I recently read a column stating that the NBA has the worst pool of officials among the four major sports leagues. This guy has no idea what he's talking about, but it got me to thinking about comparing the officials of the different leagues. If you have thoughts, and especially if you ref more than one of the "major" sports, maybe you could list how you would rank the officials in each of the leagues, from best to worst.

Without giving it a whole lot of thought, my preliminary ranking would go as follows:

1) NFL - best overall
2) NBA
3) MLB
4) NHL - worst overall

Chuck

I agree. However, I would like to point out that the NHL has some of the best officials ever. In any sport. Ray Scapinello. Bill McCreary. Kerry Fraser. And these are just active officials. I actually met McCreary once - at an officials conference in Waterloo, ON. That man knows how to talk to people! The best call I've ever seen in any sport was made by Ray Scapinello three years ago in the playoffs. Trule a defining piece of officiating.

Mike

I was once told by a coach that he ranked me the second best official he had seen all season.......and that everyone else was tied for first!

When I was a young official (1st year), JurassicReferee's friend Paul Mitchell told me this. I fell for it HUGE, and all my ref friends laughed. We were at Kelsey's a restaurant chain, much like TGI Friday's, at our year end bash.

At the end of my second year, I improved *alot* and was told the same thing again by the same guy at the same place at the same party. Fell for it again.

I felt humiliated at the point.

Mike

I will agree about the NFL Officials.
 

I will have to say this, NFL Officials get it right much of the time. But the nature of the game is different than the other sports. Remember they have 7 officials helping each other out. Many times they do not make a call independent of another officials. Unlike the other sports.

I really do not think this is fair to really rank any of this also. I realize that this if for fun sake, but each sport is entirely different. I do not understand most NHL rules and applications and do not have a clue what is a good call or what is a bad one. NHL has rules or penalties like "Interference" and they can call this almost anywhere on the ice. I do not understand why they call it when they do or why they do not call it, but I am sure I am like most fans that do not have a clue, but at least I am smart enough to keep my mouth shut or even complain about bad calls.

I only say this because Hockey is a sport that most of us do not have a clue about. I like the sport and watch the playoffs, but I do not understand many of the rules and what NHL officials are looking for.

Peace

Re: I will agree about the NFL Officials.
 

I agree that the nature of football is different than that of other sports. (I ref bball and fball.) When a foul happens in football, you can have a few seconds to think about it if you need it. I don't believe the NFL officials really need a few seconds, I do think that they wait to see the entire play. There are always more than one set of eyes on a play. I recently heard Dick Honig speak at a camp, and he re-affirmed to me that one angle looks like a legal play, while another angle does not. Or, both might look illegal, or both look legal. That's why you get 1 flag, 2 flags, or zero flags. (Dick showed an NFL video on pass interference that is the best officiating video I have ever seen.)

Quote:

I really do not think this is fair to really rank any of this also. I realize that this if for fun sake, but each sport is entirely different. I do not understand most NHL rules and applications

That's because you're not Canadian!

Quote:

...and do not have a clue what is a good call or what is a bad one. NHL has rules or penalties like "Interference" and they can call this almost anywhere on the ice. I do not understand why they call it when they do or why they do not call it,

You just need to watch more hockey. (Or become Canadian. ;)) In fact, I once described a bball foul to a coach as "just like a hockey interference call." (It was exactly that - an offender ran right into a defender with both were making cuts in whatever pattern they were doing. The offensive player initiated the contact.) When the coach heard my explanation, he responded, "Ok, thank you," and went on to tell his player to be more careful out there.

Quote:

but I am sure I am like most fans that do not have a clue, but at least I am smart enough to keep my mouth shut or even complain about bad calls.

I wish more people had this attitude!

Quote:

I only say this because Hockey is a sport that most of us do not have a clue about.

(Assuming "us" means Americans.) Fox proved this when they thought of their Fox Puck that was designed to help Americans follow the game.

Quote:

I like the sport and watch the playoffs, but I do not understand many of the rules and what NHL officials are looking for.

NHL Playoffs are by far, the most exciting of all of the 4 major sports' playoffs. Next could be baseball or football. Last is the NBA.

I think the NHL officials are looking for infractions of the rules agreed upon. :) The referees calls penalties and goals. The linesmen call offsides and icing. I don't recall who calls gloved passes. And I'm certain the NHL has an elastic powers rule, but I don't think a referee will eject a coach without first assessing a bench minor. :D

..Mike


Oh yeah, Don Cherry calls it like it is!

[Edited by JugglingReferee on May 18th, 2002 at 03:25 PM]

There's a Davism you can use in a similar situation. When a coach tells you something like "you are the worst official ever" or "that was the worst officiated game ever", you can reply by telling him that would be impossible. When he looks at you with that vacant howler monkey stare, tell him it would be too much of a coincidence for the worst officiated game ever and the worst coached game ever to have happened in the same game.

Then, just for good measure, puke on his shoes. :p

NBA officials only bad due to the game
 

The problem is not the officials the problem is they are refereeing entertainment and not basketball. The game has become just a show and the officials are just a part of the act. Some are better than others.....

Canadian?
 

Americans do not understand simple fouls and violations in basketball. They diffenently do not understand the thinking behind the "tuck" rule in football. What makes you think most Canadians really understand the rules anymore than Americans? Americans want us to rule intent on things that different officials would always rule if that was the case. Candians surely cannot be better than any stinking American.

Peace

The camp I just got back from had us reffing only one half of a game at a time. After reffing one of the "worst games ever," The next group of officials steps in to call t he second half. I am sitting behind the scorers table and with about four minutes left in the game the coach looks at me and says, "You still did bad, but not nearly as bad as this guy. I hope you aren't hiring him this season." I had to chuckle. The worst official ever is the one on the court when your team is loosing.

Here's my two cents...

There are some differences in officiating the different sports just dut to the nature of the game.

Basketball officials it's easy to see faces. You have 2-3 officials on a 4700 sq ft floor (I have not idea what that is in Canadian Measurements square meters or metric acres or something like that) There is no anonymity...

In baseball the plate umpire is in a mask the other guys are wearing hats, and heck (not to offend the baseball umps) but we as basketball officials could make 95% of the out safe calls, then you have to worry about foul balls, balls and strikes.

In football you got 6-7 guys with only one who is ever on camera announcing the penalty. Everybody else has some pretty good anonymity and besides they do let the play develop, the flag is actully a delayed penalty, and besides you can conference on every penalty.

Hockey they guys wear helemts and shields and there are only 3216 americans who understand the rules. (Besides how hard could it be to officate a fight where hockey breaks out :))

What about the pro volleyball refs? the pro lacrosse refs? MLS refs? no one mentioned them....

I dont think they can be compared because the guys at the level we are talking about understand the game, the nuances, etc. (NFL/NHL/NBA/MLB/MLS) They are trained by the legaue and I bet are more consistent across than we are in what we call because their groups are so small, have a ton of video to watch, and get fined or "reprimanded" from the leage if they kick a call.

I think where fans come from is (that if you think about it and this applies to us as well), because of the number of whistles that go off in the game we are perceived to be in the game more and have more of an effect on the outcome of the game. What I think is funny is that you have coaches and fans who scream and yell about officiating but could not pass a test if they had the answers given to them. Heck 50% of the time the foul is away from the ball and the fans arent even watching there

Being new to this, I wanted to ask a question. Isn't comparing officials from different sports kind of like comparing apples to oranges to pears to grapefruit, etc? While they are all "officials," there are different rules, crew structures, professional responsiblilites, game speeds and other nuances within each sport that make comparisons difficult. Can this comparison be legitimately made, or is this a sports writer with too much time on his hands?

Yes, it probably is comparing apples to oranges. And as Rut pointed out, it's not really fair to compare. But I wasn't looking for "fair"; I was just looking for something fun to think about during the off-season.

In the large sense, it's reasonable to try to compare the one thing that all officials must do: exercise judgment to fairly apply the rules of their game. Officials from each different sport have a different way of doing this. But the bottom line for any crew in any sport is, did they get the calls right?

The reason I ranked NFL referees first is that they get a lot more help from one another than any of the other sports' officials. I think that's a huge help to them. One of the reasons I put MLB umpires lower is that I think, as a body, they are not very consistent with the balls and strikes. That's an incredibly difficult part of the game to call, it's a very important part of the game, and yet they get no help at all from their partners.

So the question was really just trying to generate some discussions of what makes each sport difficult to officiate and how the various officials are able to deal with it.

Chuck

Great point.
 

Yes!!!

I do Football, Basketball, and Baseball.

Football I have help all the time. There are not many calls that I am not looking at a similar play with a partner of mine. And most of all, before a penalty is announced we discuss it amongs each other to make sure we get it right. So you are never alone out there. And unless you are the man with the White Hat, no one really knows who you are. At least publicly.

Basketball is the sport where judgement is the most important as an individual. You do have help with partners but I think there are many plays that you are all alone. Or plays that you and only you can make accurately.

Baseball is not as easy as most people think. You have a baseball flying around the diamond and getting out of the way and knowing when you stay in a certain place is key. You cannot call balls and strikes if you are afraid of getting hit. And there are many times you will anyway. Most officials think they could call balls and strikes, but most could not. It is not as easy as many think. Just like basketball there is a reason for everything and you need to have great knowledge of what to do and when.

As an officials that just does these sports, the things you cannot measure are things that most cannot see. And unless you have knowledge of those sports inside and out, you will hardly fully understand the things that make a good official. Just like I am not qualified to judge NHL officials. I do not understand there mechanics and rules to where I could even rank them accurately. I just cannot do that.

Peace

Well, I think I may have to shuffle my rankings after watching highlights of the D'backs/Giants game. The umpires awarded a home run on a ball that was easily 3 feet foul. The plate ump really struggled with his ball/strike calls. The Giants were the victims of a "strike-him-out-throw-him-out" double play in which the catcher had to move almost to Barry Bonds' shins to catch the called third strike (low and very inside) and the runner at second beat the throw, although to be fair it was very close.

1) NFL
2) NBA
3) NHL
4) MLB :)

Anybody else catch the replays on ESPN?

Chuck

Unfortunately I had the chance to see the replays of this game. The strike em out-throw him out play was a disaster. I am not sure but their may have been a second where the ball actually disappeared in the dirt.
Chuck, I would have to agree with you, the MLB staff fell in the officiating ranks last night.

That was on when I turned on the TV this morning. I couldn't tell on the HR/Foul ball dispute, but from the replay, the runner was (from my angle and rules knowledge) safe on the steal in question.

funny, i just read this post, turned on the tele and saw the plays in question, good timing. Home run was obviously foul, but I thought the called third strike was reasonable and the play at second was very close. It looked like to me he was there but his slide slowed almost to a halt before his foot touched the bag allowing the tag to get down on his foot at almost the same time he got to the bag, I have to give the benefit of the doubt to the guy standing on top of the play.

OK- so we get to see the replay, we have the best angle in the house. We all can make the correct call. Out, Safe, Foul, no foul, Icing, offsides, inbounds, out of bounds, apples, oranges, pineapples, and kiwis.

My vote goes to the WWF referee, They will be going to the NBA soon. Because NBA is not a sport anymore, it is entertainment.

AK ref SE

The World Wildlife Foundation has referee's?

AK:

Some simple words for ya:
"You have to appreciate the game for what it is." The pro's are a whole different level and although thousands watch in night in and night out it still is the game that Mr. Naismith invented. As you know pro athletes are bigger and wiser, so I think you need to think about the negativity you have toward the pro game.

It's still the game of B-Ball and that is what makes it great.

iref21, NBA far from what Naismith invented
 

AK ref SE is correct. The Pro game has become just that entertainment. The officials are instructed how to call in the NBA and what to let go. They very much stretch the intent of the rules. I am tired of hearing how great these athletes are. They have ruined the game by how they are instructed to officiate. Upper Mgmt. has made a big mistake, that is why attendance is down and still dropping. Not to mention the lack of any real icon or role model.

Re: iref21, NBA far from what Naismith invented
 

I really have to disagree, Self. They don't stretch the intent of the NBA rules. The rules are written with a particular philosophy, just as the NF rules are. The officials are then instructed (by their director of officials and the Officials' Manual) regarding that philosophy and how the game should be called, just as NF officials are (by a board interpreter and the Officials' Manual). The officials do not, in my opinion, "stretch" the intent at all. They simply call the game the way the league wants it called. Now you may take issue with the league's philosophy, but I don't think you can put that on the officials. There's nothing wrong with being instructed how to call a game.

Quote:

Upper Mgmt. has made a big mistake, that is why attendance is down and still dropping. Not to mention the lack of any real icon or role model.

You might be right about the league's philosophy. But my personal opinion is that they are on the right track to making the game more fun and more watchable. Pat Riley's Knicks and Mike Fratello's Cavaliers really dragged the league down into ugly, unwatchable basketball. But the new rules in the last couple years have started to turn the tide back toward opening up offenses and discouraging the thuggery that passed as defense in Riley's system.

As far as role models, oh well. Nobody pays them to be role models, much as we might want them to be. Old time players weren't role models either. It's just that now, the media attention is so much greater that we get to see all their "faults" much more than anybody did even 20 years ago. And even though there are certainly a large number of players that I wouldn't want to hang out with in polite company, there are also a LOT of athletes (in all sports) who do good things out of the spotlight. Even Alonzo Mourning (who I personally can't stand) is supposedly a great guy off the court who has his own charity that does amazing work.

Again, just my opinion.

Chuck

Chuck good points..
 

I agree regarding the officials are calling the game the way they are instructed and you can't blame them. I see that point, no problem.

I do think upper mgmt is ruining the game though. I have seen the attendance numbers, and they are on the decline. I am an avid baskeball and and referee. I love the game, but I do not care for teh NBA. The college I officiate and the HS(to me) is so much more enjoyable basketball. The kids are playing there hearts out. The NBA while I understand the season is long(i've heard this) and players can't play 100% every night, is why it doesn't seem lik ethey are trying. If that is the case, then shorten the season. For that amount of money. I expect 100% every night, or close to it.

Again to me the NBA game is turning in entertainment and they are losing the battle. Hockey attendance is on the way up. I have heard from many, that the reason they feel hockey is on the way up and NBA on the way down is white america can't relate now with the players of the NBA. From looking at the crowd in attendance, they may not be far off.

Time will tell if the NBA's new rules will help.

Re: Chuck good points..
 

If that's true, and I suppose it's possible, it's not the fault of the league. And new rules won't help. You can't make a rule mandating a minimum number of white guys on a team.

Chuck

Sure you can, it's called Affirmative Action. :)

In all seriousness, I doubt that the reason for attendance drop is the ethnic makeup of the players. You could make the same circumstantial case for an increase in non-American players. Correlation does not mean cause and effect. Hockey may not be a good example, as it is the yuppie sport of choice at the moment and will wane when the wine and cheesers find something new.

A high concentration of African-American players is not a new phenomenon to the NBA (or other professional basketball leagues). What has been changing is the quality and consistency of the product. College basketball and high school basketball remain entertaining because the length of the season means that all of the games have meaning, much like football, and the players are playing to survive to the next level every game. The length of the regular season in the NBA diminishes the impact of losses. I think that the number of teams and dilution of talent has also decreased the quality of the product.

The NBA, like all other pro sports leagues, are entertainment, just like the movies, concerts and other similar endeavors. This means that they all compete for the same expendable income. If basketball ceases to be entertaining, which it has, the dollars will move elsewhere. If the game opens up and becomes more entertaining, the attendance will pick back up, regardless of the ethnic makeup of the team.

Chuck, kiddingly Why not?
 

Corporate America across the US is dealing with diversity. They have set diversity numbers they are working toward in their workforce. NBA could do the same.

[Edited by Self on May 23rd, 2002 at 10:56 AM]

The NBA is entertainment, I dont want to burst your bubble but so is college ball. There are 160 plus DI schools out there, untold numbers of DII and DIII. There are only 29 (?) NBA teams. On any given weekend there are 30 -100% more fans watching college ball than NBA. Who has the crowds? You dont think that NF basketball is entertainment? what do all these small towns across the country do. When 96% of these small towns show up for basketball games it's to support kids but you dot think they are being entertained? Its th social/sporting/entertainemnt event of the week,!
Look at the rule changes- shot clocks, one shot T's, points of interruption, limit number on FT lane, no shots on all offensive fouls, reductions and changes in time outs, are all part of the game to speed it up and make it more entertaining. I would suugest that most of these rules ought to be at the NF level, and given a year or two most will be. Shaq picked up three offensive fouls the other night.
(I guess college basketball isnt very physical aw maybe it's just the Big East and SEC that play that way)The game is played differently in different parts of the country depending on the conference as well.
And you dont think the college refs are told how to officiate the game? That's why the college coaches have the power they do and have a lot of impact who works games and how.


I will tell you first hand that you cannot call the basketball game the same with pro players that you do with HS even if you played the exact same rules. The NBA players are best 400 players in the world. Theres probably a few in Europe but all in all not much comparison. They are the biggest, fastest, strongest and you just cant call the game the same way.

If I had my choice, I'd rather reff Stockton, Malone, Duncan, Robinson, Shaq and Kobe.... etc than I would a girls varsity game

Ah come on Kelvin! I know you're just dying to do the Layton Christian v. Meridian girls next year!:D:D

I was thinking more about ST Joseph vs Meridan... wasnt the final score two years ago 74-0???

I am not saying the others aren't entertainment also.
 

I realize that. The only reason I would ever call in the NBA would be for the money. Not the enjoyment and not for the game. Best players in the world or not. The game has become NOT entertaining to me. Too much one on one, and whats wrong with defense.. As far as speeding the game up faster is not always better. Of the rules you mentioned I do not beleive they have been good for the game. In retrospect some have even lessoned the game in my opinion. One shot T's and piont of interruption, I beleive has increased bad behavior and unsportsmanlike act.

As far as HS level being only entertainment in some areas. That is sad to me then. HS sports were bought about to teach many different aspects of life not just winning and losing. There is sportsmanship, discipline to name a few.

As far as calling a HS Varsity girls game. I have enjoyed soem of them more than the caollege games I have called. It all depends on who is playing.

Hey, Meridian actually won some games last year.:rolleyes:

Self,

Why would a one shot T and play at point of interruption increase bad behavior?
In my opinion it is the two shot plus ball penalty that as caused alot of the problems. I know officials at the HS level let a lot of garbage go because the penalty is too stiff. When a T causes a 4-5 point swing we think hard about calling T's in a two point ball game.

If the T is one shot and point of interruption, it says to the player and coach I have heard enough you got the foul, and youre half way out the door. They pick up the second one they are out of the game and cant cause problems but you have only penalized their team a potential total of two points not 4 shots plus two posessions (unless back to back T's)
The big penalty is post game since in most areas an ejection buys a one game suspension as well.

Why do you think we are going back to a violation on swinging the elbows? the penalty was disproportionate and was rarely called.. If it was we called a travel or something else.

I will have to disagree with another point. It is not necessarily speeding up the game, but it is keeping the game moving that is the benefit of the rules that both the NCAA and NBA have adopted. The more dead time administering thins takes, the more players and coaches have a chance to complain, scream, and yell. The faster the ball is put back into play the less they can howl. The best rule change the NCAA has done, and I hope the NF adopts next year is the no shots on offensive fouls. You call an illegal screen, the ball goes back out of bounds and we play instaed of going all the way to the other end to shoot FTs ( eliminate the long switch in a two man crew, and the ball is back in play a lot faster)

although you are right on the lessons kids are supposed to learn, but the game is supposed to be fun (it's a game) we play the game for exercise, relaxation, and entertainment. We watch them for the same reasons.

Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree

IREF21-
Some simple words back at ya:
I appreciate the college game and the High School game of for what it is. The NBA in my opinion is high priced entertainment that I do not care to support. The superstars get the calls or no-calls more than the average player, because I as a consumer(If I paid to go see them) paid to see SHAQ, Tim Duncan, Jason Kidd, etc. play the game. The college game is entertainment also, High School game is entertainment also. But the officials in my opinion call the game.

In my opinion(again) with all the new extreme sports that are coming out, and the younger generation that follows them, the audience and the attendance may sway the advertisement dollar that direction.

AK ref SE

Kelvin, You make some good points..
 

"Why would a one shot T and play at point of interruption increase bad behavior? In my opinion it is the two shot plus ball penalty that as caused alot of the problems. I know officials at the HS level let a lot of garbage go because the penalty is too stiff. When a T causes a 4-5 point swing we think hard about calling T's in a two point ball game." POINT TAKEN, I COULD SEE HOW THIS IS POSSIBLE.



"Why do you think we are going back to a violation on swinging the elbows? the penalty was disproportionate and was rarely called.. If it was we called a travel or something else." GOOD POINT I AGREE WITH THIS CHANGE.

"The best rule change the NCAA has done, and I hope the NF adopts next year is the no shots on offensive fouls. You call an illegal screen, the ball goes back out of bounds and we play instaed of going all the way to the other end to shoot FTs." NOT SURE ABOUT THIS ONE. I COULD SEE THE BENEFIT.

"the game is supposed to be fun (it's a game) we play the game for exercise, relaxation, and entertainment. We watch them for the same reasons." NO PROBLEM HERE EITHER.

I don't think we are that far apart, maybe just in a few ideals. I just really don't care for the NBA, maybe that just the bad taste in my mouth showing. The game is full of too many premadonna's and not enough quality. Maybe just as in the workplace where diversity has been pushe dfor its benefit(not sqaying I agree or disagree). There needs to be a push for it in the NBA, to help improve it...haha, like that would ever happen.

I think that the consumer dollar is the primary point. From an attendance standpoint, people will go where they are entertained and get the most utility for their money.

From an officiating standpoint, I would assume that different levels are called different ways based on expectations and rules. The NBA ratings and profit would suffer if the stars fouled out consistently in the first half. Therefore, the rules and the officiating are set up to avoid that happening. The NBA officials are a part of the NBA, therefore they are subject to the directives and rules of the company. May not be fair or ideal, but that is corporate America.

Personnaly, I hope someday to be good enough to call D1 and pro ball. I don't know that I will ever do it, but I want to master the profession well enough to know that I could.