KY Referee Squabble - Outta Control

[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.

[zebraman]

A paragraph from the Louisville Courier-Journal of March 14.

In an interview, Scott, the KHSAA's attorney, said that even if racial taunting precipitated the argument, it did not excuse Montgomery's conduct, which spilled into public view while he was in his official's uniform.

"If you are in a striped shirt, that is not the kind of leadership we expect in high school sports," Scott said. "Officials set the examples for others to follow."

He said a student-athlete would have been suspended for a similar outburst.

Z

[house18]

Yes, the KBOA is one of many local associations. I have never been selected for the state tourney, but Vic has been several times (not sure how many). The coaches and assigning secretaries rate the officials and based off that rating, this determines how far you advance in the tournaments: district, region, and selection for the state.

I am not sure how the state refs are selected but sometimes, some regions do not get represented because of the mandated 3 black officials that must go to State.

From my understanding, this attorney is simply backing up what he was given to say. He was not there. Did the guy who removed Vic have the ability to do so? Of course the KHSAA will defend their actions...right or wrong. No one ever thinks that racial comments or taunts warrant any actions...especially those who never have racial taunts aimed at them.

[Jurassic Referee]

[QUOTE=house18]
From my understanding, this attorney is simply backing up what he was given to say. He was not there. Did the guy who removed Vic have the ability to do so? Of course the KHSAA will defend their actions...right or wrong.

The only solid information on this to date seems only to be what has been printed in newspaper accounts, and you never know if even those are completely accurate. If the allegations are true, then action of some kind certainly has to be taken. Is there any kind of investigation under way that will throw some definitive light on what actually happened in the dressing room? Has Mr. Montgomery laid a complaint re: the racial aspect with the appropriate state agency for follow-up investigation? I would hope that the answer is "yes" on both accounts. The speculation and innuendo imo at this time is not doing anybody any good- including all officials in Ky. I think that the air really needs to be cleared on this one.

Btw, weren't both officials barred from doing further games in that Regional? Wasn't Mr. Bailey supposed to be on the final with Mr. Montgomery, and both officials were removed for their actions in public by whoever made that decision?

http://www.wlextv.com/global/story.asp?s=4625544

[house18]

I had not read that account from the Lexington, KY media. Pretty good reading. Seems to me that Darrell accepted it because he knew he was wrong...Just my opinion.

[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.

[azbigdawg]

[QUOTE=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.

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

Please dont.

[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?