the past 20 years are dead and gone, who will have the required experience to step in?
One has to start somewhere, sometime.
But that said, I'm sure those guys have worked conference title games before in other conferences and it was clearly their time to start getting an ACC final.
Also, have you ever thought that perhaps Larry Rose was a much better official 6 years ago when he only had 3 ACC finals under his belt? Maybe he was quicker, ran harder, had better reflexes, better eyesight, hearing, etc. A number on paper doesn't necessarily equate to a better job done on the court!

Re: experience or ability?
 

Seems we like to take everything out of context. Rose had the final game based on his performance this year, not 6 years ago not ten. This year!! Yes those guys may be deserving, but why weren't they deserving 1 month ago when the assignments were made. There was one person more deserving and that was Rose based on his performance etc. If it was the other person's time then why not be posted to the game a month ago?????

Why??

Because there was someone more deserving. If Rose wasn't the same or better official he was 6 years ago, he wouldn't continue getting games at this level.

Re: Re: experience or ability?
 

This is totally incorrect. There are many officials who qualify to work the final. It just so happens only 3 may work a game. 3, three, 1,2,3. If this game called for 2 or 4 or 6, pick any number, you can find very (the best) officials to work the game. Just because he was assigned to work this game does not mean others are not as good or better. All supervisors have more than 3 officials able to work a final.

Not saying who was right or wrong in this situation. I do remember though.. the NCAA saying.. that officials not enforcing bench decorum will not work the tournament. Isn't this bench decorum ? Also, if knowone ever calls it.. won't the teams gradually start to "blow off" the rule. This puts other teams on notice that this "could" be called, even in a big time game. So likely they won't do it. It's like three seconds... most teams no that it is not a popular call... but, they stay out of the lane.. for "fear" that someone "might" just call it.

Rose worked DePaul/UConn in the second round. I'd be willing to bet he will work again this coming weekend.

Wouldn't be the first time an official got spanked by a conference and still worked deep in the NCAA (Ted Valentine comes to mind).

--Rich

Plus, Larry worked the Iowa St./Florida St. NIT game last night, and it's my understanding that Barakat assigns those games, so I think it's all under the bridge at this point.

This is politics, not basketball
 

Of course I don't think hanging an employee out to dry is the right way to treat people, just ask William Tennet. If the collective community of this board has never experienced it in their work, it is very lucky. Crap does roll down hill, and the more visible the crap is to the public, the more likely it is to roll. I have never done it to my staff, and I have chewed out mid level managers under me who have done it to their staff. However, I have had a target painted on my back when it served my management to do so. I didn't like it, I felt betrayed, I developed some personal animosity toward the ones who did it, but I fully understand why they did it. My context was not basketball, and it wasn't the general public, but it was the same thing. I was sacrificed to get a client to believe we were taking action to help solve a problem they had. Of course, I was required to stay with that client, and ultimately got an award from them, but in the meantime, our upper management was demonstrating that they were responsive to the "client issues".
This was what the ACC was doing. They were redirecting the heat from their organization, and ACC officiating in general, onto one guy who made an unpopular call. It was not fair to him in any way, but that's life. The guy is near the top of his field, and is in a position that makes him an easy target for EVERBODY. That's the price he pays for being where he is.