Interesting story- NCAA Womens Officials

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by chayce

This is one of those articles that has a lot of truth in it but also some misinformation. Just some thoughts:

* There is a lot of competition on the women's side. If you don't believe it, just go to a couple of D1 camps.

I know women that are in were in their second year of officiating and have a full JUCO and D3 schedule. I know guys that have been working 10 years and cannot get a single college game on the Men's side. I do not think the issue is competition as it relates how many people are at camps. The issue is who is getting hired and why they are getting hired. It does not bother me one bit that a women official can get a D1 schedule early, but to compare her experience to a D1 Men's officials as comparable is not being very realistic.

Originally Posted by chayce

* Officials on the top of the men's side will not do women's games. Can you say E - G - O?

Ego has to do with a preference? So if I like shrimp and you like steak, it is my ego that is not allowing me to like steak?

Peace

[Dribble]

I agree with JRut...I think many women are (rightly or wrongly) pushed a lot faster than their male counterparts. A strong woman can get a women's college schedule A LOT easier than a comparable man. I've heard many women's supervisors say that they look forward to a time when it's only women reffing the women's game and vice versa. Thus, I can only conclude that some may be being put into a situation that they're not ready for.

[JugglingReferee]

Yes, it is very interesting, JR. Reminds me of the movie called Disclosure. Donald Sutherland is bent on hiring the best woman for a high-level job. When that woman fails, Donald realizes that he should have hired the best person for the job; turns out that person was female.

Originally Posted by Clay Kallam

It certainly would make sense to have female supervisors rating the refs, however, to make sure the old-boy bias doesn't unfairly discriminate against women with whistles.

Can't say that I agree to this. Why would we focus on hiring the best officials, rather than the best female officials, and not use the same process for hiring the best supervisors? Being the best supervisor includes the ability to recognize the best officials rather than the best male officials.

Originally Posted by Clay Kallam

...this would be my prediction about the officiating: In five years, there would be fewer women doing DI games, but they would be doing both men's and women's games with similar results.

I agree with this. I think that there are more female officials doing Dx games that are not as skilled as male officials not currently doing Dx games that could and would do Dx games than there are male officials doing Dx games that are not ask skilled as female officials not currently doing Dx games that could and would do Dx games. Therefore, unfortunately, there would be a higher percentage of male officials.

Originally Posted by Clay Kallam

Will this ever happen, either in the colleges or WNBA?

I agree and I agree with his reasons. It is unfortunate, however.

Originally Posted by Clay Kallam

If an official is good enough to do a women's game, she should be good enough to do a men's game; if she isn't, then she shouldn't do either.

I do not agree here. I have seen female officials keep up with female athletes but not with male athletes at the same level. I have also seen the same of male officials.

The twist is in a societal perception that women can acheive anything. Naturally, I support this, and seeing women as officials is a good thing. We need more women involved so that we can develop better female officials. Maybe this is more of a recruiting issue.