Evaluations

[RonA]

I am going to go on a rant here. Feel free to respond (or not) it if you like.

Never more than now has there been a need for an ongoing, fair system of referee evaluation as well as coach, facility and crowd evaluation. For the official to be impartially evaluated it must be done by an observer who has NO stake in the game being evaluated. A coach should NEVER be the one to do the evaluation of an official, because all he/she will remember at the time is whether his/her team won the game and the one or two calls he/she feels cost his/her team the loss. Nevermind that the official wasn't the one who couldn't hit free throws, hit the ocean from a boat(make an open shot), or was the one who repeatedly turned the ball over. In the coaches mind the official was to blame if the team lost. What a chapter needs is a fair and balanced system whereby the evaluator is a neutral party, with nothing at stake to handle these critical evaluations that are ONGOING. ONCE IS NOT ENOUGH!!! It should also be requisite upon the officials who have the following game(where applicable) to complete an evaluation of the previous crew. These are important and beneficial to everyone, from the up and coming to the much more seasoned official, because there are always things that others can spot to be corrected that you may not see. This information could be put in a refs file for the coaches to look at the picking meetings, in order to better assist the coaches selections when they need to inquire about partcular officials. Evaluation of coaches are also necessary, due to some of their antics. How do they handle their bench, are they always out of their coaches box, are they constantly chirping (*****ing, moaning, whining, crying) about everything at the officials during the game? These issues have a negative affect on the officials' game and are cause for concern! The facility is also something that needs to be evaluated. From the MS to the HS is an APPROPRIATE place to change and to have a pregame provided, especially when mixed crew male/female officials are involved?

'Nuff said!

[JRutledge]

Let me say this about this topic. Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not, coaches will always have a say with officials and who is doing a good job or who is doing a bad job. Now some coaches have more credibility than others. Some have say in whether you work at their school. Some have say who is allowed to work playoff games. Either way, they have a say in some way. It can seem frustrating when you think that the coach that hates everyone is giving that type of information to an assignor, but to think coaches will not have a say is very naive.

In my area schools and coaches are apart of the process to decide who works playoff games, they just do not have the deciding "vote" or final say who works where and when.

Peace

[tomegun]

One thing you might want to consider is the person evaluating an official. There is no assurance that the person anointed as the evaluator will actually be impartial between two or more officials and actually know what they should be looking at. There probably is no perfect way to evaluate officials.

[boiseball]

After having moved to a new state twice in the last 4 years, I have a an equally strong opinion regarding the flawed structure of referee evaluation and game assignments. Is there no answer, no good solution. I think the only real solution is that you have to have leadership that is incredibly selfless. You have to have assignors who passionately believe in helping good officials get assigned to the games they deserve, who are willing to devote time and energy to finding out who are the best and most deserving officials. Leadership like that is rare, in my opinion. I am confident that there are several guys in every association who have the talent to recognize the various grades of officials. Unfortunately, those guys are also the ones who are working lots of games, have families at home, and just may not have the desire to put that talent to work.

I moved to Cleveland and got lucky. Great assignors who gave me opportunities to show my stuff and then found me great games to work. Now I move to Idaho and find the exact opposite. Assignor has yet to see me work. Spent an entire year working subvarsity, with lower rung officials who neither had the power or interest in helping me get recognized. Went from working all varsity top level basketball and some small college ball to working not even one large school varsity girl or boy game.

I took a similar approach both times I moved -- lots of emails, meet the assigner face to face, take all the games given, letter of recommendation explaining my level of experience, even game tape available upon request -- but drastically different results from the two moves.

If you have not been in the situation where you were screwed out of games you deserved to be doing, and for a long period of time, they you just cannot understand the frustration of it all. This is not about paying your dues. I paid my dues several times over but because of a flawed system, you are completely at the mercy of the professionalism and time-devotion of your assignors. I have been on the otherside, where my buddy was the assigner and I was able to get games that would challenge me.

Any system where you are powerless to say something, for fear of getting buried even deeper, is a very flawed system. Unfortunately, because I am new, there is no option to get in there and try to fix the problems myself. An attempt like that would only blow up in my face.

wow, done venting, I think I earned at least one vent after a year dropping from college ball to jv ball

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by boiseball

If you have not been in the situation where you were screwed out of games you deserved to be doing, and for a long period of time, they you just cannot understand the frustration of it all. This is not about paying your dues. I paid my dues several times over but because of a flawed system, you are completely at the mercy of the professionalism and time-devotion of your assignors. I have been on the otherside, where my buddy was the assigner and I was able to get games that would challenge me.

I was kind of feeling you until you made this statement. Why are you entitled to work games because you say you are qualified? I understand that you might have had success in one place, but you are not entitled to anything because you move to another place. Also in my experience assignors work games too. So to see you work they either have to not work a game or they have to be in two places at the same time. I know you are frustrated, but if your attitude was a little better, maybe someone would help you out. Because if you came to my area thinking you deserve something that would not make me want to help you either.

I was at the NCAA Baseball Meeting this past weekend and Dave Yeast who is the NCAA Director of Umpires and assigns all umpires for all D1 post season games made an interesting statement. He said that at this point he has no idea who is going to work what and when. He cannot stand it when someone says something like, "I worked a Super-Regional last year, and this year should be my turn." Or he said it upset him because someone was injured or retired umpires would say, "That should be my spot." Now if that is the attitude you have given off (I do not know I am not there), it might not help you. Just work hard and contact the right people and that is all you can do. If you are truly talented, I am sure someone will help you.

Peace

[boiseball]

Why are you entitled to work games because you say you are qualified? I understand that you might have had success in one place, but you are not entitled to anything because you move to another place. Also in my experience assignors work games too. So to see you work they either have to not work a game or they have to be in two places at the same time. I know you are frustrated, but if your attitude was a little better, maybe someone would help you out. Because if you came to my area thinking you deserve something that would not make me want to help you either.

. . . he said it upset him because someone was injured or retired umpires would say, "That should be my spot." Now if that is the attitude you have given off (I do not know I am not there), it might not help you. Just work hard and contact the right people and that is all you can do. If you are truly talented, I am sure someone will help you.


When I get to a new area I just ask to have someone come watch me work and then schedule me accordingly. A good evaluator, in my opinion, can see right away what level of a referee you are. Plus, I bring a letter of recommendation from the top assignor of my former area. The attitude of "that should be my spot" only begins to rear its ugly head as you start to get well into the season and all your efforts to prove yourself have been rebuffed. Just putting your head down and watching your season slowly waste away so that no one will think you are too over-the-top or so that no one thinks you have an ego, well that is easier said than done. I am ambitious, a quality that usually serves me well in officiating. but not in this situation.

[Scrapper1]

Just some random thoughts. Hopefully, to share a little of my perspective.

Originally Posted by RonA

Never more than now has there been a need for an ongoing, fair system of referee evaluation

Never more than now? The problem is worse than it's ever been? I agree that some objective basis for evaluation would be nice; but it's not like this is a new problem. It's always been this way for amateur referees. Just 20 or 25 years ago, your chances of moving from high school to college ball -- and even from low-level college ball to D1 college ball -- were based simply on whether you knew the assignor. There was not even such a thing as camps and try-outs. There were were very few commissioners who employed evaluators. And at the HS level and below, it was worse. One person could control a whole county's worth of HS assignments, and your schedule could depend on whether that person liked you.

I'm not trying to poo-poo your frustration. I'm just trying to assure you that it's not a new problem and not simply your problem.

For the official to be impartially evaluated it must be done by an observer who has NO stake in the game being evaluated.

That would be nice, but that person isn't going to do it out of the goodness of his heart. Who's going to pay for an observer to spend 2-4 hours a night in a HS gym, taking notes? Not the coaches. Not the conference. Very likely, not the officials' association. It would be great. Most of us would welcome it. But it's a financial issue, and it's a tough nut to crack at the HS level.

A coach should NEVER be the one to do the evaluation of an official, because all he/she will remember at the time is whether his/her team won the game and the one or two calls he/she feels cost his/her team the loss.

Two things to say about this. First, I agree with you that the coach shouldn't be allowed to evaluate the officials; but for different reasons than you state. It's not so much that they only remember wins and losses, although that's probably true. But many of them (most) have literally no idea what the official is doing or looking at on the floor. Position, angle, mechanics, judgment are completely foreign to the coaches. So they should not be given a voice about how they think we performed.

Second, despite the fact that most of them have literally no idea what we're doing out there, the coaches will ALWAYS have a say in who works and where. The assignor has to please the schools/conferences/coaches that hire him/her. Therefore, the assignor will do (roughly) what the schools/conferences/coaches want. That will never change as long as the assignor is accountable to someone other than the officials.

What a chapter needs is a fair and balanced system whereby the evaluator is a neutral party, with nothing at stake to handle these critical evaluations that are ONGOING. ONCE IS NOT ENOUGH!!!

Again, the financial question. In a perfect world, I agree with you. But how much of each game check are you willing to donate to the Observers' Fund?

It should also be requisite upon the officials who have the following game(where applicable) to complete an evaluation of the previous crew.

Again, in a perfect world. . . But not all officials want to help younger officials out. Some officials (even some good ones) just want to do their game, get their check and go home. That is what they're there for, after all. I'm not saying that's a good attitude to have; but we live in the real world. Not all officials are excited about helping others to move up and "take their games".

This information could be put in a refs file for the coaches to look at the picking meetings,

But as you've already pointed out, they only remember if they won or lost anyway. Why will they care what's in a folder. "I don't need to read his file. He screwed us last time we had him."

Evaluation of coaches are also necessary, due to some of their antics.

I think this is done by AD's. It's no more appropriate for officials to evaluate coaches than it is for coaches to evaluate officials, and for some of the same reasons.

Ok, I already wrote way too much. I know you're frustrated. And believe me when I tell you that I've been through the same frustration. The bottom line for me was that I had to tell myself, "I have no control over coaches, ratings, or postseason selection. I'm just going to go out and work my best game every night. Eventually, if I'm as good as I think I am, somebody will notice." I try to control what I can control and not worry about what I can't control.

[Chess Ref]

Scrapper wrote "The bottom line for me was that I had to tell myself, "I have no control over coaches, ratings, or postseason selection. I'm just going to go out and work my best game every night. Eventually, if I'm as good as I think I am, somebody will notice." I try to control what I can control and not worry about what I can't control."

Scrappers attitude is the attitude I have. And lord knows I need it this week. GJV game. I had to explain to my partner we have no 5 second count on closely guarded unless the girl is just standing there with the ball. Also needed to convince him no foul shots on team control fouls. My favorite personal instruction was explaining to him then when,as lead, he points to the floor I think it's a 2 and not a 3. We had to stop the game 3 times caused he pointed to floor as lead and I gave the opponent 2 points-he meant 3. So last night he comes strolling in the gym in all his glory to do the Varsity game. I was taken aback slightly but felt good when I saw him now raising his hand to signal a 3 to his partner.
Not that I think I am ready for V games, well some of them I could do, but I need to stay focused mentally. Which for me means incorporating the attitudes and thinking Scrapper referred to.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Chess Ref

I had to explain to my partner we have no 5 second count on closely guarded unless the girl is just standing there with the ball.

NFHS rules?

[Chess Ref]

Here in California, at least in our section, we use modified rules on closely guarded for the girls. We also use a shot clock. The girls also have no 10 seconds in the backcourt. The modifications come from page 28 of the California Basketball Officials Associations handbook.

It's true, it's true.....

[jmkbball]

Boiseball,

While you've already had some objections to your post, I would have to share almost all the frustrations you offer.

In my case I first worked games almost 25 years ago and because I had played in college, gradually worked up to better games over those 4 years. I then stopped officiating to raise a family and a business but watched both my kids play HS and then college ball.

I have the time and interest now to run three or four nights a week, to try to help kids and the game. In coming back to officiating four years ago, I found that some things had changed -- at least in our area.

I've noticed that more new officials seem to work today because of the money and that a surprising number (at least to me) have not had much (in some cases, no) previous participation with competitive basketball.

I'm sure this will be popular ?, but it also seemed that more officials today come from professions where merit is not the first consideration in advancement – longevity with the system is. And that seems to carry over to the way some chapters are set up and games assigned.

[zebraman]

There is no perfect evaluation system. Even an independent observer system is imperfect because it's almost impossible to find observers that everyone can agree on. Also, most observers are friends with at least some of the officials (so they would have some bias).

I have seen several evaluation systems. They all have flaws. I feel fortunate to have never been in a system that has coach input. I know some officials who are evaluated partly by coaches and they are scared to give a technical foul for fear that the coach will rate them poorly. You should see the bench decorum (actually, the LACK of bench decorum) at those games.

Our local association has had 4 different ratings systems since I have been in the group. None of them were perfect, but all of them did manage to put the best officials near the top and the weakest officials near the bottom, IMHO.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by zebraman

There is no perfect evaluation system. Even an independent observer system is imperfect because it's almost impossible to find observers that everyone can agree on. Also, most observers are friends with at least some of the officials (so they would have some bias).

Then there is the issue of personal preference and bias. What works for one official doesn't always work for another. So a single observer, with his/her personal experience, is going to approach those evaluations from his/her point of view. If your style and the evaluator's don't mesh, how will that affect the rating?

Throw multiple evaluators into the mix (and how could a reasonably sized association be well served by just one evaluator?) and you get different points of view, different weight given to different attributes, etc. It's a practically intractable problem.

Here the varsity officials are required to turn in 10 evals of other officials each season in order to be eligible for the post-season. I spent some time recently perusing those evals (the names are removed from public view, but the evals are available for all to see). It's very plain to see how different evaluators appreciate different criteria, and use different point scales in evaluating the same categories, and finally come up with very different overall ratings.

I had to chuckle recently as I read an evals I received. In that game there was a, shall we say tense moment, with a coach in which I could have T'd him, but managed to fairly quickly bring him back from the edge. One varsity official questioned why I didn't T him. The other, in his written eval, gave me kudos for my patience in handling the coach.

A completely objective evaluation is a mythical creature.

[BillyMac]

RATINGS GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION

REACTION TIME
Reacts quickly enough to make a decision at the moment of its occurrence.
Makes quick and positive decisions, especially with respect to the “close ones”.
Takes the time to prevent an error from being made.

INTESTINAL FORTITUDE
Remains consistent when calling violations or fouls - without regard to the score, whom it may hurt, or how it may effect future relations with the coach.

CONFIDENCE
Exhibits a confident manner i.e. attention to detail, alertness, firmness, and timeliness of his/her reaction to a situation.
Has a resonant, strong voice that is supported by proper mechanics for purpose of clarification.

POISE
Has a quiet influence on the game that relieves tensions and creates a steady effect upon contestants (both players and coaches alike).
Has control of his/her emotions.
Is courteous and polite.

CONSISTENCY
Is consistent in all calls regardless of situation or point of time in the game. For example consistency in the determination of a block vs. a charge.

JUDGMENT
Uses fair and unbiased judgment and common sense in applying the rules of the game.

COOPERATION
Has the ability to work effectively as a “team” with his/her fellow official
Is not overly sensitive to constructive criticism.
Has a sense of loyalty to fellow officials, a willingness to share the responsibility and avoids attempts to shift the blame.

KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPER APPLICATION OF THE RULES
Presents a thorough knowledge of the rules of basketball
Appears to make his/her decision with consideration to the effect the calling, or equally as important, the not calling of a rule violation will have. (i.e. advantage / disadvantage)

MECHANICS OF OFFICIATING
Utilizes proper mechanics, up-to-date techniques and procedures as detailed in the Officials Manual.

APPEARANCE AND CONDITIONING
Is in excellent physical condition and exhibits hustle and energy
Official’s uniform and overall appearance is neat, clean and well kept