The 3 versus 2 fallacies, a mini-rant

[Rich]

I am still in a state where we work most of our varsity games 2-person. Last night, matter of fact, was the first time we got 3 checks to work 3 person in a varsity game in Wisconsin in our three years of working games 3-person here.

It was a girls game. Evenly matched teams, but certainly not a huge amount of running. And this always gets brought out -- what do we need three for, heck we barely break a sweat in these games?

Why, oh why, is that relevant? Officiating is done best with the EYES, not with the legs. Why would we even use how much we need to run as criteria for working 3 over 2? And yet I hear this most often from OFFICIALS.

Clearly there are other fallacies at work, including the one where we'll "call more fouls" because we have more officials. Nonsense. I'm applying advantage/disadvantage just as stringently in a 3-person game as when I work 2. And we still hate unnecessary game interrupters in 3-person as much as 2-person.

But that's where we are where I live and why I work 10-15 games a year in Illinois where they work 3-person in all varsity games. And my little 3-person crew has been working 10-15 games and collecting only 2 checks for it every year, too. It makes for a better officiated game and frankly, I'd be happy to never work another 2-person game again.

Because my state won't mandate three (give the school districts 2 years to figure out the money and then mandate it), I never see us consistently working 3. And yet, the state managed to get a 5th football official consistently assigned for varsity games about 10 years ago.

End rant.

[Nevadaref]

Rich,
I feel for you. I'm sorry that you are stuck with 2 except for a few games.

NV has had 3 officials for BV and GV regular season games for 10 years now. We also use it for regional and state tournament contests.

As for your thoughts:
1. Yes, being in better position, having better angles, and not being physically fatigued allow for better officiating.
2. I do believe that, at first, more fouls and violations are called with 3 officials. This is because more illegal activity is observed, especially off-ball. The teams will soon realize that this stuff is getting seen and knock it off. Then the number of calls will drop and the game will be an even cleaner one than with only 2 officials.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

2. I do believe that, at first, more fouls and violations are called with 3 officials. This is because more illegal activity is observed, especially off-ball. The teams will soon realize that this stuff is getting seen and knock it off. Then the number of calls will drop and the game will be an even cleaner one than with only 2 officials.

Also keep in mind that in two person, you are bound to call fouls that aren't really fouls, just because we didn't get as good a look as we would in 3 person, so this will offset some of the hidden fouls that 3rd official sees too.

[wfd21]

Here we do a single varsity game on any given night. Most are two man with a few three man here and there. Most freshman and JV games are double headers. They went away from varsity double headers several years ago. All tourney games are three man.

[Adam]

I think a lot of it depends on the pay scale. In Iowa, you didn't make as much for the 2nd game as you did for the first if you did a double header. In subvarsity, for example, it was $35 for one game and $55 for two. I don't know what the pay was there for varsity, because it varied by school, and the only varsity games I did were double headers.
Here in Colorado, each game has its own pay. Therefore, schools that are close to the city I live it generally get a fresh set of refs for each game. Also, while most varsity games are three man, there are some schools we serve that for whatever reason get two officials. Colorado has set a minimum pay for officials, and it's different for 2 vs. 3 whistle. Varsity pays $44 for 3, and $52 for 2. In the JV game I did 3 man, they just wrote 3 checks totaling the standard pay for a 2 person game.

[mj]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

I am still in a state where we work most of our varsity games 2-person. Last night, matter of fact, was the first time we got 3 checks to work 3 person in a varsity game in Wisconsin in our three years of working games 3-person here.

It was a girls game. Evenly matched teams, but certainly not a huge amount of running. And this always gets brought out -- what do we need three for, heck we barely break a sweat in these games?

Why, oh why, is that relevant? Officiating is done best with the EYES, not with the legs. Why would we even use how much we need to run as criteria for working 3 over 2? And yet I hear this most often from OFFICIALS.

Clearly there are other fallacies at work, including the one where we'll "call more fouls" because we have more officials. Nonsense. I'm applying advantage/disadvantage just as stringently in a 3-person game as when I work 2. And we still hate unnecessary game interrupters in 3-person as much as 2-person.

But that's where we are where I live and why I work 10-15 games a year in Illinois where they work 3-person in all varsity games. And my little 3-person crew has been working 10-15 games and collecting only 2 checks for it every year, too. It makes for a better officiated game and frankly, I'd be happy to never work another 2-person game again.

Because my state won't mandate three (give the school districts 2 years to figure out the money and then mandate it), I never see us consistently working 3. And yet, the state managed to get a 5th football official consistently assigned for varsity games about 10 years ago.

End rant.

Amen to that Rich. We worked a 3-person boys game last night and it would've been suicide doing it 2-person. I am beat today and I can't imagine how I would feel had we not had the extra man.

The only good thing about 2-person in WI is that at least we are still assigned games as a crew.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mj

Amen to that Rich. We worked a 3-person boys game last night and it would've been suicide doing it 2-person. I am beat today and I can't imagine how I would feel had we not had the extra man.

The only good thing about 2-person in WI is that at least we are still assigned games as a crew.

Problem is, there are officials out there that would say that if you can't work these games just as well 2-man you don't belong on the games.

One more tonight. Fifth 3-person game in 4 days -- consolation game of a Christmas tourney. We're taking 2 checks for 3 officials. Third time this season, so tonight I'm the one working for free.

Thursday and Friday I was in IL working holiday tourneys and, of course, we got paid for 3. They wouldn't do it any other way. And they have the same "budget" issues any other state and their school districts have.

[BktBallRef]

It's not a budget issue, I don't think. Most of the "southern" states use 3 man exclusively. I don't our school systems have anymore money than systems in northern states.

All varsity games are mandated by the NCHSAA to be officiated by a 3 person crew. Our local association uses 3 man crews for all JV games as well. How can you expect less experienced officials to learn the mechanics and move up if it's not offered to them?

However, we do some other things differently. We work a GV/BV doubleheader during regular season nights. I think other associations may work JVB/VB or JVG/VG. We receive $75 for the doubleheader. I believe the fee goes up to $85 next year. You guys may receive more based on working a single game times 2. But it maybe a compromise you have to reach to get 3 man full time.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

It's not a budget issue, I don't think. Most of the "southern" states use 3 man exclusively. I don't our school systems have anymore money than systems in northern states.

All varsity games are mandated by the NCHSAA to be officiated by a 3 person crew. Our local association uses 3 man crews for all JV games as well. How can you expect less experienced officials to learn the mechanics and move up if it's not offered to them?

However, we do some other things differently. We work a GV/BV doubleheader during regular season nights. I think other associations may work JVB/VB or JVG/VG. We receive $75 for the doubleheader. I believe the fee goes up to $85 next year. You guys may receive more based on working a single game times 2. But it maybe a compromise you have to reach to get 3 man full time.

I'm not really interested in working GV/BV or JV/V (I did the GV/BV thing when I lived in Tennessee and the games are played on different nights here) -- how do younger officials get trained then? How many officials would pace themselves knowing there's a varsity game right behind? And frankly, I'm already working enough 5PM games during baseball and football seasons.

But I would be willing to work for $40 a game for 2-3 years with the pay sliding up back to what we make now. Don't know how many officials would go for that. Nobody has ever asked us or tried this out, I don't think. Without the state stepping up and making it (forcing it to) happen, it's going to remain a patchwork. Some conferences will go 3 and some won't.

[MadCityRef]

Hey Rich,
This is my first season straddling the IL/WI border. Amen to your thoughts.

I think a pay reduction is a good proposal. Perhaps suggest three for boys, remain at two for girls, with a climbing scale. Maybe the assignors could cut their percentage too.
The puzzler to me is why WI schools want to take the time to find refs for underclass games. It's my first area where that's the case. Making those games easier to assign could be part of the mix.

But then no one asks us.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

But I would be willing to work for $40 a game for 2-3 years with the pay sliding up back to what we make now. Don't know how many officials would go for that. Nobody has ever asked us or tried this out, I don't think.

This is the way NV did it. We currently receive $49.50 per official on a 3-person varsity game.


Edit: Sorry, I was off by 50 cents in our game fee.