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

[rockyroad]

So if I am reading Nevada correctly, he wants us to believe that someone with less experience who is NOT better than someone with more experience should be given important playoff games so that they can get experience...that makes absolutely no sense at all. There are a myriad of ways that the "younger" official can get experience and become better than the more experienced official...there are some people on this board who know me personally and have heard me say tell "younger" officials - "Come and get me". If you want my games then you need to be better than me and prove to the boss that you should have those games over me - and there are officials older than me telling me the same thing. It isn't about age, it's about how good the official is...

And as for Juggling Referee's comments, what that tells me is that you happen to know some older officials who shouldn't be working that level...bet you know some older officials who are still pretty freaking good at it, too!

[BBall_Junkie]

Originally Posted by Brad

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.

Probably couldn't keep up???? I know you. Right now you would get winded walking to the beer fridge that you have in your bedroom so that you don't have to walk downstairs to the kitchen. By the way, all, he also purchased a bar fridge for his third floor entertainment room so he wouldnt have to walk all the way to the second floor refrig!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHA

Decent shape my a$$. Quit reading this forum and get your butt to that yoga class.

This will teach you to call me out!!!!

[Dan_ref]

Doesn't Bball-junkie work for Brad? If so I commend him on creating exactly the proper manager/employee environment! Great work! I can tell you from my vast experience (but not enough experience to be declared ready for the soylent green factory! ) that it's very important to have a well-trained boss!

[BBall_Junkie]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Doesn't Bball-junkie work for Brad? If so I commend him on creating exactly the proper manager/employee environment! Great work! I can tell you from my vast experience (but not enough experience to be declared ready for the soylent green factory! ) that it's very important to have a well-trained boss!

Let's be clear.... I DO NOT WORK FOR BRAD!!!!

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BBall_Junkie

Let's be clear.... I DO NOT WORK FOR BRAD!!!!

Good attitude!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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.

Yep, sure is. I happen to think that both of those make good sense. There is no way that a 21 year-old is ready to control a HS environment.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yep, sure is. I happen to think that both of those make good sense. There is no way that a 21 year-old is ready to control a HS environment.

There are 19 and 20 year olds controlling professional baseball games.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by 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.

This is not just the opinion of one individual in his 30s. It is the stance taken by those who run the world's most popular sport. (The FIFA board which runs world soccer.) These people are not just young'uns either. They have significant experience in both sport and life. So how does that fit with your theory?

Why are people so resistant to this idea which could greatly improve officiating? Is it due to self-interest? Hmmmm....

Originally Posted by GarthB

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.

Ok, so how many of those officials take a fitness test each year? How are they tested? What drills are they put through? How is their "performance" graded? Are they ranked by their level of physical ability as well as what others think of their judgment, experience, and rules book test score?

For those in their 60's and 70's which you say should hang it up, are they still getting games? Why? It seems that they don't share your opinion of them. How do you feel when you have to work with these folks? Do you think that it is good for the HS game that they are out there?

What measures does your area take to assign games according to merit instead of merely by seniority?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yep, sure is. I happen to think that both of those make good sense. There is no way that a 21 year-old is ready to control a HS environment.

I guess a veteran that has fought in the war can handle bombs flying around them but they cannot handle a HS game?

You really need to stop characterizing everything based on age. I am sure there are many 21 year olds that could not handle a HS game, but I am sure there are many that can. Some kids younger than 21 have done more in their lives than someone that is 30.

The thing about officiating is some people either has it and others will never get it. Age has little or nothing to do with how good you are as an official.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by GarthB

There are 19 and 20 year olds controlling professional baseball games.

Yeah in the minor leagues with players who are barely out of HS. And I still believe that they are not ready for that. There is just not enough of an age gap for there to be the required respect factor with the participants. There isn't the proper sense of an authority figure.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by GarthB

There are 19 and 20 year olds controlling professional baseball games.

There are 19 and 20 year olds running divisions in the military during a war. I guess war is not as hard as blowing the whistle in a game.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I guess a veteran that has fought in the war can handle bombs flying around them but they cannot handle a HS game?

You really need to stop characterizing everything based on age. I am sure there are many 21 year olds that could not handle a HS game, but I am sure there are many that can. Some kids younger than 21 have done more in their lives than someone that is 30.

The thing about officiating is some people either has it and others will never get it. Age has little or nothing to do with how good you are as an official.

Peace

Of course, there is nothing that can compare to being in the hostile situation of a war zone. That life experience changes a person forever. BTW it is the general opinion of most veterans who served that they were just scared kids who had no idea what they were getting involved in.

But, since you brought up military service, do you know what is the maximum age for the draft or enlistment? How about the reserves? I'm sure that you are aware that they all have age limits. Why? Why don't they just go on performance and evaluate each individual?

Additionally, why does our country set an age limit to vote and to drink alcohol? Perhaps we believe as a society that people under those ages are not mature enough to make informed decisions in those areas. Why don't they evaluate each individual for those?

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why are people so resistant to this idea which could greatly improve officiating? Is it due to self-interest? Hmmmm....

Because it's a stupid idea, but then again I will turn 51 before starting my 7th season.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Of course, there is nothing that can compare to being in the hostile situation of a war zone. That life experience changes a person forever. BTW it is the general opinion of most veterans who served that they were just scared kids who had no idea what they were getting involved in.

But, since you brought up military service, do you know what is the maximum age for the draft or enlistment? How about the reserves? I'm sure that you are aware that they all have age limits. Why? Why don't they just go on performance and evaluate each individual?

You analogy does not fly. For one you said a 21 year old could not handle and there were example they could handle situations a lot tougher than a HS game. The Military is a completely different institution with completely different objectives. Officiating has little to do with the military. You cannot enter the military for medical reasons that you can officiate a basketball game. And the military does go on many performance evaluations. If you cannot do the job you will not be in the military very long. It is not like everyone that enlists in the military automatically stays in the military.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Additionally, why does our country set an age limit to vote and to drink alcohol? Perhaps we believe as a society that people under those ages are not mature enough to make informed decisions in those areas. Why don't they evaluate each individual for those?

Once again another flawed argument. There are age limits for officiating games as well. That age is not 21 in any state that I am aware of. In my state I believe you can be 17 to get a license if you pass several requirements. And so what? I know 20 year olds that are out of shape and fat. Their age has little or nothing to do with that. Once again you are putting an arbitrary limit on people based on a personal belief. It has nothing to do with fact and you have not told us why automatically at age 50 other than a prejudice that has little basis.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yep, sure is. I happen to think that both of those make good sense. There is no way that a 21 year-old is ready to control a HS environment.

Damn, I wish that I hadda known that back when I was 21.......and was in my sixth year of doing high school varsity games, in both football and basketball. And I had just became a white hat(Referee) in football too. Worked playoff games in both sports that year too. Geeze, now I find out that I wasn't ready for any of that. Bummer.

I also know guys that started doing T-ball games when they were 12/13 to make a few bucks, kept up with umpiring because they enjoyed it, and by the time that they hit 21 years old they had 8-9-10 years of experience. I'd like to be there, Nevada, when you tell people like that they're not ready to do a high school game.

We have a hard enough time getting and retaining officials in just about all sports. To arbitrarily tell good, solid officials who are both experienced and capable that we can't use them because they are either too young or too old is just simply asinine. To think that you can also set an imaginary date where an official automatically is unable to officiate further because it's the birthday, and instant and complete physical deterioration has set in, is just as asinine.