Frank Deford in Referee Magazine

[ChuckElias]

Frank Deford gave an interview to Referee in which he basically calls for full press access to officials. Anybody have any thoughts on this? Is there really any legitimate reason that officials shouldn't be allowed to talk to members of the general press ever?

Obviously, you don't want an official to seek out the coverage to promote him/herself, but you could deal with those individuals on a case-by-case basis as you needed to.

Any thoughts?

Chuck

[BktBallRef]

I think that officials would be able to help eliminate some of the misconceptions about officiating, rules, and definitely controversial plays or rulings. If Phil Luckett had had an opportunity to expain what actually happened in the Detroit/Pittsburgh coin flip, it would have helped clear the air and proved that his call was correct. Yet, the powers that be have always stayed away from this type thing.

I'm not sure what Deford means by "full press coverage." I don't see a need for a news conference after every game. But it wouldn't hurt for a pool reporter to be picked to ask questions or a statement to be released explaining a given situation.

[rockyroad]

I think Deford is dead wrong on this one...maybe there should be a press liason type person at the different levels who handles rules questions and clears up misconceptions, but I certainly don't want to have to answer reporters questions about calls...look what they do to coaches - "Why did you run that play?" "Given his poor performance up to this point, why was player X on the court at this point in the game", etc., etc...would you want reporters asking you questions like "The 4th foul on such-and-such was a real turning point in the game. Did you consider that before blowing your whistle?" What an ugly can of worms would be opened up...

[Danvrapp]

Originally posted by rockyroad
What an ugly can of worms would be opened up...

Well spoken!

[Mark Dexter]

For the NCAA Tournament, a pool reporter is allowed to go to the officials' locker room to get a clarification if a fight (or similar situation) occurs or if a call is made which the basketball committee thinks it would be beneficial to explain. The calling official does not have to give the rule interpretation if he does not want to - either the R or the alternate would in this case.

[rainmaker]

Certain types of press coverage would be disastrous, but couldn't we turn someone like BktBallRef or Padgett or DeNucci loose on Billy Packer? Forget the game -- the commentary would be entertaining enough!

[RecRef]

Just read this board and McGriff’s board and I think you will see why I think it is a terrible idea. Granted, the boards are populated by all levels of refs. Even taking that into consideration, how many times do we have 100% agreement?

All we need is one ref to say one thing about a situation and another one to say something different.

[JAdams]

I would be very careful about endorsing full-blown access by reporters to any sports officials. Reporters ask tough questions for a living... they do it every day. We officials are no more skilled in answering sneaky "why did you call that" questions than they are in officiating the contest. A knowledgeable official as an interpreter? Fine. The on-the-floor officials? Not me.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by rainmaker
Certain types of press coverage would be disastrous, but couldn't we turn someone like BktBallRef or Padgett or DeNucci loose on Billy Packer? Forget the game -- the commentary would be entertaining enough!

I am would be honored for such a position, but I might want to strangle Packer. The funny thing is that, for years now, Hank Nichols has addressed the press before the start of the NCAA season about rules, mechanics, etc., and it seems that his presentation goes in one ear and out the other. One year Hank, because of other commitments, could not make the presentation and a conference supervisor (a retired Big East official, and still very active as a H.S. and college interpreter), gave the presentation. He said that Packer was the biggest jerk of them all. His position is, that Packer will say anything to cause a controversy, when it comes to officiating.

[Bart Tyson]

Good point Mark. I don't think the press is interested in the officials point of view. They have access to many people who can explain the rule. i.e. Officialforum.com, Referee Mag. Many people can explain any situation in a game. This would only give the press an opportunity to catch an official saying something wrong. There is no such thing as a perfectly called game. Many opportunities to hammer officials and get them to say "yes i blew it". Then the press would be calling for penalties for the officials.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by rockyroad
would you want reporters asking you questions like "The 4th foul on such-and-such was a real turning point in the game. Did you consider that before blowing your whistle?"

Personally, I would love the opportunity to answer asinine questions like the one above. My reply would be something like, "If that player fouling out was such a terrible thing to happen to his team, why don't you ask him why he committed his fifth foul? Or ask his coach why he was still in the game early in the third quarter with four fouls. That's a real brain-teaser.

Hey - he committed it, all I did was point it out to everybody when he did it. That's my job. If you think I am supposed to change the rules of the game depending on how many fouls a certain player has, then petition the NF rules committee to put in a rule saying that a fifth foul cannot be called on a "star player" unless the foul results in reconstructive surgery for the player who got fouled. I'm sure they'll seriously consider a suggestion like that from a real expert as you. And, by the way, someone just puked on your shoes.

Now get out of here before I throw a chair at your ugly face. Oh yeah, I'll apologize if you can tell me the four elements needed for an over-and-back violation. You do know we have violations in basketball, don't you? Also, please tell me what paper you work for since I have to wrap some fish on the way home. Thanks, Brainiac. Next question."

I think that went well, don't you?

Actually, appointing a spokesman, er, I mean spokesperson (dammit, Juulie, you got me again) to speak for all the refs in an area or association is a great idea. I vote for Dave.

[Don in MN]

The pool reporter concept, as it works in the NCAA (I work as a sports information director at a D-III college), is just fine. If there is a controversial call, a pool reporter (or host SID in some instances at a tournament) should be able to get comments from the officials.

The officials are participants in the game, just like the players and coaches. If a controversial call occurs that has an effect (either direct or implied) on the game, officials should be made available to a pool reporter to answer questions.

I've seen it work on a handful of occasions (I've worked as a volunteer on media relations staffs for several NCAA D-I tournaments in the Twin Cities, including last year's men's Final Four), and often, an officials comment can help to clarify what could be a disastrous situation. The more information available, the better for everyone involved.

[chels]

It would be a disaster. Once the media gets ahold of you,
they would keep on needling you until you said something out of frustration. One wrong answer and it would then involve the supervisor calling you before he/she would have to respond to the media. Nothing good can come of it!

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
Actually, appointing a spokesman, er, I mean spokesperson (dammit, Juulie, you got me again) to speak for all the refs in an area or association is a great idea. I vote for Dave.

I don't commit the foul, I just point it out when it happens!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by rainmaker

I don't commit the foul, I just point it out when it happens!

Hey - that's my line!

Actually - I really wouldn't mind talking to the press. I do it all the time anyway, due to my involvement in civic affairs and politics in my city and state. I do have some experience in this area.

After college, I went to broadcasting school and worked in radio doing news and sports. I did play by play of HS football and basketball, NCAA basketball and hockey plus semi-pro baseball.

And no, I never presumed to know the rules better than the officials. I left that to the color commentator. In fact, in one HS football game, my "sidekick" said that he expected a team that just scored to take the lead with two minutes left in the game would probably try an on-side kick.

I just stared at him. It's a good thing we weren't on TV.

And - before Juulie gets a chance - I'll say it. Yes, I have a face made for radio.