In case you haven't hear...Joey Crawford

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Ok, old guys, fire away!

I'll repeat my impression of you.

You're Old School with a rule book. That's just another example.

'Nuff said.

[TRef21]

Originally Posted by Coach Jinx

I post on here to give crap to officials who always want to talk about how bad fans are, teams are & coaches are. I am not only a high school official, & A VERY, VERY, VERY GOOD ONE but I also a guy who does a lot of things in my association to help mentor younger guys & help train & retain guys. I pop off on here because I don't like a lot of older officials or guys who always want to put other people down. If a guy makes a mistake he should be accountable. What joey did was not a mistake it was bad wreckless judgement [In my opinion only].

Like they said post your schedule man. Even better if are so great you must tape every game, so why not post a clip of you in action. Live up to what you say. If you are that good you must be working college. From your post you only mention high school ball.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

My recommendations for basketball officiating age limits would be:
NBA = 50
NCAA = 55
NFHS = 60

Ok, old guys, fire away!

Here is some interesting data:

I can name multiple people from different local boards in more than one sport who are "older" and have told me first hand that "they are too old for these assignments," when referring to varsity level sports.

Their physical ability is what you expect of people their age. They are of ages very similar to what you've posted: 60.

So basically, some refs are loosely saying they shouldn't be getting certain assignments. What does that say?

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Here is some interesting data:

I can name multiple people from different local boards in more than one sport who are "older" and have told me first hand that "they are too old for these assignments," when referring to varsity level sports.

Their physical ability is what you expect of people their age. They are of ages very similar to what you've posted: 60.

So basically, some refs are loosely saying they shouldn't be getting certain assignments. What does that say?

This says that not everyone is the same. But anyone with half a brain already knew that.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by GarthB

This says that not everyone is the same. But anyone with half a brain already knew that.

It says a hell of a lot more than that.

[Brad]

I guess I just think that an age cap is just arbitrary. The age of two individuals doesn't have as much to do with their abilities as an official as does their physical health.

Dick Bavetta is 66 years old and I wouldn't want to run eight miles with him (as he does every day) -- I probably couldn't keep up and I am in decent shape.

On the flip side, there are some officials barely in their 40s that have trouble running in a high school game.

So, to me your age is not as important as all of the other factors. And I don't think it will be that effective against political power and cronyism -- you're going to have that regardless of how old the officials are!

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

First in response to Brad, you are one year older than I am, not that that matters. To RookieDude, I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, to learn that you are 50! I would have guessed closer to 40.

Anyway my opinion about an age cap is not something that just came up, I have been considering it for a few years. My background as a soccer referee played a large part in forming it.

There are always a few people who can maintain their physical fitness, eyesight, and otherwise good health as they age. However, from my personal observations of officials in various sports on both coasts of this country, it appears that these individuals are the exceptions, not the norm. RookieDude, congrats, you seem to be one of those folks. We also have a tremendous official here who is now 60.

As I have already stated FIFA, the world governing body of soccer, has an age limit of 45 for working international contests. In the past couple of years this has forced the retirement of the man who was widely considered to be the best referee in the world--Pierluigi Collina from Italy. There was a brief discussion of rescinding the age limit or granting him an exemption. However, he stated publically that to protect the good of the game that should not be done. Of course, soccer is clearly more demanding physically of an official than basketball, but the concept carries over.

My main point of contention with the older officials is that too many of them get a free pass from a fitness standpoint and they serve to clog up the system while their presence on certain games prevent the next group of officials from gaining valuable experience.

Consider the choice for a second round playoff game between two officials of roughly equal ability. We'll call them A and B. A is 55 years old and has worked twelve years of postseason. B is 35 and has worked three years of postseason. Some would argue that going with the more experience official is appropriate. On the other hand there are others who state that it is unfair, and a catch-22 situation, to the younger official to use this criterion as how does he get more playoff experience if the older guys keep getting the nod over him based on that? If the older official is chosen, then what happens the next year when the situation with these same two officials would be 56 and 36 and the playoff experience would be 13 to 3? What carries more weight--that extra year of seniority or that extra playoff experience? At what point does an assignor make the other choice?
It is my opinion that unless the younger officials are given the opportunities to be in the pressure situations and gain that experience, then they will not improve as much or as quickly as they could and there will be a lack of people ready to step in when the older group calls it quits. In short, the older officials are actually slowing their progress.

Lastly, while an age cap would certainly eliminate a few qualified individuals from consideration, it more than makes up for it in the opportunities that it creates for up-and-coming refs and by providing a safeguard against abuse of political power and cronyism. I have personally witnessed officials put on state tournament games who are long past their prime only because of their connections with those who make the selections. This is not right. Their fitness is never subjected to tests. It is unfair to the participants and not good for the game to have these appointments made, and when they do not perform, it hurts the overall image of officiating.

Others are sure to disagree, but my opinion is in line with Collina's that it is proper to sacrifice a few for the good of the many. There is always a balance that must be found between experience and the declining effect of age on an official. I feel that age limits help find that point.

My recommendations for basketball officiating age limits would be:
NBA = 50
NCAA = 55
NFHS = 60

Ok, old guys, fire away!

All the fuss - and it's basically the same "old boys network" argument.

And I suppose the "younger" officials are less political, selfish, and prone to cronyism?

Naive, to say the least.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

1. There are always a few people who can maintain their physical fitness, eyesight, and otherwise good health as they age. RookieDude, congrats, you seem to be one of those folks. We also have a tremendous official here who is now 60.

2. As I have already stated FIFA, the world governing body of soccer, has an age limit of 45 for working international contests.

3. My main point of contention with the older officials is that too many of them get a free pass from a fitness standpoint and they serve to clog up the system while their presence on certain games prevent the next group of officials from gaining valuable experience.

4. Consider the choice for a second round playoff game between two officials of roughly equal ability. Some would argue that going with the more experience official is appropriate.

5. Lastly, while an age cap would certainly eliminate a few qualified individuals from consideration, it more than makes up for it in the opportunities that it creates for up-and-coming refs and by providing a safeguard against abuse of political power and cronyism.
Others are sure to disagree, but my opinion is in line with Collina's that it is proper to sacrifice a few for the good of the many. There is always a balance that must be found between experience and the declining effect of age on an official. I feel that age limits help find that point.

6. My recommendations for basketball officiating age limits would be:
NBA = 50
NCAA = 55
NFHS = 60

1. Pretty good argument against the point you are trying to make.

2. So what?

3. This sounds like an overgeneralization to me. An alternative would be to put emphasis on having a mixed crew, containing some blend of youth with greater experience.

4. You talked a lot in this paragraph without saying much. The key phrase here, as I see it, is "roughly equal ability." Somebody, somewhere, has to make the decision as to which one is better, and age should not enter the equation. This should work like any other area of sports, where the old guy can get bumped by even a rookie, BUT the reverse of this is also true.

5. Horsefeathers

6. Johnny Carson once said something to the effect: "Old is 15 years older than you are now." Interesting that you are slamming the doors on the first group when they reach an age close to that same margin over your own age.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Brad

I guess I just think that an age cap is just arbitrary. The age of two individuals doesn't have as much to do with their abilities as an official as does their physical health.

So, to me your age is not as important as all of the other factors. And I don't think it will be that effective against political power and cronyism -- you're going to have that regardless of how old the officials are!

Gee, I hope that you're not saying that you shouldn't establish rules for the norm when there is no norm. Why, that kind of thinking is totally......non-Nevadian. Heresy! Heresy, I tell ya!

Personally, I think that knowledge and experience factor in also. Good officials learn how and when to move to get into position, and also how and when to move to stay in position. And moving or maintaining position usually means walking or trotting imo. The only time that sheer speed is necessary is on fast breaks and quick steals going the other way. And even then, I don't care how young and quick you are, you are not going to beat the break or steal down court to get into perfect position. At lead, you usually end up beside, or slightly ahead of or behind the ball. And at that time, your experience lets you get into the best position possible, not the best possible position.

You just can't compartmentalize officials by age imo. Everybody is different and they have to be individually assessed that way.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

My recommendations for basketball officiating age limits would be:
NBA = 50
NCAA = 55
NFHS = 60

Ok, old guys, fire away!

I'm sure that at one time in your life, you thought that the folks in "Logan's Run" had a pretty good idea for society. Now that you're over 30, you still think the idea is good, but that the age limit should be changed.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I'm sure that at one time in your life, you thought that the folks in "Logan's Run" had a pretty good idea for society. Now that you're over 30, you still think the idea is good, but that the age limit should be changed.

Great movie btw. Sort of along the same lines, it's hard to believe that the timeframe of the movie Soylent Green is 2002.

"It's people. Soylent Green is made out of people. They're making our food out of people. Next thing they'll be breeding us like cattle for food. You've gotta tell them. You've gotta tell them!"

(btw Bob we might be making a mistake discussing these old movies in public...wouldn't want anyone to think we're "old people")

[FrankHtown]

Get a bottle of Grecian Formula, and you can ref till you're 98.

[MajorCord]

I posted this in another thread, but it seems appropriate here as well.

Check this 87 year old official out.

http://cbs2chicago.com/video/?id=303...ort.com&cid=29

[GarthB]

A fact of life is that we are all products of our experiences. Thus, our view of the world is different in our 20's and 30's than it is in our 40's and 50's.

Age isn't a learning experience, experience is a learning experience. What the younger set will discover eventually is that there is no universal truth about aging or about physcial ability at any age.

I learned to respect the physical prowress of those older than me when a 70 year old kicked my a$$ in a pick-up racquetball game at the Y when I was 22.

There are several 60+ and a few 70 year olds in our basketball association. Some should hang it up. Some know their limitations and work an appropriate level of ball, and some can run rings around a 20 year old.

Age isn't the issue. Performance is the issue. Any blanket policy would rob the activity of some excellent officals at all levels. Of course that would mean more games for 20 year olds. Maybe that's what this is really about.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Age isn't the issue. Performance is the issue. Any blanket policy would rob the activity of some excellent officials at all levels.

Amen.

Similarly, it would be just as ridiculous imo to put in a policy that you couldn't officiate D1 or NBA games before the age of...say...30 or 35 because you aren't experienced or mature enough yet to work at those levels until then. Or maybe even establish an age requirement that you must be a minimum of 25 years old before you can officiate a high school varsity game, for the same reasons. That would be Nevadian logic of the finest kind also.

Think that your son, the up-and-coming baseball umpire, would like that one, Garth?