"Honey Bunny"

[Corndog89]

As officials, we are authority figures. As such, our credibility, in large part, depends on treating everyone the same. Therefore, IMO, it is incumbent we don't do or say anything that may offend anyone, even if we do it innocently. Why do we stay calm and rational when dealing with an angry coach, an irate parent, or a petulant player? Because we have to always be in control and not ever be seen as playing favorites. EVER! But if we refer to players as "ladies" or "gentlemen", we may be doing just that, even if unconsciously or inadvertantly.

I love the poll Larry S did...84 out of 84 answers thought the issue was silly. But the 85th responder may very well be the one who is genuinely offended by the term "ladies". And if so, then odds are that #85 will be be a player/coach/parent in my next game and bring me grief when I unwittingly use the term "ladies". When someone is zealous about something, even something so seemingly innocuous as the term "ladies", and you offend their sense of righteousness, then you will never regain your moral authority in their eyes, to include the authority to officiate their game. Pretty sad when you think about it. Therefore, I do my best to avoid any terminology that may be construed as offensive and keep things as simple and straightforward as possible. Just good common sense.

And I liked what a couple other people said about officials setting the tenor of good sportsmanship, civility, and personal responsibility...we should and usually do. But I think we do it with our demeanor, sense of fair play, control of our emotions, and passion for the game we love. I don't have to call men/boys "gentlemen" or women/girls "ladies" to accomplish that.

One guy's opinions....

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

Therefore, IMO, it is incumbent we don't do or say anything that may offend anyone, even if we do it innocently.

Therefore, I do my best to avoid any terminology that may be construed as offensive and keep things as simple and straightforward as possible. Just good common sense.

And I liked what a couple other people said about officials setting the tenor of good sportsmanship, civility, and personal responsibility...we should and usually do.

One guy's opinions....

What about the players/coaches that might be offended by good sportsmanship, civility and personal responsibility? Aren't you worried about offending them also?

Btw, I personally find the term "guy" very offensive.

[Junker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

What about the players/coaches that might be offended by good sportsmanship, civility and personal responsibility? Aren't you worried about offending them also?

Btw, I personally find the term "guy" very offensive.

Me too! I'd prefer to be called "Stud" or "Stallion".

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Junker

Me too! I'd prefer to be called "Stud" or "Stallion".

That's fine with me, Honey Bunny.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Junker

Me too! I'd prefer to be called "Stud" or "Stallion".

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Thgat's fine with me, Honey Bunny.

Now now, calm down ladies, calm down.

[Junker]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Now now, calm down ladies, calm down.

I don't mind Honey Bunny as long as it comes from the right source. I'm sure JR is a handsome man, but he's not the right source for me.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Junker

I'm sure JR is a handsome man, but he's not the right source for me.

He called me a "man"!

Mummy, make the bad person of indiscriminate sex quit it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

But the 85th responder may very well be the one who is genuinely offended by the term "ladies". And if so, then odds are that #85 will be be a player/coach/parent in my next game and bring me grief when I unwittingly use the term "ladies". When someone is zealous about something, even something so seemingly innocuous as the term "ladies", and you offend their sense of righteousness, then you will never regain your moral authority in their eyes, to include the authority to officiate their game.

If I come across #85 and they are a player or a coach in a game I officiate then I would apologize for offending them and move on. If after my apology their sense of righteousness is still offended beyond repair that's something I can't control. However my authority as an official in that particular game still stands.

I've been offended many a time by people in a positions of authority (retired after 22 years of Air Force service). The fact that someone says something offensive to my personal senses did not usurp that person's power or authority.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

As officials, we are authority figures. As such, our credibility, in large part, depends on treating everyone the same.

If you treat everybody the same, you're going to be a pretty ineffective referee. Some players you want to win to your side, because they can solve your problems. Some players you just let do their thing, because they're the journeymen who get the job done. Some players you need to actively "handle," because they're your game disruptors. You've got two coaches, and since no two people are alike, you're going to have to handle them each differently. If you're in a crew of three, you may even need to handle your crew members differently.

Case in point: In one of my Saturday games I had a kid who kept popping off to me. So I got in his grill about it. Then I hear a man in the stands hollering about how I have to handle this kid the same way I'd handle every other kid. Bull****. This kid was my game disruptor and I had to handle him differently or I will not have done my job.

Originally Posted by Corndog89

Therefore, IMO, it is incumbent we don't do or say anything that may offend anyone, even if we do it innocently.

Again, bull****. I'm there to do a job. That job involves making judgements about and exerting influence over others without undue respect to their feelings and sensitivities. Some people are going to be unhappy about what I do, no matter what I do. That goes with the territory. And while I absolutely need to be professional, and part of professionalism is not deliberately seeking to offend, I am under no obligation to watch my every word or walk on eggshells because little Johnny or Joanie (or Johnny/Joanie), or their parents, may choose to take offense at what I say or do. If I am made aware that I have offended somebody, I'll likely apologize. If I think they have a legitimate point, I will probably make a change. If I don't, I won't. In which case they can take their little crusade to change the world to the next potential convert. I don't live my life for them; they sure-as-hell ain't living their life for me.

And on the subject of authority, my authority comes from the fact that I've been hired by somebody with more authority to wear the stripes. Unlike important institutions like governments, my authority doesn't derive from the people I'm refereeing. I do not have to win their popular support. I do not have to pander to their whims. I do not have to be politically correct to win their vote. I have the whistle. I do not need to be liked, but I do have to be respected. And the surest way to lose respect is to try to conform to other people's whims.

And while I'm on a roll here, just let me say one last thing:

Another person's offense, real or pretended, at my words or actions is based on that person's perception that I have not embraced or respected their value system and/or view of the world. But by the same token, they have not embraced or respected my value system and/or view of the world. So while they clamour for my conformance to their value system, they refuse to give me the same courtesy. Political correctness is inherently a one-way street, and those who most demand other's respect seem least willing to give it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Another person's offense, real or pretended, at my words or actions is based on that person's perception that I have not embraced or respected their value system and/or view of the world. But by the same token, they have not embraced or respected my value system and/or view of the world. So while they clamour for my conformance to their value system, they refuse to give me the same courtesy. Political correctness is inherently a one-way street, and those who most demand other's respect seem least willing to give it.

Amen, BITS, amen.....

Well said.

[truerookie]

[QUOTE=Back In The Saddle]
Case in point: In one of my Saturday games I had a kid who kept popping off to me. So I got in his grill about it.

Back in the Saddle, . A kid was popping off and you got in his grill. I am left to believe whatever was said did not warrant a T. However, it warranted you to get in his grill as you stated. Clear something up for me here

How close did you get to the kid grill?

Did you maintain a distance between four to seven feet?

Because, I find it unbelieveable that someone of your stature, will take issue with a kid in this manner and get in a kid grill.

The kid popping off at the mouth could have been handle differently then you getting in his face.

[Back In The Saddle]

[quote=truerookie]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Case in point: In one of my Saturday games I had a kid who kept popping off to me. So I got in his grill about it.

Back in the Saddle, . A kid was popping off and you got in his grill. I am left to believe whatever was said did not warrant a T. However, it warranted you to get in his grill as you stated. Clear something up for me here

How close did you get to the kid grill?

Did you maintain a distance between four to seven feet?

Because, I find it unbelieveable that someone of your stature, will take issue with a kid in this manner and get in a kid grill.

The kid popping off at the mouth could have been handle differently then you getting in his face.

Ah yes, the devilish details.

No, what was said was not deserving of a T. But after the second time it happened, early in the game, it appeared that it was going to be a continual problem. In my experience, those kinds of problems only escalate. It is the A in ABS technical foul.

The background: this is one of those meaningless summer tourneys where they don't keep player fouls, they shoot one-for-whatever and we were specifically advised to not give out T's except in very deserving situations because they were unlikely to be effective. So, it being the final day of the tourney, I had little hope that the fear of a T would carry any weight.

Distance: the "getting in the grill" occurred while we were in transition once, and while I was at lead and he was in the key once. Both times at distances of several feet. No physical contact, no proximity that would add an intimidation factor. I was, however, suitably gruff and curt. So perhaps "got in his grill" was overstating the physical nature of the confrontation, but is pretty accurate for the verbal and attitude aspects of it.

Could I have handled it differently? Sure. There are an endless number of ways I could have handled it. Some may be more effective, most would not. Based on the situation (an obvious game disruptor, popping off repeatedly, from early in the game), I chose a method I have had success with in the past. It gets the point across, addresses the offender directly, doesn't punish the team or player, leaves room to escalate in a controlled manner if the behavior doesn't cease. In this case the behavior ceased, and life was good.

[Corndog89]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

If you treat everybody the same, you're going to be a pretty ineffective referee. Some players you want to win to your side, because they can solve your problems. Some players you just let do their thing, because they're the journeymen who get the job done. Some players you need to actively "handle," because they're your game disruptors. You've got two coaches, and since no two people are alike, you're going to have to handle them each differently. If you're in a crew of three, you may even need to handle your crew members differently.

Case in point: In one of my Saturday games I had a kid who kept popping off to me. So I got in his grill about it. Then I hear a man in the stands hollering about how I have to handle this kid the same way I'd handle every other kid. Bull****. This kid was my game disruptor and I had to handle him differently or I will not have done my job.
Again, bull****. I'm there to do a job. That job involves making judgements about and exerting influence over others without undue respect to their feelings and sensitivities. Some people are going to be unhappy about what I do, no matter what I do. That goes with the territory. And while I absolutely need to be professional, and part of professionalism is not deliberately seeking to offend, I am under no obligation to watch my every word or walk on eggshells because little Johnny or Joanie (or Johnny/Joanie), or their parents, may choose to take offense at what I say or do. If I am made aware that I have offended somebody, I'll likely apologize. If I think they have a legitimate point, I will probably make a change. If I don't, I won't. In which case they can take their little crusade to change the world to the next potential convert. I don't live my life for them; they sure-as-hell ain't living their life for me.

And on the subject of authority, my authority comes from the fact that I've been hired by somebody with more authority to wear the stripes. Unlike important institutions like governments, my authority doesn't derive from the people I'm refereeing. I do not have to win their popular support. I do not have to pander to their whims. I do not have to be politically correct to win their vote. I have the whistle. I do not need to be liked, but I do have to be respected. And the surest way to lose respect is to try to conform to other people's whims.

And while I'm on a roll here, just let me say one last thing:

Another person's offense, real or pretended, at my words or actions is based on that person's perception that I have not embraced or respected their value system and/or view of the world. But by the same token, they have not embraced or respected my value system and/or view of the world. So while they clamour for my conformance to their value system, they refuse to give me the same courtesy. Political correctness is inherently a one-way street, and those who most demand other's respect seem least willing to give it.

BITS

Great post! I mean that and agree with everything you say...but consider this, you're talking about dealing with behavior, which we have to deal with, while I'm talking about dealing with persons. It's on old axiom of leadership that when behavior is unacceptable, you address/deal with/fix the behavior, you don't judge the person engaged in the behavior. By treating all persons the same, you can focus on addressing behavior.

Is that being PC? I don't think so. I'm not afraid of offending people and therefore walk on eggshells, and I certainly don't try to to make people embrace my values at the expense of theirs...I just consciously try to avoid saying potentially explosive/threatening/offensive things to people that I don't know--i.e., players/coaches/parents/administrators/etc--but that I may have authority over. Do I occasionally offend people despite my precautions? Of course I do, but I deal with it and don't punish myself with angst.

Is this a silly thread as some people have said? Of course a discussion on the merits of the word "ladies" can be beat to death and become silly. But this isn't about just that word. Words mean things, which sounds obvious, but they can and do mean different things to different people. And people often react to different stimuli--in this case words--emotionally and irrationally. Put even sane, rational people in an emotional athletic arena, and you never know how they may react.

A couple years ago I was deployed to Al Udeid Air Base in the Qatar desert. The 'Deid has a very good gym and a good intramural program for the troops deployed there. As such, I officiated the intramural b-ball games while I was there. The 'Deid is not a particularly happy place, though it's not that bad either, but as you can imagine tempers can run short in such an environment. During one of the games I called, one of the players, a medical doctor assigned to the hospital there, was losing control so I told the captain of his team, another doctor, that we needed to work together to keep him from doing anything "stupid". The captain went and talked to the guy...and remember, he's a medical professional...and he went ballistic because I called him "stupid". I never did, but that's not what he heard. His perception of the situation was more real than the actual reality of the situation.

Moral of the story: I should have been more careful in my word choices to avoid such a confrontation. If I deal rationally, logically, carefully with behavior, I can more likely avoid an ugly human response. If I treat every person the same, I can keep the playing field much more level and the focus on the game where it belongs, not on differing values.

Thanks for listening to my long-winded response.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I agree; this thread is getting way too long. I believe in treating all people with respect and civility and that includes addressing male and female athletes as gentlemen and ladies, and I do not give a hoot about what some sociologist thinks.

MTD, Sr.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

BITS

Great post! I mean that and agree with everything you say...but consider this, you're talking about dealing with behavior, which we have to deal with, while I'm talking about dealing with persons. It's on old axiom of leadership that when behavior is unacceptable, you address/deal with/fix the behavior, you don't judge the person engaged in the behavior. By treating all persons the same, you can focus on addressing behavior.

Is that being PC? I don't think so. I'm not afraid of offending people and therefore walk on eggshells, and I certainly don't try to to make people embrace my values at the expense of theirs...I just consciously try to avoid saying potentially explosive/threatening/offensive things to people that I don't know--i.e., players/coaches/parents/administrators/etc--but that I may have authority over. Do I occasionally offend people despite my precautions? Of course I do, but I deal with it and don't punish myself with angst.

Is this a silly thread as some people have said? Of course a discussion on the merits of the word "ladies" can be beat to death and become silly. But this isn't about just that word. Words mean things, which sounds obvious, but they can and do mean different things to different people. And people often react to different stimuli--in this case words--emotionally and irrationally. Put even sane, rational people in an emotional athletic arena, and you never know how they may react.

A couple years ago I was deployed to Al Udeid Air Base in the Qatar desert. The 'Deid has a very good gym and a good intramural program for the troops deployed there. As such, I officiated the intramural b-ball games while I was there. The 'Deid is not a particularly happy place, though it's not that bad either, but as you can imagine tempers can run short in such an environment. During one of the games I called, one of the players, a medical doctor assigned to the hospital there, was losing control so I told the captain of his team, another doctor, that we needed to work together to keep him from doing anything "stupid". The captain went and talked to the guy...and remember, he's a medical professional...and he went ballistic because I called him "stupid". I never did, but that's not what he heard. His perception of the situation was more real than the actual reality of the situation.

Moral of the story: I should have been more careful in my word choices to avoid such a confrontation. If I deal rationally, logically, carefully with behavior, I can more likely avoid an ugly human response. If I treat every person the same, I can keep the playing field much more level and the focus on the game where it belongs, not on differing values.

Thanks for listening to my long-winded response.

Thanks for taking the time to respond. After reading this, I think we're pretty well on the same page. However, I will give some more thought to the distinction between behavior and people you talk about. That's probably a distiction that I could be clearer about in my own mind. For my part, I make gut-level decisions about how I'm going to deal with behavior, and try to anticipate what types of behavior I may have to deal with based on my perception of what type of person I am dealing with. Of course, I'm judging "type" of person based on behavior, but I have found the another old axiom to be pretty accurate: By their fruits ye shall know them.

I agree, of course, that each person should be treated equally as far as being treated fairly but firmly, respectfully, cordially, etc. But how to deal with behavior, especially in a situation like a game, is much more of a case-by-case basis. And a significant factor in deciding how to address the behavior is the person. And this is starting to sound rather like the first paragraph all over again

I feel your pain with the "stupid" incident. I think that word has probably bitten most of us at some time In similar situations I try to use the word "unfortunate" or "regrettable" now. Not only does it avoid using the word "stupid" but subtly reinforces there being a negative consequence associated with the behavior.