KY Referee Squabble - Outta Control

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

JR

These 2 responses sound somewhat similar. First one is a response from you to me in another thread, I tried not to draw any conclusions but your response to JRutledge speaks volumes.

You decided a fellow official was guilty of racial discrimination without hearing his side of the story, or waiting to see if any more details are forthcoming from other sources. That speaks volumes about you also imo.

I expected the other poster to pull the race card. He always does. I can see that you are no different than he is.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You decided a fellow official was guilty of racial discrimination without hearing his side of the story, or waiting to see if any more details are forthcoming from other sources. That speaks volumes about you also imo.

I expected the other poster to pull the race card. He always does. I can see that you are no different than he is.

How can you NOT "pull the race card" in this situation? Bailey, I assume, is white. Montgomery is an African-American. My first reaction upon reading this story was: Wonder if he would've gotten pulled from the game if he was white?

Furthermore, if I were an African-American and someone called me "boy," I wonder how I would react. I'd probably want to punch the guy in the mouth. I would assume that "boy" is only slightly less inflammatory than the N-word. I may be wrong.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

How can you NOT "pull the race card" in this situation? Bailey, I assume, is white. Montgomery is an African-American. My first reaction upon reading this story was: Wonder if he would've gotten pulled from the game if he was white?

Furthermore, if I were an African-American and someone called me "boy," I wonder how I would react. I'd probably want to punch the guy in the mouth. I would assume that "boy" is only slightly less inflammatory than the N-word. I may be wrong.

Rich, the "race card" that I'm referring to is a poster inferring that someone is a racist because they don't agree with the other person's views. I've seen that one used here too many times, and now I'm seeing it from another source. That's the inference that BadNewsRef was trying to make of myself. That's just despicable imo.

From the story back on p1 of this thread, both officials were pulled from games, apparently for letting the dispute spill out into public view. As for the "boy" part of it, I agree with you 100% if the slur was made. All I have been saying is that until it is proven that Bailey actually did call Momtgomery "boy", then Bailey should be given the benefit of the doubt- as should anyone who is on the receiving end of any unproven allegations, no matter what color they might be. Similary, Montgomery has to be given the benefit of the doubt as to whether he tried to get 2 other officials removed from a previus game, which apparently started this mess. If the allegations are proven to be true, then Bailey should never be allowed to officate another game in Kentucky.

For the record, imo there were different phrases to this incident:
1) I've haven't commented yet on what started it off, I think. I will now. Bailey had no business entering that dressing room at half-time and starting the altercation. That's completely wrong. He deserves to be disciplined for that act alone by whoever is responsible for disciplining wrongful acts by officials in Ky. Hopefully, he will be. If so, I doubt that we will ever hear about the discipline though.

2) The argument in the dressing room is a separate act. During that argument, it is alleged that Bailey called Montgomery "boy". Until those allegations are proven or disproven, it is my opinion that Bailey should be given the benefit of the doubt, the same as any person who has been accused of anything without accompanying evidence to prove that accusation should be given the benefit of the doubt. That is all that I have been saying all along. Bailey is innocent until proven guilty. If Bailey is eventually proven guilty, then again- imo- his career as an official in Ky should be over. And...if the allegations are proven false, then Montgomery should have to answer for making those allegations also. Whichever way it turns out, there should be no discipline involved either way until the allegations are proven or disproven. This one shouldn't be difficult to investigate either. Montgomery's partners shoulda been in the dressing room and shoulda witnessed what went down. Get their stories.

3) The argument then spilled out into public view. I've already commented on that. Imo, both officials were wrong to let that happen. We don't know all the facts here also, but whoever convened that regional seemed to agree that both officials were wrong. They removed both officials from further games. The Appeals and Supreme court of the state of Ky apparently backed up the right of the convenor to make that judgement, even though we don't have the reasons as to why the courts made that decision.

Hopefully, someone is investigating this mess. Also hopefully, a racial complaint has been put in to the state of Kentucky, and that complaint will be investigated properly. That's the fair way to handle it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

Furthermore, if I were an African-American and someone called me "boy," I wonder how I would react. I'd probably want to punch the guy in the mouth. I would assume that "boy" is only slightly less inflammatory than the N-word. I may be wrong.

You are exactly right. I know we are supposed to be professional, but those are what we used to call "fighting words." I can tell you calling someone Black a "boy" in other settings might get a bigger response than just getting punched in the face if we were on the block or in a club. Bailey knew what he was doing when he made those comments and based on other situations. Once again, we are not talking about a state here that has had no racial incidents in the past. We are talking about a situation where the state has history and a white person is accused of calling someone a racial slur. Now maybe there are people that think this is not a big deal. If you do not feel it is a big deal, go to the Proviso schools in Maywood and Hillside and call those kids and fans "boys." Come to the south side of Chicago and call those kids and fans "boys" then tell me when you get out of the hospital if you are lucky that is all that happens to you after you call some African-Americans that are not going to care about professionalism before they split your head open with a weapon or their hands, then tell me how much of a big deal this is not. I think if all Montgomery did was have words with Bailey that is a really good job on his part. If he said that to someone else Bailey or anyone else might not be so lucky. Now you can think this is a moral stand and try to act like these things are not a big issue, but I am sure no one's mother raised that big of a fool to think that you can say or do anything and a reaction is not a serious possibility. My Mom used to say to me all the time, "You can be right and dead at the same time."

Peace

[SMEngmann]

I have observed this thread for a while and feel that now's a good time to comment. I agree and disagree with a lot of the previous posts. Firstly, I don't think we need to hear Bailey's side of the story, because the preponderance of the evidence gives us a pretty good idea of how things went down. Bailey himself admitted fault and didn't challenge his suspension, so by that alone, we have to assume that he did enter the locker room and referred to Montgomery as "boy" and that an altercation took place. The only gray area here is where the dispute took place, Mongomery said the dispute with Bailey took place in the locker room and only spilled out onto the court after he was replaced, while newspaper accounts simply point to a "visible dispute." After reading Montgomery's side of the story, I believe that the dispute happened behind closed doors and that the only reason it could've spilled out is if he was being replaced at the half. I know if I was being replaced by a tournament director at the half, I'd likely react the same way. Also, the only way that any dispute could've gone public would've been if Bailey followed Montgomery onto the court, in which case, Montgomery would have, in my opinion, more latitute.

In terms of how Bailey got into the locker room, he was not only officiating the following game, but he was the president of the association. Typically, at least in my area, commissioners of officials/observers and following officials routinely can go into the locker room at the half. In terms of where the partners were, I think we can speculate that the racial element and the fact that this guy's the association president may have played a role. Personally, if I was working a game and someone pulled my partner off at halftime, I'd refuse to work the second half as well, the lack of partner intervention here is astounding and lends credence to Montgomery's assertions.

When I initially read the story, I completely faulted Montgomery, and considered his actions grossly unprofessional, I now understand exactly why he took the legal actions he did. Montgomery was removed, AT HALFTIME from a playoff game by someone who he didn't feel had the authority to do it, after a dispute in the locker room with another official. That fact makes the visible altercation seem logical. Montgomery suffered extreme embarrassment by being pulled at the half, which no official, short of extreme conditions, should ever be. This is the heart of the issue, and I feel that the further legal action is warranted on that basis. I doubt this incident takes place without Montgomery being pulled at the half. Given the racial tension described in Kentucky, I can see why Montgomery feels race may have played a role.

In terms of the other topic of conversation on this thread, the reaction to Bailey calling Montgomery "boy" I have mixed feelings. My opinion is that, especially in our roles as officials, we must control our emotions all the times and not allow words, no matter how painful, to cause us to lose control. If you can't control yourself, there's no way you can manage the game, not to say that it's easy to do so. If a coach used that, I'd expect an ejection, but I would deem it to be unprofessional for an official to start a confrontation with the coach. Doing so only leads to the official getting in trouble and often results in the coach either looking vindicated or like a victim. Imagine in a racially charged atmosphere, a white coach calling a black official "boy" or worse and the black official not only ejects the white coach but charges at him and either hits him or unloads verbally. To onlookers, it looks as if the official, rather than the coach is at fault and as a result, the coach will get off much lighter than he should or otherwise would. In this case, Bailey baited Montgomery into losing his assignments. That being said, I'm not prepared to even call Montgomery's reaction unprofessional because if it stayed in the locker room he should have much more latitute than if the dispute indeed took place entirely in the public eye (even so, pulling an official during a game is just absurd).

[Nevadaref]

It has been written in this thread that 16 officials are selected for the KY state tournament.
There are 16 teams that make it to state. Is there only one division in KY or is there a large school and a small school tourney? I thought I saw something about that when ESPN did the profile on KY HS basketball on that show the season. BTW, that was an excellent piece.

Are those 8 first round games worked 2-man? How about the semifinals and championship game?

How are the officials for the semis and final chosen? Do they come from those same 16?

[house18]

KY is one of very few states where there is only 1 class of basketball. KY is divided into 16 regions. Louisville has 2 regions. The single regional winners advance to Rupp Arena for the "Sweet 16." The officiating is 3 person. Officials cannot referee a game of the team(s) from the region they represent. For example, a referee from Louisville cannot work the teams from the 2 regions from Louisville at Rupp. The officials also cannot work for the school that they may have graduated from either.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by house18

KY is one of very few states where there is only 1 class of basketball. KY is divided into 16 regions. Louisville has 2 regions. The single regional winners advance to Rupp Arena for the "Sweet 16." The officiating is 3 person. Officials cannot referee a game of the team(s) from the region they represent. For example, a referee from Louisville cannot work the teams from the 2 regions from Louisville at Rupp. The officials also cannot work for the school that they may have graduated from either.

House, does that mean that there are 16 different officials associations in Ky- one for each region? Is the previously mentioned KBOA only one of many associations there? How are the 16 officials chosen for the Sweet Sixteen?

Just trying to understand the procedure used.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

I have observed this thread for a while and feel that now's a good time to comment. I agree and disagree with a lot of the previous posts. Firstly, I don't think we need to hear Bailey's side of the story, because the preponderance of the evidence gives us a pretty good idea of how things went down. Bailey himself admitted fault and didn't challenge his suspension, so by that alone, we have to assume that he did enter the locker room and referred to Montgomery as "boy" and that an altercation took place. The only gray area here is where the dispute took place, Mongomery said the dispute with Bailey took place in the locker room and only spilled out onto the court after he was replaced, while newspaper accounts simply point to a "visible dispute." After reading Montgomery's side of the story, I believe that the dispute happened behind closed doors and that the only reason it could've spilled out is if he was being replaced at the half. I know if I was being replaced by a tournament director at the half, I'd likely react the same way. Also, the only way that any dispute could've gone public would've been if Bailey followed Montgomery onto the court, in which case, Montgomery would have, in my opinion, more latitute.

In terms of how Bailey got into the locker room, he was not only officiating the following game, but he was the president of the association. Typically, at least in my area, commissioners of officials/observers and following officials routinely can go into the locker room at the half. In terms of where the partners were, I think we can speculate that the racial element and the fact that this guy's the association president may have played a role. Personally, if I was working a game and someone pulled my partner off at halftime, I'd refuse to work the second half as well, the lack of partner intervention here is astounding and lends credence to Montgomery's assertions.

When I initially read the story, I completely faulted Montgomery, and considered his actions grossly unprofessional, I now understand exactly why he took the legal actions he did. Montgomery was removed, AT HALFTIME from a playoff game by someone who he didn't feel had the authority to do it, after a dispute in the locker room with another official. That fact makes the visible altercation seem logical. Montgomery suffered extreme embarrassment by being pulled at the half, which no official, short of extreme conditions, should ever be. This is the heart of the issue, and I feel that the further legal action is warranted on that basis. I doubt this incident takes place without Montgomery being pulled at the half. Given the racial tension described in Kentucky, I can see why Montgomery feels race may have played a role.

In terms of the other topic of conversation on this thread, the reaction to Bailey calling Montgomery "boy" I have mixed feelings. My opinion is that, especially in our roles as officials, we must control our emotions all the times and not allow words, no matter how painful, to cause us to lose control. If you can't control yourself, there's no way you can manage the game, not to say that it's easy to do so. If a coach used that, I'd expect an ejection, but I would deem it to be unprofessional for an official to start a confrontation with the coach. Doing so only leads to the official getting in trouble and often results in the coach either looking vindicated or like a victim. Imagine in a racially charged atmosphere, a white coach calling a black official "boy" or worse and the black official not only ejects the white coach but charges at him and either hits him or unloads verbally. To onlookers, it looks as if the official, rather than the coach is at fault and as a result, the coach will get off much lighter than he should or otherwise would. In this case, Bailey baited Montgomery into losing his assignments. That being said, I'm not prepared to even call Montgomery's reaction unprofessional because if it stayed in the locker room he should have much more latitute than if the dispute indeed took place entirely in the public eye (even so, pulling an official during a game is just absurd).

BTW, when I said there would be a scene if I was ever in that situation, I meant that there would probably be a scene startted by the coach after I ejected him with a flagrant technical.

[azbigdawg]

What was the over/under on this thread becoming a racial pissing contest between JRut and Jurassic? No offense to either one..they both brought up great issues and are closer to agreeing than they care to admit! It will be interesting to see where this goes.

The thread also makes me glad that high school assignments in Arizona go through the AIA. (Arizona Interscholastic Association) No local groups, fewer polititcs...better control of schools and officials.....and an incident like this WOULD be handled swiftly.

The one big thought that came to me. (and someone else mentioned it) is WHERE was Mr. Montgomery's partner? SURELY there were cooler heads somewhere? Or was the partner complicit in the argument?

[Jurassic Referee]

[QUOTE=azbigdawg]What was the over/under on this thread becoming a racial pissing contest between JRut and Jurassic? No offense to either one.


[QUOTE]I don't partake in "racial pissing contests" with anyone. I do take great offense to your statement.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

BTW, when I said there would be a scene if I was ever in that situation, I meant that there would probably be a scene startted by the coach after I ejected him with a flagrant technical.

That wasn't my question Rich. I asked what would the official do if the coach called him boy. I didn't ask what an official would do after a coach attacked him. Not sure why you answered my question while changing the scenario.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

That wasn't my question Rich. I asked what would the official do if the coach called him boy. I didn't ask what an official would do after a coach attacked him. Not sure why you answered my question while changing the scenario.

Because I don't read for comprehension?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You decided a fellow official was guilty of racial discrimination without hearing his side of the story, or waiting to see if any more details are forthcoming from other sources. That speaks volumes about you also imo.

I expected the other poster to pull the race card. He always does. I can see that you are no different than he is.

And since you are a big fan of evidence, this is part of a post from me the last time Race came up in this forum, the Massachesetts coach who claimed officials were racist.

The most likely exposure of any type of bigotry would probably manifest itself in how an official interacts with the coaches and players during times of communication. The coach in this particular article made very little reference to his interactions with the officials. His accusations came across as an emotional outburst in my eyes. He really said nothing to back up any of his claims.

Yep, thats me, pulling the race card again.

[house18]

I live in Louisville, KY and know both officials. I am also a referee. I know that Vic has always been treated unfairly by many of the white officials in Louisville. I just started refereeing a few years ago and I am not embarrassed to say that I am not at his (Vic’s) level in high school or college. Vic is at a very high level and many officials in the KBOA do not like him because of that. I always wondered why…

Vic has always been very helpful to me during the season and at summer camps. He also helped many white officials too. He truly loves refereeing. I later found out that in the entire state of KY that he is the ONLY NCAA Division I men’s official in the KHSAA! Can you believe that? With that being said, he faces a great deal of envy and flat out racism that comes his way because he referees at a level higher than 95% of the officials in Louisville and Kentucky for that matter. I will also say this; Vic is not shy, bashful, or timid. He speaks his mind and many do not like that either. He knows that some of these “guys” do not like him, but he moves forward.

I respect him not only for his ability on the court, but for saying enough is enough. I know that Vic would not have reacted as he did if in fact Darrell did not do what he claims. This may also bring to light the treatment and “closet” feelings that the white officials have in our association. They do not like Vic because he works harder and is simply better than them. They accuse him of being buddies with the coaches. I would think that he did not rise as high because he kisses ----. He made the most of his opportunities.

I remain hopeful that he will not only be allowed to continue, but that he will not let this damper his love for our craft. Darrell was wrong. Many in the KBOA know this too, but will not defend Vic. The KBOA majority resent the fact that a black man is higher than them. Plus, Darrell is the president right now. Hum...

Here is another question that may tie it all up: Why is Vic the target and why is he the ONLY black official in the state of KY in the KHSAA that officiates at this level? He is a role model official for not only new black officials, but anyone who wants to work hard to rise to a high level of refereeing.