Ratings

[Coachdg]

Guys, I'm looking for some help. If anyone has a ratings system that they feel is a strong one that, supports advancement and also can move out the "dead wood" that hinders advancement I would be greatly appreciative if you would share it with me. Thanks my email address is:
[email protected]

[Mark Padgett]

Since you seem to be a coach, I'll assume you mean a rating system for coaches. I have a good one. It's called "The Technical Foul Rating System". Coaches can score either a zero, a one or a two. I also have indirect ratings in which they can score a three.

The best score is zero.

[Coachdg]

Guys don't get thrown by my user name I am indeed an official, I have been aaponted to a ratings propsal committee, and I'm looking for a little guidance. Thanks

[icallfouls]

Coach, first of all good luck with removing the "deadwood," especially if you are not the assignor in your area. An example, in our area we have an assignor that assigns roughly 7,500 - 10,000 games per year (7th grade thru HS Varsity). We have approximately 400 officials to cover all these games. Not all officials are created equal. The facts are that not every game will have the very best officials working.

If your responsible for selecting the officials for your games and the officials in your area are "independent" contractors, then it helps if you are the big fish in the pond. As an example, if you coach teams from a small school and the program is not very successful, it might be more difficult to get the quality you would like.

Now with all that said, if the real purpose is to help with the development of officials in your area I offer this: If you are not intimate with them, familiarize yourself with the rules (especially the part about judgement, not all contact is a foul), review the casebooks, etc. If you are not willing to do this, then my suggestion is to develop a way to evaluate officials from a coaches perspective. Some of the measurable qualities you can easily identify are: is the official physically fit, can they keep up, can I communicate with the official, professionalism, consistency of official/crew, confidence of the official, etc. If you ever received a T, you have to ask yourself if you were the coach on the other side, would you want the T called, did you in fact deserve it? I am sure that I left some things out, but you should get more replies on this that will prove useful.

The other thing about coaches evaluating officials is the objectivity of the coach, especially after a tough call/game. It is harder to be objective immediately after the game and maybe even a day or two later.

Good luck with your quest!

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Coachdg
Guys don't get thrown by my user name I am indeed an official, I have been aaponted to a ratings propsal committee, and I'm looking for a little guidance. Thanks

So, just to be clear, you're an official that has been appointed to a committee to design a new rating system for your area? Is this an official's association, or a way for coaches and AD's to evaluate the refs? What level of ball will you be covering? Do you want a system that rates only varsity refs, or that includes the up-and-comers?

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by icallfouls
Coach, first of all good luck with removing the "deadwood," especially if you are not the assignor in your area. An example, in our area we have an assignor that assigns roughly 7,500 - 10,000 games per year (7th grade thru HS Varsity). We have approximately 400 officials to cover all these games. Not all officials are created equal. The facts are that not every game will have the very best officials working.

If your responsible for selecting the officials for your games and the officials in your area are "independent" contractors, then it helps if you are the big fish in the pond. As an example, if you coach teams from a small school and the program is not very successful, it might be more difficult to get the quality you would like.

Now with all that said, if the real purpose is to help with the development of officials in your area I offer this: If you are not intimate with them, familiarize yourself with the rules (especially the part about judgement, not all contact is a foul), review the casebooks, etc. If you are not willing to do this, then my suggestion is to develop a way to evaluate officials from a coaches perspective. Some of the measurable qualities you can easily identify are: is the official physically fit, can they keep up, can I communicate with the official, professionalism, consistency of official/crew, confidence of the official, etc. If you ever received a T, you have to ask yourself if you were the coach on the other side, would you want the T called, did you in fact deserve it? I am sure that I left some things out, but you should get more replies on this that will prove useful.

The other thing about coaches evaluating officials is the objectivity of the coach, especially after a tough call/game. It is harder to be objective immediately after the game and maybe even a day or two later.

Good luck with your quest!

Jim -- I think he's saying that he's a ref, and that he's looking for a system for refs to evaluate other refs. I'd be interested in what you think of the system we use here (but don't forget that Howard reads this baord sometimes.)

[icallfouls]

Julie,

I was replying when the post was made stating this was an official. I did not look again before submitting my reply.

However, I still think he is a coach first, official second, hence the log in name.

[Coachdg]

I am a member of a New York State Iaabo Board, we are in the process of trying to institute a new ratings system. If my user name is of concern to anyone i will change it. I am a former coach and the name is easliy remembered. if it offends anyone I apologize. I have been amember of our board for 5 years. I have been a member of our counties umpiring association for over 20 years. Thanks for any input.

[tomegun]

When asking about a ratings system are you talking about how an official is rated on a particular game or the classification of an official?
If you are talking about the classification of officials there are many names and numbers you could use. The more important thing will be what you use to divide the different groups. So many times the number of years worked or an officials political standing is the first thing used. If you have the chance, it would be good for you to use an officials overall ability as the most important element of classification.
If you are talking about rating an official on a particular game you could make a generic list of things evaluators should look at and give them a scale for each individual area. The individual areas can be averaged to come up with an overall rating.
IMO the most important thing when it comes to rating is to make sure the raters are current with the game. So many times a ratee will get marked down for something that has changed because the rater hasn't been to a camp or stayed current with the game.
Just some things to think about.

[rockyroad]

Try looking at the system the local HS group in my area uses...it's at http://www.eboa.net/ranking.htm

[socalreff]

Originally posted by Coachdg
Guys, I'm looking for some help. If anyone has a ratings system that they feel is a strong one that, supports advancement and also can move out the "dead wood" that hinders advancement I would be greatly appreciative if you would share it with me. Thanks my email address is:
[email protected]

Here's what a lot of units around here do(SoCal). May not have all the same names but most are very similar to the description below. And each officials' association is responsible for assigning their own games. The schools and coaches have very little say in any of it. They can report if officials are unprofessional or inept.

RATING OF OFFICIALS

Officials are rated at one of six levels based upon their on court performance. Ratings are reviewed annually at the conclusion of the season for all officials with the exception of playoff officials who are reviewed in January. In addition, officials that work Foothill-Citrus sanctioned summer leagues or attend the Tri-County Officials Camp will also have their rating reviewed at the conclusion of the summer for possible advancement to a higher classification.



The Rating Committee is composed of the Board of Directors, Instructors and Observers. In making rating decisions, the committee uses information gathered from on court evaluations by instructors and observers. In order to be eligible for consideration for advancement, an official must meet the following minimum requirements:

Complete the study guide with a minimum score of 80%.
Pass the classification exam or the make-up classification exam with a minimum score of 80%.
Attend all instructional meetings of the Association, or the make-up meeting, or provide written evidence to the Instructional Chairperson of attendance at a meeting of another CBOA unit.
Officiate a pre-season scrimmage coordinated by the Foothill-Citrus Basketball Officials Association.
Work a minimum of 15 games during the season.
Work all games assigned and accepted unless prior notification has been made to the assignor, or due to circumstances beyond the officials control that have been substantiated by the Board

Fulfillment of the minimum requirements alone will not warrant advancement. An official must demonstrate proficiency in game management, game control, rule knowledge and application, professionalism, and proper use of mechanics commensurate with the level of play associated with the classification for which they are being considered for advancement. If an official fails to meet two or more of the minimum requirements listed above, or fails to continue to perform at a level required by the level of play at their current rating, that official is subject to review for reassignment to a lower classification.

All officials must be members in good standing and be rated in order to receive consideration for game assignments. In the case of returning and transferring officials, they will be evaluated at the pre-season Floor Test or the New Officials On-court Clinic in order to determine the level of game assignments that they may receive. They may receive tentative game assignments that will not be finalized until the Instructional Staff has seen them on the court. They will be officially rated at the next rating meeting following their observation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


RATING DEFINITIONS


Playoff: Capable of working CIF/Southern Section playoffs, regional or state playoff games. Regular season assignments include tournament finals and “prime time” league games.
Varsity: Capable of acting as a lead official in varsity contests while working with another Varsity or Associate Varsity official. Assignments may include tournament semi-finals.
Associate Varsity: Capable of acting as a lead official in non-varsity games and as an umpire in varsity games when working with a Playoff or Varsity official. Assignments may include lower level tournament finals and semi-finals.
Lower Level: Primarily a candidate for lower level games. May receive a limited number of varsity games when working with a Playoff or Varsity official.
Limited: Officials in this category will receive a limited number of assignments due to deficiencies in their officiating skills, or placement in this category due to Board action for disciplinary reasons. All transfers and officials lacking in evaluation data are placed in this category.
Probationary: New officials will be placed in this category until such time as they have demonstrated the skills and proficiency to move to a higher classification. Game assignments will be limited to lower level games.

[26 Year Gap]

We have a form that is used by officials to rate other officials in 3 categories. I cannot format it as it is in our private area of our IAABO page. You will have to use pen and ink to follow it. I will try emailing it to you.