IHSA Officials
 

It looks like the IHSA will go to online rules interpretation meetings. Check your webpage for more information.

Peace

That's one of the best ideas since sliced bread. (Although I'm not sure how the IHSA was involved in bread-making :confused:.) Anyway, this eliminates the need for travel to the meeting site and the time involved away from home. One of our local associations has always hosted a rules meeting, but it was usually the last or second-to-last meeting in the state. One year I had to miss our meeting, and ended up having to drive an hour and a half to the last available meeting. Anything that help us get the requirements in, and still spend more time at home, I'm all for it.

Now, any chance we can referee a game from our living room, through the internet? THAT would be an improvement.

In your case, that's probably true.

I believe Mr. Schwenk just gave you the finger again.

Rut,
When did you find this out?:eek:
RR

I noticed yesterday. The information is on the top of the IHSA Website.

Peace

So, do like this idea or not? I'm not so sure that its such a good idea for newbies.

Generally, I think its a bad idea. In both, New Jersey and Pennsylvania both coaches and officials attend the interpretation meetings. Its a chance for new faces to be seen and old faces to be reacquainted. Also, particulary for new officials, I like this early season commitment to physically showing up. I would rather have an exception for those with legitimate reasons for not physically being present.

That is not a functionality of our system. Rules meetings were all over the place and for some they had to travel. We see new and older officials at association meetings and camps. And we do not have to report to specific sites either. We go to whatever site we chose to and what date we wanted to.

Peace

The reason I do not like this idea as much, is because I would like to be able to ask questions and confirm information vague rules and mechanics that tend to come up. That being said it worked rather well in football. The difference is in football you work with the same group of people on a regular basis. It does not work that way in basketball.

Peace

Didn't he get hit by a trolly?

Yea, he was. But it was what he did after he was hit that's so remarkable. He sure had some strong, er, appendages.

I was thinking more of a weak will.

He probably didn't even have a will. How much money could he have after only playing 1 game in the majors?

Oh, wait a minute...that's not what you meant.

I wonder if weak wills run through families?

Are you worried? I heard he had an illegitimate child running around Illinois officiating basketball games.

Let's see...weak will, strong appendages...

Uh, oh.

Ooh, wait - born in 1914. Whew, just missed.

Yeah, one out of three is close.

Hey, that'll make you a good living hitting in baseball.

As long as it's over more than one game.

(Now I'm beginning to see why the IHSA wants me to stay at home...)

Because you're a solid ambassador?

Obviously. :D

Hey, no where in the police report is there any mention of her hitting him.

Maybe a little slapping to try and wake him up.

(It's amazing how we can take the simplest of threads and flush it right down the crapper...)

Nope....<b>walking</b> around Illinois officiating basketball games.

Just because he was too pussilanimous to file charges.

Oh, wow, glad that got straighted out. I'd hate to be spreading false rumors.

1 outta 3 is ok. That's because 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

I won't be darkening the great state of Illinois this year (I got tired of the travel and my schedule is good enough in Wisconsin).

We are also doing the online meeting for hoops, second year. No accountability for actually watching the video yet as we STILL don't have individual logins to the WIAA Officials Center (all use the same username and password).

I like it. I travel for a living and every year I have 1-3 meetings I have to drive long distances for because I am on the road working during the 2 weeks in Wisconsin they actually hold the meetings. Naturally, I try to do more business travel during the offseason so I can work more games during the season.

That said, the WIAA has been extremely cooperative in this area. This year I had a private meeting arranged with one of the interpreters to meet the requirement. Last year during baseball season I ended up driving from Madison to Sterling, IL to get to a preseason meeting.

Good Odds ...
 

So, to somehow try to take this thread back in the actual direction that it started before the interesting detour we took :(, how are they going to make sure we actually watched the thing? Is there a code or something like the stickers at meetings now? You football guys who have been through it fill us in.

You will have to log on to your IHSA Webpage and watch the video. After the video is over, you redeem credit and I believe answer some questions that if I remember we not related to the actual video or rules being covered. It worked well for the most part. I wanted some clarification in a couple of areas. I only got that clarification when going to an actual rules meeting held by one of my associations.

Peace

For the most part I like the idea. Again, saves me another night of travel. I also like being able to ask questions. However, as long as they provide us with an e-mail to contact someone then I have no problem.

For football, we didn't have to answer any questions. We just watched the video and clicked at the bottom to redeem credit. Obviously, one could just click on the bottom and not watch the video.

Just looked...

It appears you can probably count on baseball and all sports being online this year.

I have an UPDATE!!!!
 

Your local official's association can still have a rules meeting if they request one through Kurt Gibson.

I do not know if anyone realizes this, but we will get Rulebooks this year from the IHSA and the packets were mailed out yesterday. I expect people to start getting the stuff this weekend and through the next couple of weeks.

Peace

Are we getting rule books is Basketball this year?

I guess I cannot read. Yes, basketball will get rulebooks this year and next year we take a year off.

BTW, there is some talk that the NF might go to a bi-yearly rule change process. It does seem that people in the NF think they change rules just to change rules. ;)

Peace

Rut,
How dare you put into words what other people think?:)

I try. :D

Peace

Dang!!! Two weeks ahead of schedule.... :)

Honestly TJ, I receive the books around this time of the month of September the last few years. I am almost certain I have received the packet before my birthday which is a few days away.

Peace

Hmmm, well I guess the snail mail must really be...snail-like. :p

Rut......

I heard a rumor that advancement testing will be done online also. Have you heard anything? I'm going for C

You mean the Part 2 Exam? If that is what you are talking about, then that is not a rumor that is a fact.

Peace

True.

That's great. Much more convenient and cost effective.

Thanks

Do not get so excited. You do not have hours to take the test. Once you start the test you have a 2 hour limit. You can take a break and come back to the test, about 5 days to completely finish the test. Also the questions are scrabbled. Your #1 question might be someone's #53.

I am excited. Wow, five days to complete? Law boards aren't that lenient. I just appreciate not having to drive somewhere to take it.

You mean the test answers are in crossword style? :p Note: no picture of a Scrabble board.

Gasp!

What's that gonna do to the people who come here every year at this time and make their <b>ONE</b> post of the year pleading with somebody...anybody... to supply them with <b>ALL</b> of the answers in numerical order for either the FED Part 1 or 2 exam?

It's just not fair, damnit! After all, they only want the answers for <b>study</b> purposes. They'd <b>never, ever</b> dream of cheating. <b>"Never, ever"</b>, I tell ya.:D

I realize this is going to tick you off, but the NCAA has an online test and it is encouraged to go over the test with other officials. Not only that I have heard Hank Nichols and Dave Yeast (Baseball Coordinator) openly advocate taking the exam with other officials in the room or at the computer. The NCAA has a similar testing process without as many questions and if I remember no time limit.

Actually it is encouraged by the IHSA to get help if needed (especially in football) because a lot of issues in football were crew decisions. This actually makes the test a little easier than previously where you could not get help on the test at all while taking the test (other than open book). To get to the highest level (Certified), you now can take an open book test, where before it was closed. That sounds a little easier than when I was taking the test.

I know you throw out the term "cheating" all the time. It is only cheating when you are violating a specific rule disallowing very specific practices. If you ask me the process is a lot easier than it used to be.

Peace

The goal obviously is have officials learn. It certainly is easier to have an open book on a C test. Our association as do many others, go over part one as a group and review answers. Like anything else, you get out of it what you put in.

I am not upset about the current process at all. I just think it is easier. And if I had to go through this process in football (which involves many group ruling and is much harder from a rules standpoint), I would have been a C long time before I actually was. That being said, if someone wanted help I would be happy if someone wanted my help to go through the test. After all, the test does not mean a damn thing if you cannot referee. The test alone is not going to make you work more varsity games.

Peace

Yup, and I'll continue to do so for every single unprincipled ethics-lacking clown that comes here just wanting the bulk exam answers instead of wanting to <b>discuss</b> individual questions, situations, etc. There is one helluva big difference between discussing the exam questions and just regurgitating a list of supplied answers. The difference is that you might actually learn something using the one method; you don't learn diddly-squat memorizing provided answers.

Being able to attain a higher certification level without having to learn the appropriate rules is just wrong imo. They're just cheating themselves, but they don't think of that.

It is kind of a pet peeve with me...along with midgets, BoSox fans and anything to do with Notre Dame football.

Every request is not cheating. Everyone does not take every test for the same reasons. Everyone is not a regular to know that kind of information. And taking a test does not mean anything. It never has and it never will. When coaches start asking us what our test score is, I will buy into that logic. They never do or even know we actually had to take a test, so who cares what someone asks about a stupid test. You need to do more reading of a rulebook anyway than when you have to take a silly test.

Peace

I'm just going to jump in with a quick observation - doesn't the IHSA require a minimum test score to keep your license every year? If that's the case, the test score does mean something. And I know of officials that have copied the answers just so they don't have to go through the process of discussing the rules, or looking them up on their own. So, in that case, they really are cheating.

In this case, I agree with the Really Old One, in that there are people that come here just to get the answers, not to discuss and learn about the answers. There's a diffference.

I will concede that you do need a certain test score (80/100), but the test is open book and we have weeks to turn in the test. The online version of the test has been available since Tuesday and we do not have to turn in the test until the middle of November. We have just short of two months to take the test. There are association meetings during that time and other events that people can get the answers for the test or some idea what the answers are long before the season starts. It is not against any rule to get the answers by everyone to work with others to get those answers.

As I said before, I have a group of individuals that we go over the test every single year. Only a couple of us do the actual background work and just about every person in our little group of about 10-15 people has not taken the test or reviewed the test before our meeting. This is also very common all over the state with officials I know all over the state. And if the state was totally against this reality, they could completely change the process and require officials to take the test at a set site on a specific date and everyone that wanted to get through the process would be willing to go through that process.

I have a friend that is retired and has some flexibility and applied for a license in another state in the southeastern part of the country (I am not giving the state). He took their test and just based on his test alone, he got varsity games and even has the opportunity to work the post season all based on his test. He had to take their state run test (not the NF test). He had to go down to the state and take the test on a specific time and he never had to attend a camp or prove that he had ability of an official. Now this person is older and once was a very good official, but he is declining on that side of his career (he would admit this) and he was shocked that he was put in such an important situation all based on a test. Now you want to talk about retaining officials that is a great way to get officials that have worked hard their entire career to have an "outsider" possibly pass them or be eligible for those kinds of assignments without having to prove it more than a test.

Retention of officials is a problem in our state and officials are getting older and older even when you include the age of many starting their respective sports (Their not starting in their early 20s anymore. The starting age is more like in the 40s now) and if you want to make it harder to keep officials, start requiring officials to have to take tests in that manner and Illinois will have a bigger problem then other places do across this country.

Not everyone takes the NF Test the way many here do. I suspect that many of those requests are innocent people trying to get answers to a test they did not have to take. After JR goes off on them, that becomes rather obvious if you look at their state's requirements. Of course we have the people trying to get over, but you do not need to come here to do that either. ;)

I look at it simply this way. It is not illegal when there are no rules against it. The same applies to the rulebook. We cannot make something illegal because we do not like the practice.

Peace

I almost forgot, I got my packet today. And yes, we have rulebooks. :D

Peace

Still nothing here.

Also, I heard talk that the score needed to promote to the C level is going to go up since you are able to take the exam online. From what I've heard, I believe this will happen next year. Has anyone else heard this?

December 4, 5 & 6
 

Change that to 3 days. :D

You just have to have all your recommendation letters in before November 17. It should be easier for winter sports than it was for the fall sports to accomplish this requirement. At least school is in session.

Peace

You have to get a 90% to get your C. To get your R, you still need an 85%.

Peace

Oh, ok. So it already went up? Was it previously 85% to promote to C?

It was up about Tuesday I believe.

Yes it was 85%.

Peace

Works really well for me. Im thrilled. :)

I sit down with a senior official and go over it. It helps me understand. He gives examples.. its great. I feel more prepared too IMO.

To Make A Long Story Long ...
 

Here, on my local Connecticut board, we've gone through a few different procedures regarding taking the annual IAABO Refresher Exam, which counts ten percent toward our individual rating, and ranking.

Many years ago, we were all expected to take the exam, individually, as an open book exam, at home, over a two week period. This was when the internet was nothing more than a twinkle in Al Gore's eye.

The way it always turned out was that some officials, usually some of our more veteran officials, would somehow gain access to the IAABO answer sheet, I'm not sure how, but those answer sheets always seemed to be available to a few officials. In some cases those officials with the answer sheets would simply fill in the IAABO answers and submit their exams. In other cases, those officials would give the answers to some of their close friends on the board, who would then simply fill in the IAABO answers and submit their exams. In yet other cases, officials would meet in small, informal groups, having already filled in their own answers on their open book, take home exam, and go over the answers together, comparing their answers with the IAABO answers, that, as I already stated above, seemed to be available to a few officials every year. When the meeting was over, all the officials in this small, informal group, would have the IAABO answers on their answer sheet.

Back then, I was on the rating committee that was in charge of correcting these submitted exams. For those of you not familiar with the annual IAABO Refresher Exam, it's contains many hard, tricky, often poorly worded, questions, with answers that, very often, hinge on a single word in the question. When we were using this procedure, and I remind you, "officially" we were all expected to take the exam, individually, as an open book exam, at home, the scores fell into two groups. Those who did not follow the "official" procedure, and had access to an answer sheet, either individually, from a friend, or after participating in one of these small, informal, groups, had almost all the questions correct. The reason I say "almost" is that every year the international IAABO organization, for reasons that I could never fathom, makes at least one mistake on the answer sheet, and I'm not talking about a mistake in interpretation, I mean an outright mistake, like two plus two equals five. The group of officials that followed the "official" procedure, that is, without any access to the answer sheet, usually got many questions incorrect, I told you the exam is very difficult, even as an open book exam, with many tricky, often poorly worded, questions, with answers that hinge on a single word in the question, in other words, it's a poorly constructed exam.

Our rating committee saw the disparity of the scores, and the unfairness, with these two groups of officials, so we came up with a new procedure, in which we "officially" encouraged officials to get together in informal, small, study groups, to go over their answers together, without acknowledging the existence of the availability of the answer sheets. We kind of covered our eyes to the existence of "the elephant in the room", i.e. the existence of these answer sheets. We did this for several years, and noticed a change in the scores. Now, a much larger group of officials would get "almost" all the questions correct, but there was still a sizable group that would get many questions incorrect. Looking into this, our committee discovered that some of our newer officials had trouble, not yet having made friends on our board, finding an informal study group to participate in.

Our newest procedure actually sets up about a dozen "official" study groups, held at different locations, on different dates, in a two week time frame, with at least one study leader, usually a member of our executive committee, who has the answer sheet. We must complete our exam, at home, on our own, which is our "ticket" into one of these groups. We go over each question, discussing the answer, before getting the correct answer, which often leads to further discussion. Those of us who participate in these "official" study groups must sign in at these meetings, and by doing so, get full credit for the exam. We don't even have to submit our exam.

Attendance at these study groups is voluntary. There are some officials who choose not to attend, and they can submit their individual exam to the rating committee for scoring. Again, these exams fall into two groups. Some have many incorrect answers, again a testament as to how difficult, and poorly constructed, the exam is. Another group has "almost" perfect scores, "almost" because these officials got the answers from some of their friends who had attended a study group, and the "mistakes" from IAABO answer sheet showed up in these scores.

Our latest change will try to stop the group of officials who do not actually take the exam, who do not attend a study group, and simply copy the answers from a friend. At our final business meeting last season, we tried to pass a constitutional by-law change that would make it mandatory to attend one of these study groups, again with a completed exam needed as a "ticket" into one of these meetings. Those that attend one of these study groups would get full credit, again counting toward their rating, and ranking, on the exam. Those who didn't attend a study group would get no credit, a major hit, ten percent, against their ratings, and ranking. The constitutional by-law change didn't pass after a vote, because someone brought up the fact that an official who is unable to attend a meeting due to a health issue, family emergency, or business emergency, will have no option, the way the by-law change was written, but to get no credit for the exam. Next year this change will be voted on again, but with a option that in such emergency circumstances, the executive committee can vote to give full credit to officials who are unable to attend a study group as a result of such an emergency circumstance.

What's our purpose in regard to the exam? First, to get everyone to actually take the exam, individually, as an open book exam. The second purpose is to get everyone to attend a study group to get involved with discussions about the exam questions, and answers.

To make a short story short......
 

Study groups, open-book exams, etc. etc. do <b>not</b> test an official's true rules knowledge imo. The only test that will really do that is a closed-book, time-limited proctored exam. Anything else...you're just kidding yourselves.

Just my probably very unpopular opinion....:)

Intent And Purpose ...
 

I agree. The purpose of our local procedure is not to test an official's true rules knowledge. We know that our procedures don't do that. The purpose is to get everyone to start the season by opening up their rulebook, which some haven't opened since March, or earlier, and to get involved with discussions about the rules, especially the new rules.

Why do you assume that your opinion would be very unpopular? I wouldn't mind taking a closed-book, time-limited, proctored exam every year to earn the right, and privilege, of officiating interscholastic basketball games. It would certainly make me more knowledgeable of the rules. After twenty-seven years, I think I have a pretty good handle on the rules, but I can always improve (see my recent thread regarding technical-type, technical fouls), and a closed-book, time-limited, proctored exam every year would certainly force me to become more knowledgeable than I am presently, and, perhaps, give me more confidence as an official.

Test only test what you know on the test. Tests do not test your ability to be an official which is much more than knowing how long the net is or how wide the lines on the floor are. And if you think a test is going to prove that you can referee, then you are kidding yourself. As I have said, you can know those insignificant rules, but you cannot make a foul call. Or you cannot recognize an obvious carry. I am in the process of watching tapes of games for a class I am going to be running and I do not think it is rules tests that makes an official not see a player be fouled or identify when a foul occurred.

Peace

The Cord Of The Net Has Less Than A 120 Thread Count. Penalty? Citation Please ...
 

Which is why the Refresher Exam only counts 10% here in my little part of Connecticut. Colleague ratings count 80%. Attendance at meetings counts 5%. Availability to the assigner counts 5%. This overall rating, averaged over a three year period, determines your ranking, which determines the level, and number of games, that you will be assigned.

But I still think that knowledge of the rules is one important part of being an official. You always hope that you don't have to use 2-10 in a game, but if, and when, you do, you better know how to correct an error, because if you don't do it right, you can bet that the coach, fans, local sportswriters, local cable televison announcers, and your buddies, over a cold adult beverage, after the game, will give you a hard time.

This May Describe A Good Official ...
 

Here's what we use to rate our colleagues. Note that only one guideline deals with rule knowledge. With four officials at a site, two varsity, and two junior varsity, each of the four officials should get three ratings based on that particular game.

RATINGS GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION

REACTION TIME
Reacts quickly enough to make a decision at the moment of its occurrence.
Makes quick and positive decisions, especially with respect to the “close ones”.
Takes the time to prevent an error from being made.

INTESTINAL FORTITUDE
Remains consistent when calling violations or fouls - without regard to the score, whom it may
hurt, or how it may effect future relations with the coach.

CONFIDENCE
Exhibits a confident manner i.e. attention to detail, alertness, firmness, and timeliness of his/her
reaction to a situation.
Has a resonant, strong voice that is supported by proper mechanics for purpose of clarification.

POISE
Has a quiet influence on the game that relieves tensions and creates a steady effect upon
contestants (both players and coaches alike).
Has control of his/her emotions.
Is courteous and polite.

CONSISTENCY
Is consistent in all calls regardless of situation or point of time in the game. For example
consistency in the determination of a block vs. a charge.

JUDGMENT
Uses fair and unbiased judgment and common sense in applying the rules of the game.

COOPERATION
Has the ability to work effectively as a “team” with his/her fellow official
Is not overly sensitive to constructive criticism.
Has a sense of loyalty to fellow officials, a willingness to share the responsibility and avoids
attempts to shift the blame.

KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPER APPLICATION OF THE RULES
Presents a thorough knowledge of the rules of basketball
Appears to make his/her decision with consideration to the effect the calling, or equally as
important, the not calling of a rule violation will have. (i.e. advantage / disadvantage)

MECHANICS OF OFFICIATING
Utilizes proper mechanics, up-to-date techniques and procedures as detailed in the Officials
Manual.

APPEARANCE AND CONDITIONING
Is in excellent physical condition and exhibits hustle and energy
Official’s uniform and overall appearance is neat, clean and well kept

I never said that rules knowledge was not important. I just said that a test is not going to prove that someone knows or does not know the rules.

And I can tell you until you face a correctable error situation, most people are not going to know they handled this correctly until after the situation. Or they would have to see it take place. And I have never seen a NF Test ask on how it is applied, but point out what is a correctable error situation. You need to know how to apply the rule than just know what situations are correctable error situations. The problem I see in rules mistakes are often not just what the rule says, but what you do after you make an application.

Also Billy, you can list a bunch of things or this canned information, it does not mean that all of that stuff is correct or accurate in everyone’s eyes. We do not even agree on the importance of a rules tests and different states and associations have different approaches on how to train or what they require their officials to do to maintain a license. I am about to start teaching a basketball class and I attend camps in different areas and this list has never been used to illustrate how to officiate. That suggests like anything in life people have different opinions on how to be successful and not to be successful.

Peace

Just One Fifth Of The Third Smallest State ...
 

"I have never seen a NF Test ask on how it is applied, but point out what is a correctable error situation." There has always been at least one correctable error application question on the IAABO Entrance Exam, at at least a couple of correctable error application questions on the IAABO Refresher Exam.

"The problem I see in rules mistakes are often not just what the rule says, but what you do after you make an application." You hit the nail right on the head. Especially with the IAABO Refresher Exam, the correct answer to the question very often hinges on, not the violation, or the foul, but what happens after the violation, or foul. That often tricks up a lot of people.

"We do not even agree on the importance of a rules tests and different states and associations have different approaches on how to train or what they require their officials to do to maintain a license. That suggests like anything in life people have different opinions on how to be successful and not to be successful." I don't believe that I ever suggested that what I post is appropriate for everywhere in the world where basketball is played under NFHS rules. Case in point:

My first post in this thread: "Here, on my local Connecticut board..."
Second post: "The purpose of our local procedure is not to test an official's true rules knowledge..."
Third post: "Which is why the Refresher Exam only counts 10% here in my little part of Connecticut..."
Fourth post: "Here's what we use to rate our colleagues..."

These are the procedures and guidelines that we use. Not only don't I think that they would be appropriate for all officials groups, there are officials on my local board, who don't even think that they work for us, and would like to change them.

I'm sure that you'll probably be passing out handouts at your training sessions. I would love to see those, and use what I can, with proper source notations, at out training sessions that begin Thursday night, and continue through the month of October. Why reinvent the wheel? If you've got something, especially something that might be unique, that works for you, and your local, or state, organization, why not share it with other officials organizations? Why keep something that works a secret?