Massachusetts and Post-Game Handshake/Round 2

[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?