Massachusetts and Post-Game Handshake/Round 2

[sixer]

Perhaps you didn't read my post correctly. No, not perhaps.

Did you skip over the part about the kids, or choose to ignore it?

I've been officiating for some years now and have received a generous share of playoff games. But even if I KNEW I wouldn't work a playoff game, I'd do the same thing. Sometimes, you gotta do what you think is right. My fellow officials who choose what they think is right are free to do so. Does that mean I need to agree with them?

You, obviously, would do something different. Good for you. You would march in lock-step with any decision made by your state board. Again, good for you. It sounds like your primary concern is what others think about you. My primary concern is that high school students, KIDS, have officials who aren't looking to make a point about how evil the MIAA is.

IAABO is a great training organization and I'm proud to be a part of it. But I'm not going to let group-think sway my judgement.

Some of these high school students will play their last interscholastic game that means anything this year. The fact that some officials will choose self-interest over that is, to me, what's really sad.

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by sixer

The fact that some officials will choose self-interest over that is, to me, what's really sad.

If self-interest includes not wanting my butt sued by a parent whose kid just got sucker-punched during the pghs by a kid he'd been jarring with all night, or includes me not wanting to argue with an angry group of spectators about why that last-second, game-winning shot did/didn't make it before the final horn while the kids shake hands, then call me egotistical...

[sixer]

All fair points. Which would lead you to make a decision not to stay for the PGHS. I know that the argument has been raised that some assignors are not assigning officials who will not stay for the PGHS. But the assignors work for the leagues (and in the tourney, for the MIAA) and they have been asked to have officials stay.

As professionals, we all need to make decisions we feel are right. If one makes a decision not to stay, then the consequences (if any) must be accepted. If one chooses to stay, similarly, he/she must deal with the outcome. Because of this duality, isn't an important decision like this best left to individuals?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by sixer

All fair points. Which would lead you to make a decision not to stay for the PGHS. I know that the argument has been raised that some assignors are not assigning officials who will not stay for the PGHS. But the assignors work for the leagues (and in the tourney, for the MIAA) and they have been asked to have officials stay.

As professionals, we all need to make decisions we feel are right. If one makes a decision not to stay, then the consequences (if any) must be accepted. If one chooses to stay, similarly, he/she must deal with the outcome. Because of this duality, isn't an important decision like this best left to individuals?

No, for the simple reason that the state can then put ANYTHING in place it wants, provided enough "individuals" will do what they want. Sometimes strength in numbers is far more important than individual choice.

The PGHS is bad policy. Yours is the only state that (to my knowledge) has expected its officials to stick around for such a thing. Other states recognize that there are other adults whose main job is to supervise the sportsmanship of their players.

I believe the game is for the players, which is why I think the officials should leave quickly and quietly once the game is over. There never should be any opportunity for the officials to be the center of attention once the game ends. And trust me, the first time the game ends on a controversial call, all kinds of abuse (from coaches, spectators, and possibly players) will be heaped on the officials. If this is in the playoffs and the team heaping abuse is done, how will the state take care of that?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Other states recognize that there are other adults whose main job is to supervise the sportsmanship of their players.

Bingo! Whose job is it to see that sportsmanship standards are maintained after a game is over? The people who have that basic responsibility as part of their jobs-the coaches and administrators-- are trying to shift their responsibility on to the officials.

It's exactly the same as if something happens during a game. The first response is always that the officials let things get out of hand.

[ma_ref]

As the IAABO boards in MA are technically not unionized, then it is an individual decision. However it becomes tough to decide what to do based on misinformation coming out of both camps. MIAA says that tourney games are covered under their liability policy. Good, so if I get sued for the reason above, they're going to pay my attorney fees? Well they don't exactly come out and say what is covered, or who is covered, so if the s**t hits the fan, then I'm guessing good luck getting a dime from the MIAA. Does MIAA mention that their own board of directors and their coaches committee voted against the PGHS? Nope. MSBOA says all the boards are united against this. Hmmm...really? Then how do you explain the 700+ officials that enrolled directly with the MIAA. Yes, there are a few non-IAABO boards in MA that enroll individuall, but I'd be shocked if a clear majority weren't IAABO. Local IAABO boards are telling their members they'll be suspended if they stick around for a pghs. Ok, then how come there have been plenty of instances of people sticking around, and not 1 suspension (to the best of my knowledge)? I know of at least 1 board that encouraged their members to enroll directly with the MIAA.

This whole things stinks, and I agree with you that the kids are losing out. But I don't think what the refs are asking for is unreasonable. We're not asking the MIAA to park our cars and hold the front door open for us. We're asking for basic peace of mind knowing that in a worst-case-pghs scenario, we're covered legally and reasonably protected from bodily injury. Our local boards/MSBOA have failed us for not working this out in a timely fashion, and for the misinformation distributed to its members. When did our local board/MSBOA ask us how we wanted to proceed once it became apparent MIAA wasn't going to budge? Oh yeah, that's right...they didn't.

[sixer]

ma_ref, you get it. I'm not sure either side is necessarily right or wrong.

As for the comments about strength in numbers and ethics (I think someone needs to get a dictionary out and look up what that means), the assumption that because MSBOA is making a decision therefore making it "right" is not a settled issue. Perhaps the strength in numbers rests with those who disagree.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

MIAA says that tourney games are covered under their liability policy. Good, so if I get sued for the reason above, they're going to pay my attorney fees?

I believe IAABO is the training/certification body in MA. If this is the case then I doubt that even your own insurance policy (home owner, NASO, whatever) will cover you for these games since you are going against IAABO's policy & procedure.

I'm not one to usually bring up the threat of a lawsuit when discussing these things but in this case I think it's safe to say that all bets are off once you knowingly go against the advice of the body that trains you. And not just for the post game handshake.

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I believe IAABO is the training/certification body in MA. If this is the case then I doubt that even your own insurance policy (home owner, NASO, whatever) will cover you for these games since you are going against IAABO's policy & procedure.

I believe you are correct. We were told that additional insurance had to be purchased through our carrier for this type of coverage. I think they had come to an agreement with the insurance company, but the coverage was never actually purchased, as the pghs issue was never fully resolved and members continue to be advised not to stick around.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

I believe you are correct. We were told that additional insurance had to be purchased through our carrier for this type of coverage. I think they had come to an agreement with the insurance company, but the coverage was never actually purchased, as the pghs issue was never fully resolved and members continue to be advised not to stick around.

And what I'm saying is no sane insurance company will cover you even if you plan to not stick around for the pghs. If you work these games you're violating approved procedure and that opens you up to personal liability at ANY point in the game. I'm not a lawyer but I think any decent civil attorney can make this point and get a judgement for their client.

So to you guys who think you'll be insured...call your insurance company and ask them if they will sell you the "I am guaranteed to lose in court" policy. Ask them if they'll throw in the "I drive drunk" coverage as well.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I believe IAABO is the training/certification body in MA. If this is the case then I doubt that even your own insurance policy (home owner, NASO, whatever) will cover you for these games since you are going against IAABO's policy & procedure.

I'm not one to usually bring up the threat of a lawsuit when discussing these things but in this case I think it's safe to say that all bets are off once you knowingly go against the advice of the body that trains you. And not just for the post game handshake.

The insurance liability was resolved a while ago. IAABO went to the insurance carrier, who agreed to cover the post-game handshake for regular season games for an additional premium. The MIAA agreed to pay the additional premium, which I heard is about $1 per official. According to my board treasurer, $13 of our dues is for insurance. The MIAA said it has insurance for its tournament.

But don't let this insurance liability issue cloud the real issue. This is about power and control. The MIAA wants to run its tournaments and its games its own ways. Many officials had no problems this year staying an extra 30 seconds for the handhake. Others did as they always have...and left the gym at once.

My IAABO board has given full backing to officials -- regardless of their choice. There was no directive that we had to stay. My assignors said the same thing: the choice was mine.

It does appear that the state tournament will use 2-person crews for the early games because there are not enough qualified officials to work 3-person games until the quarter finals. Two-person is the norm for the vast majority of regular season games here, but the state tournament went to 3-person crews for all games two years ago.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

The insurance liability was resolved a while ago. IAABO went to the insurance carrier, who agreed to cover the post-game handshake for regular season games for an additional premium. The MIAA agreed to pay the additional premium, which I heard is about $1 per official. According to my board treasurer, $13 of our dues is for insurance. The MIAA said it has insurance for its tournament.

Well I just read that ma_ref thinks it has not been resolved, and it's still my opinion that any decent lawyer will rip you guys to shreds if something bad happens at any point in the game regardless of your insurance coverage or whether you planned on staying for the pghs or not.

But it's not my problem, so good luck to you all.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by sixer

Did you skip over the part about the kids, or choose to ignore it?

Neither. I completely disregarded it as being a very weak excuse used to cover up your singular lack of ethics.

Do what you have to do. I don't have to officiate with you. Hell, I feel like I should go wash my hands after just typing this out for you.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Neither. I completely disregarded it as being a very weak excuse used to cover up your singular lack of ethics.

Do what you have to do. I don't have to officiate with you. Hell, I feel like I should go wash my hands after just typing this out for you.

Word.

[Adam]

What I don't understand is the purpose behind asking the officials to stick around. The state thinks they've removed the jurisdiction of the officials by fiat, in order to avoid the possibility of a stupid coach getting himself a post-game T that costs his team the game. (Now this stupid coach can say what he wants with impunity.) So, without jurisdiction, why have the officials stick around? Warm and fuzzies?