I'm curious to know if any of my fellow brethren (acceptable term to use? :)) have had this storied procedure? I'm due to go under the knife tomorrow morning, and I'm wondering if any of you can share how (if at all) it affected your officiating career. Do the artificial lights give you problems? How long before you stepped back out onto the floor? Do you see all the fouls that you were missing before that the coaches were yelling about?

I have had a number of freinds go though it and they love it. Only ime they have any real issues is in low light, but that wears off in a month or two.

Immediately after the procedure, you'll won't to go home and go tho sleep. But you'll be able to work again with a couple of days. Many patients experience difficulty when driving at night, but no more than they did when they wore glasses. You shouldn't have any problems while working a game but you may still need your reading glasses to check the score book.

I had this done two years ago and it was the best thing ever. You will love the results.

I doubt you'll see all the fouls they scream for! ;)

I looked into this but never had it done. Tony brings up
a good point. The procedure won't cure or prevent
the need for reading glasses as you age. I understand that
with today's technology the incedence of blurring,
glaring and night vision problems are very low. Good luck,
let us know how it goes!

(BTW, how many fingers am I holding up?) :)

My wife had it done about 14 months ago. While all is not perfect, she loves it. Her vision is better than 20/20 now. Her former prescription was about -6 or -7 diopters. Her night vision still suffers from starbursts around bright lights and some minor halos. These effects are significatly reduced from the first couple months but will probably always be present.

They now have a method of predicting the likelihood of problems with night vision. Each person's pupil dialates a different amount for various light levels. The more the dialation, the greater the night vision problem nd the greater the correction, the greater the problems. They can measure the size of the pupil in a dark environment to predict the magnatide of the problem.

Still, she is completely satisfied and would still have it done even if she knew ahead that the side effects would occur.

She had it done at Lexington Eye Institute in Surrey, BC, Canada for a fraction of the cost of any US eye clinic. They had equipment more state of the art then any of the US eye clinics (at that time anyway---the FDA was a couple months short of approving the new equipment). The doctors had performed thousands of the proceedures (a very important point).

It's about time. . .
 

. . . one of you refs asked the real question us coaches have been asking for years now! Thanks Dan!

Hmmmmmm...
 

Ya know, there was this movie awhile back where this guy kept asking that question... "How many fingers do you see". It seemed he thought that looking directly at the fingers was the problem with answering the question correctly. His answer was to look through the finger to a point beyond for the solution... And of course when you do, you'll double up on the image and get twice as many fingers.
Now suppose we apply this in the game.... We'll get to see the violation twice! Doubling your chances to make the call! Incase you missed it the first time....
Just a thought......
Chuck

I think the message is that we should look past the violation and perhaps see that foul that caused it! :)

Re: Hmmmmmm...
 

That was Patch Adams...great movie by the way :)