Patches

[tomegun]

I think the whole "Patched" terminology and language is ridiculous and many comments in this thread are the reason why. To say someone is going to get patched says nothing of their ability to officiate a game well. Whether someone wears a patch or not is no indication of their training or ability.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Whether someone wears a patch or not is no indication of their training or ability.

Agree. You evaluate the official, not the patch.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I think the whole "Patched" terminology and language is ridiculous and many comments in this thread are the reason why. To say someone is going to get patched says nothing of their ability to officiate a game well. Whether someone wears a patch or not is no indication of their training or ability.

To say someone is going to get patched says nothing of their ability to officiate a game well. Whether someone wears a patch or not is no indication of their training or ability.

Disagree to some extent. You have to be licensed in Illinois to ref high chool games, to be licensed yearly, you have to pass a test and attend a mandatory rules meeting and additionally attend a clinic I believe every other year. Does this make you a good ref? Of course not, but it does say something about one's training........... they've made the effort. I can only go by what I see in the Chicagoland area, and an unpatched official at the middle school level leaves alot to be desired and clearly indicates no effort for self improvement or a willingness to learn. That said, there are plenty of horrible officials that are patched only in an effort to collect a check.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by fullor30

To say someone is going to get patched says nothing of their ability to officiate a game well. Whether someone wears a patch or not is no indication of their training or ability.

Disagree to some extent. You have to be licensed in Illinois to ref high chool games, to be licensed yearly, you have to pass a test and attend a mandatory rules meeting and additionally attend a clinic I believe every other year. Does this make you a good ref? Of course not, but it does say something about one's training........... they've made the effort. I can only go by what I see in the Chicagoland area, and an unpatched official at the middle school level leaves alot to be desired and clearly indicates no effort for self improvement or a willingness to learn. That said, there are plenty of horrible officials that are patched only in an effort to collect a check.

I do know there are quite a few varsity games worked in Illinois without patches being worn. Some of the officials are from out of state and aren't looking to impress the IHSA since they aren't going to get post-season games anyway. Some work mostly college games.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I do know there are quite a few varsity games worked in Illinois without patches being worn. Some of the officials are from out of state and aren't looking to impress the IHSA since they aren't going to get post-season games anyway. Some work mostly college games.

It is not an issue of impressing anyone, it is a requirement. And when you do not follow requirements, your license might be in jeopardy if it is reported. And I can think of only a handful of times where someone working an IHSA game has not had a patch on. And I have worked in a pretty wide area. And even the “college officials” adhere to the requirement. Maybe I do not always see the need to follow some other things from time to time (like wearing a CCA jacket to a game for example), but the patch is usually a very common thing you see.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is not an issue of impressing anyone, it is a requirement. And when you do not follow requirements, your license might be in jeopardy if it is reported. And I can think of only a handful of times where someone working an IHSA game has not had a patch on. And I have worked in a pretty wide area. And even the “college officials” adhere to the requirement. Maybe I do not always see the need to follow some other things from time to time (like wearing a CCA jacket to a game for example), but the patch is usually a very common thing you see.

Peace

Wearing a CCA jacket to a high school game will always be interpreted (by me and my usual partners) as trying to "big-time." And it's a big no-no in Wisconsin, as is the side-panel shirt.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Wearing a CCA jacket to a high school game will always be interpreted (by me and my usual partners) as trying to "big-time." And it's a big no-no in Wisconsin, as is the side-panel shirt.

I have seen lower level officials wear a CCA Jacket. And I have seen officials that do not work any college ball wear CCA Jackets. I do not see it quite that way, but that is because these jackets are available to anyone that wants them no matter what you have done.

Peace

[just another ref]

When I first got my patch, after calling locally for 15 years or so without one, I pointed it out to a coach. "You know what this means, don't you?" "No, what does it mean?" "It means that anybody can get one of these."

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Disagree to some extent. You have to be licensed in Illinois to ref high chool games, to be licensed yearly, you have to pass a test and attend a mandatory rules meeting and additionally attend a clinic I believe every other year. Does this make you a good ref? Of course not, but it does say something about one's training........... they've made the effort.

Attending a meeting and going to a camp every three years does not prove that you are a good official. Many good officials go to several in one year and not just the basic requirements.

Originally Posted by fullor30

I can only go by what I see in the Chicagoland area, and an unpatched official at the middle school level leaves alot to be desired and clearly indicates no effort for self improvement or a willingness to learn. That said, there are plenty of horrible officials that are patched only in an effort to collect a check.

And this proves why having one means little or nothing in the bigger picture. It still takes years for an official to be competent. It still takes extensive training and understanding of the game. It still takes being able to keep up with the players by being in shape. All those things are not things you get by putting a patch on your shirt.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I think the whole "Patched" terminology and language is ridiculous and many comments in this thread are the reason why. To say someone is going to get patched says nothing of their ability to officiate a game well. Whether someone wears a patch or not is no indication of their training or ability.

Nobody's ever said anything to me about not wearing a patch. Of course, in Wisconsin we don't wear any.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Nobody's ever said anything to me about not wearing a patch. Of course, in Wisconsin we don't wear any.

You don't where you are, but I'm sure you've read someone say something like, "I think I will get patched next year" or something similar. My comment had to do with the fact that a patch alone, or the process involved with getting one, doesn't make an official a good official. This may be something that is very misunderstood by the fans.

[BillyMac]

On our local IAABO board, the "first" year official is considered a "probationary" member, which simply means that he, or she, has passed the written test before the season began, usually after attending about a dozen rules clinics. Once they pass the written test, they attend several mechanics clinics, after which they are eligible to accept subvarsity assignments, middle school, freshman, or junior varsity games. Toward the end of the season, they must pass a floor exam, after which they become full members of our local board, which is signified by the new member receiving his, or her, patch at our final board meeting of the season.

I agree with those who posted that an unpatched official can be a very good official, especially those who may have had previous experience outside our IAABO organization. I also agree that a patched official can be a very poor official, especially if he, or she, doesn't take advantage of camps, clinics, colleague critiques, etc.

Fans in our area seem to recognize the meaning of the patch. As is our custom, varsity officials must observe about three periods of the junior varsity game, that usually precedes our varsity game. We often hear fans reacting to a "bad" call by a "probationary" member, that the official "doesn't have a patch".

[Mark Padgett]

I think we should all wear this patch. I bet coaches would stop giving us crap.

[RookieDude]

...or patches like these....

http://www.friscohellsangels.com/

enter at your own risk...

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tomegun

You don't where you are, but I'm sure you've read someone say something like, "I think I will get patched next year" or something similar. My comment had to do with the fact that a patch alone, or the process involved with getting one, doesn't make an official a good official. This may be something that is very misunderstood by the fans.

I've worked in more states with patches than not. And when I'd move to another state it would be time for a new wardrobe.

But they give ANYONE a state patch in places where I live. You sends your money, you gets your patches. Worthless.