Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by drinkeii
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by drinkeii
And I feel I have a unique perspective, being both a coach and an official.
|
I'm willing to bet you that over 90% of all officials have coached sports at some level in their lives. It's not unique at all.
|
I'm saying for basketball, currently. Most officials have coached. Most don't continue to officiate and coach at the same time. I know most swimming officials I work with are coaches at the same time. 1-2 soccer officials are out of 50 or so in our chapter. Basketball, almost none of them are currently coaches.
So the unique perspective I'm talking about is working with the officials on one hand, and being a coach "under" them on the other. I think officials often forget what it is like to be a coach, and vice versa. I like to consider both views.
|
I can't see the difference between an official who *currently* coaches and an official who *formerly* coached. Both sets of people experienced the game from both sides.
Regardless, I would still bet that many, if not the majority of officials you see at your level (middle school roughly?) are actively coaching basketball somewhere. Maybe not 90%, but certainly not 0%, making you non-unique.
|
This is a silly argument. I am not saying I am unique. I am saying it is a unique (or mostly unique) perspective, because many officials completely seem to discount coaches in terms of having any clue about the game or the rules. Some of us do actually know the rules, and have every right to be upset when the officials pick and choose which rules to use and which ones to ignore. Sports should not employ the concept of selective enforcement. There are rules. You can't play a game without rules. The officials are there to keep the players safe, and enforce the rules. (replace enforce with something less "pushy" if you wish - the concept is the same).
Wed Jul 06, 2005, 11:08am
Hybrid Mode
