I am headed to a camp this weekend at Utah State University. This got me thinking about the learning that goes on and thought that it might be good for us to write about whatever it is that sticks out about the camps that we go to so everyone can benefit from our collective experience. I'll write mine on Monday.

Feel free to share what you've already gotten if you've been to camp this year.

if you want, i always take detailed camp notes, i have been to 5 this year, and i will give them to you if you want them.

I enjoy camps, but...
 

one thing that bothers me is any time there is a supervisor of officials there, the only thing the evaluators are concerned about is kissing their butt (read, trying to move up) instead of evaluating the campers.

I attended a local camp here in Tucson. The camp was run by two DI officials. They are also friends of mine. The supervisor from the Big Sky conference was there to check out new prospects. The majority of evaluators were so far up her arse that they forgot about critiquing the other officials. Very disappointing when you are trying to improve.

Is this common?

I never noticed this. What I notice is that the evaluators leave as soon as the checks arrive. If you host a camp. Pay them when it is over, not half way through. Also, about taking notes. Watch for diffences on what one evaluatore sees versus another. Take what fits your game this summer and leave the rest. You may be ready for that next year.

Not really looking for detailed notes, what I am looking for is a place to share information for everyone's benefit.

A couple of thoughts about my latest camp experience (Dave Hall's Camp @ Utah State University):

1--When you are expected to be the man on the game--You had better be ready to step up--elevate your partners closer to your level.

2--Don't let the game's or your partner's shortcomings affect how you officiate.

3--One very small step can make a big difference in what kind of angle you create (or take away) for yourself.

4--Catching subtle off ball stuff makes you so much better in the evaluator's eyes.

5--Networking is important as you move up the ladder, but politics tend to get worse--they never get better.

6--Game management is what separates the good officials from the great ones.

That is all for now. If I think of anything else I'll put it up too.

Stripes, What do you call game management and can you give me a couple of examples? Thanks.

Sure. I am talking about dead ball officiating. Dealing with coaches and players, understanding the "temperature" of the game, knowing what to say and when to say it, etc. Basically, it is administrating the game smoothly.

Hope that makes sense. ;)

Game management also includes things such as staying aware of where the coaches are in respect to their coaching boxes, watching the game clock (and shot clock where applicable), having had a thorough pregame so both refs are on the same page when something unusual happens, seeing when a player is getting frustrated and heading off a problem with him/her before it occurs, always making sure the possession arrow is correct....etc. etc.

And I completely agree. Game management is what separates good from great.

Z

Sure. Game management is giving Shaq 20 FTs in the 4th quarter and never calling a foul on Kobe, when it's obvious to everybody that he's just manhandling Bibby, to make sure that Sacramento (a small market team) doesn't make the Finals.

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist. ;)

Stan, in all seriousness, Stripes and Z give a good picture of game management.

Chuck

You mean rules knowledge is not important?
 

I thought having the highest test scores was what separated the bad officials from the good officials. Maybe I need to lessen my test scores and work on that Game Management thing you keep talking about. I must have had it twisted all along. ;)


Peace

Re: You mean rules knowledge is not important?
 

Must have!! :cool:

Oh boy, now you guys did it! I'm going back over to "the other board", they seem a little more reasonable there! :eek:

Oh Rut, you just couldn't resist could you?

Incredible official: Good rule knowledge, good mechanics, good presence, good game management.
<P>
Great official: Good rule knowledge, good mechanics and great presence.
<P>
Good official: Good rule knowledge and good mechanics.
<P>
Fair official: Good rule knowledge.
<P>
Poor offical: Poor rule knowledge, great mechanics and great presence.
<P>
Horrible official: None of the above.
<P>
Obviously, I left out many possible combinations. But the point is that you could become a decent official without that "presence" that you so highly prize yet you aren't going to get past horrible without good rule knowledge.

Z

I don't know if I totally agree. I guess it depends on what you rate as "poor rule knowledge". I know, personally, a couple of final four officials and they have told me stories about how they have screwed up rules because they haven't known them. These stories involve situations in the NCAA tournament. These officials have great presence and credibility, but some of them have terrible mechanics and I would think that rules knowledge is somewhat suspect, due to the stories they tell about themselves. Does that make them "poor" officials? I don't think so.

I think that rules knowledge is very important--we have to know them to administer them, but rules knowledge is not nearly enough. Too many officials, IMO, are like cops--they think they have to know everything and bust every infraction they see. Realistically, there are too many infractions at any given time to get them all. Understanding what to call and what to leave alone is much more important, IMO, than what a false double foule is and how to administer it. Personally, I would rather have a partner with great presence and management skills than a guy that could quote rules and book locations. I am convinced that a partner who understands the game can help me figure out what the right thing to do is, but a guy who might know the rule will rarely, if ever, get you out of trouble with a coach.

JMO, take it for what it is worth (not much!!! :rolleyes: )

[Edited by stripes on Jun 11th, 2002 at 04:44 PM]

Z my man.
 

If you have been paying attention to anything I have said about "Presence," I have always felt that "Presence" is the glue that keeps the fabric together. You cannot have good game management without a good presence in my opinion.

It is much bigger than that, but I think we have hashed and rehashed this topic, no matter what I say someone will disagree with it. But that is life. ;)

Peace

<i> I know, personally, a couple of final four officials and they have told me stories about how they have screwed up rules because they haven't known them. These stories involve situations in the NCAA tournament. These officials have great presence and credibility, but some of them have terrible mechanics and I would think that rules knowledge is somewhat suspect, due to the stories they tell about themselves. Does that make them "poor" officials? I don't think so.</i>

Stripes, let me ask you this. Is there any correlation between their rule knowledge and their screw-ups? Would you want to ref a final four game with them on National TV knowing their rule knowledge was suspect? Not me.

Z

Wha? Come on now, you would pass up the chance to work a
D1 final 4 with a veteran because their rules knowledge
was not quite up to snuff? When you turn the game down
please give them my number.

Well I'd love to ref a final four, but I'd hope that if I got there it was because I had the complete package. I would expect the same of my partners. Would you like to be known as part of the officiating team that decided a game because of not doing enough rule study?

Z

The guys/gals who get there have the complete package.
If I get there I will have the complete package (there will
also be a hard frost in hell but that's a different
thread ;) ). Officials screw up, it happens, life goes on.
BTW, there was recently (last 2 or 3 yrs) a HUGE mess up in
the last few seconds of a tight D1 tourney game. Can you
name the refs? The game? The sitch?

Unfulfilled Promises
 

Echoing a post above, try to not pay for camp services until they're delivered. When I was in my third year of officiating I attended a local high school camp which promised individual videotaping. I paid the full amount of the camp upfront, and the camp coordinators finked on the taping... most disappointing.

<i>Can you name the refs? The game? The sitch?</i>

No, but I bet the coaches involved and all the referees in that conference (including the evaluator/assignor) can. And I bet it reflected on all three refs in the crew.

Actually, I got sidetracked from my original point which was to just have a little fun with Rut since he has been known to rail on the "presence" side of "presence vs. rule knowledge" a few times.

None of us can recite the rule book verbatim and none of us are above getting caught on a once-in-a-lifetime situation where we weren't sure of what rule applied. Anyone who gets to a final four is obviously a great ref. However, it has been my experience that some veteran refs quit doing a yearly rule study once they have reached a certain level. Then they get caught with their pants down. When given the choice between a partner with great rule knowledge or great presence, I would feel much more comfortable being teamed up with the partner who has great rule knowledge. Just my personal preference.

Z

Rules is important but not the most important. if anything is weighted it is the game managment aspect of it. Presence is next. Presence is the first impression that a coach or assignor will have of you. Do you belong on the floor. But in my case, I never trust first impressions so game managment is more important because you can have all the presence in the world and you can't manage a game then you are in big trouble. With rules knowledge, you have one to two other officials to consult if you don't know a rule. If you know scott, not scott K, from the other board who shows up every now and then. He has the book memorized and he carries great presence on the floor. But coaches don't want to see him because of his game management skills. I have also watched George Demetreau, a published writter, work a game. Good knowledge and game management but poor presence on the floor. Me, I have to work on both presence and game management. I think I have the management down better then the presence after looking at my last video.

[QUOTE

BTW, there was recently (last 2 or 3 yrs) a HUGE mess up in
the last few seconds of a tight D1 tourney game. Can you
name the refs? The game? The sitch? [/B][/QUOTE]

Robert Strong, Lollie Sienz, and a veteran male from the east coast. Women's regional final between UCLA and someone. They allowed the thrower-in to run the baseline on a spot throw-in at the end of the game, and then the clock did not start on time, which allowed the winning basket to be scored when it should not have.

This play was the catalyst for the women's game to modify the end of game procedures as to when the officials leave the floor after a close game (less than 4 point difference).

The bad thing is, the officials thought they had nailed the game until the observor came in after the game.

Robert Strong, Lollie Sienz, and a veteran male from the east coast. Women's regional final between UCLA and someone. They allowed the thrower-in to run the baseline on a spot throw-in at the end of the game, and then the clock did not start on time, which allowed the winning basket to be scored when it should not have.

This play was the catalyst for the women's game to modify the end of game procedures as to when the officials leave the floor after a close game (less than 4 point difference).

The bad thing is, the officials thought they had nailed the game until the observor came in after the game. [/B][/QUOTE]

You got it! I believe the other team was Tennessee (not
sure) but I do know UCLA was playing on the other team's
home court, and of course UCLA ended up losing.

I remember a game, I think it was in the SEC, in which a player was fouled in the act of shooting. After getting fouled, he was assessed a T (probably for getting in the defender's face) which was his 5th foul of the game. The officials allowed him to shoot the 2 FTs for the personal foul. He was then DQ'd, then the other team shot the FTs for the technical. Ouch. This was probably 4 years ago now.

Chuck

Do not misquote my position.
 

This is what is so frustrating about talking to some here or any board for that matter. :( The Presence vs. rule knowledge discussion was about what I perfered in an official. What "I" wanted if I had to choose for a partner. Most of the time I do not have any choice in who I get to work with. But I when I can choose my partner and when I can choose who I work with, I do not want a guy that can just quote rules. If that is all you have to offer, then I will pass. I want an individual that can actually handle themselves under pressure and deal with coaches and players in an appropriate manner. I do not want someone that can quote the rules, but T the entire bench because they gave him or her some crap. I want someone that would know how to deal with the situation without anybody really knowing about it, but me and another partner.

Rules are the foundation on which we all have to build on. I for one know the rules, but applying them is another story all together as far as I am concerned. Things I used to call in my first few years of officiating, I do not even call anymore because I know how to prevent these things from happening now that I have been around the block.

And finally if rules were at the most importance as you think Z, tell me why I have never seen an D1 official in any of the sports I do (Football, Basketball or Baseball) lost or gained assignments based on a test score. College rules are always very different from HS rules. Why would you not have to take a simple qualification test like you do for HS? And BTW, show me any place that requires it other than HS? That also includes Junior High or AAU (rec. league type ball). Why are these officials that do all these other levels not required to have a 80 out of 100 like the NF levels usually have to?

Peace

Interesting Tim, but do you not think................
 

that your presence is how you manage the game? I do understand that they are slightly different, but if you are the calm with the storm falling all around you, would you not be "managing" the game by your demeanor or the tone in which you handle the conflict?

Peace

Presence is how you look when you come out onto the floor. How you look. Do you look like you belong. Many game management problems come from not having a good presence. That is why lifting weights and watching videos of yourself call games is important. You need to look like you know what you are doing.

Game managment is being able to do the right thing at the right time. Talk to the right player talk to the right coach or both coaches. Say the right things. Do the right things to make the game run smooth. Call the appropriate foul at the appropriate time and not let the game get out of hand. You can have an ugly presence but manage the game well. You can also have a good presence but the game gets out of hand because you are not practicing game managment.

I agree.
 

I just wanted to see if you were thinking about it the way I was. Not to think that you were not, but I have been ripped apart for even suggesting what you just stated. I wanted to see if I was the only one that was taught that way.

Peace

I think we were all taught the same way. We just don't interpret it the same way or regurgitate it correctly.

Re: Do not misquote my position.
 

While they don't have to take a "test", a lack of rules knowledge will cost them. I believe I once heard that the NBA levies a fine for blowing a rule (not judgement). At the upper levels, rules are assumed to be known. If they are not, it will eventualy catch up to the official. You can only carry presence so far.

The best officials have a very high rules knowledge AND good game management...even presence.

At the HS level, a test is a good way to keep those that really don't have a clue from working games. As short supplied as official are reported to be, everyone that can get a lot of the rules right is needed.

You are right Camron.....
 

a rules mistake will cost them. So will a lack of judgement. So will use of improper mechanics or procedures. So will anything else that the NBA or specific conferences on the College level determine as against the conduct or actions of an official.

Please, do not try to make it seem like the only trouble an official can get into is by making a rules mistake. Officials have been fined and suspended for not handling the situation as stated in guildlines set by the NBA or College Conference. I know specifically the NBA and NCAA in many sports will repremand or suspend officials for much more than rules mistakes. The NBA reviews every single call an official makes and grades them on their positioning and the calls they make. So they could nail a rule and be the wrong official making a call or use the improper mechanic and get in trouble. And I know that D1 Football officials and Basketball officials go through the same type of scrutiny. I would be probably sure that other sports go through that same type of evaluation, but lets us get real. Officiating is much more than rules. If rules was the only thing, Ed Rush himself would not have asked me about my competitive background when I asked him "what does it take to become an NBA Official?"

Peace

I guess it all depends on our experiences. I have never had a partner who put me in a bad spot because of a lack of presence. I guess I have always felt that I could "cover his back" if he seemed a little nervous or unsure. However, I <b> have </b> had partners who put me between a rock and a hard spot with improper rule interpretations. It was about as enjoyable as having teeth pulled without novocaine.

Z

Not that different of an experience if you think about it.
 

Well, I have seen officials make many mistakes and often times they are rules mistakes. And you know what, not a coach said a single word. Maybe other officials watching in the stands realized there was a rules mishaps, but the coaches and many times fans were clueless (like that is a surprise :)). Let me ask you this, how many times have you made the absolute right call and you caught hell for it by coaches? You have much more to worry about then just missing a rule, you have to sell your calls too.

Peace

<i> how many times have you made the absolute right call and you caught hell for it by coaches? You have much more to worry about then just missing a rule, you have to sell your
calls too.</I>

Rut,

My number one concern is to get the call right. If a coach "gives me hell" because he does not know the rulebook, he is in the wrong - not me.

Are you implying that it's OK to not be an expert on the rules if you have the ability to "B.S." a coach into thinking you know the rules when you really don't?

Z

Just returned from a camp full of D1 and NBA evaluators. Discussion started during film session. What is more important - a good play caller or good game management?
Question was later presented to campers, college assigners, and coaches (HS & D1).
While everyone agrees that the plays must be called correctly and rule knowlege is important, nearly 95 percent of the campers felt game management was most important. The assingers and coaches who expressed their opinions felt that officails do their best in play calling and felt that the way a game is managed was more important.
Food for thought.

Ever try to "manage a game" where several rules have been "kicked?" Doesn't work real good. :-)

Again, I think all the aspects of officiating are important. But given the choice between a partner who has good rule knowledge and good presence, I'll take the rules guy.

Instead of talking theory, let's move to a real life example I had. I'm officiating a varsity game last year with a 15-year vet. I'm lead watching off ball. I hear his whistle and look up to see him signal a travel. Coach is giving him the business. I inbound and we carry on. At quarter break, I ask him what coach was upset about. 15-year vet tells me that he called the travel because the player bent over and touched the ball to the floor while holding it with both hands. I tell him that's a legal play and his response is, "I've been calling it that way for 15 years." Lovely.

OK, now what do we do if it happens again, especially to the other team? Call it as we should or stay "consistent" and call it incorrectly.

This guy "manages a game" pretty good. He has good presence. I don't think he has studied the rule book since his third or fourth year of officiating. I have seen him pull other "myths" out of his *** and it's because his rule knowledge sucks. Give me a less experienced partner with good rule knowledge any day of the week.

Z

Those are the kind of refs who make it harder the ones who know the rules. The only reason you have to manage the game sometimes is when the coach doesn't know the rules because too many refs call it wrong.

What do you want me to say?
 

It is not about "BS'ing" anyone. Whether you want to believe or not. Whether it has happen to you or not, you can be complete correct and you will still have to convince, sell, or whatever adjective you want to use or just be confident about your decisions.

Look, this is a personal preference for me. If you need to work with guys that only have 95 and above on a test score to feel confrontable, the so be it. Unfortunately official have all kinds of talents that they bring to the table. Some are better at one thing over another. I myself have many things I need to work on and it ranges from rules application to court demeanor. I just told you what I perfer in a partner when and if I had a choice. Often times rules knowledge or application is something that a crew has to get right together. Unless you mess up a rule on a block/charge or verticality, but judgement has a lot to do with that to me. But the how many times we shoot on Intentional Fouls and who is shooting those shots is usually something that the crew needs to get right, not just the official that made the call. I had two situations last year that involved correctable error situation, and none of the 4 coaches had a clue what was right or what was wrong. We did both the correct way, but I still had to explain it. My partner and I still had to stay calm and handle it. But then again maybe it is just me.

I really do not understand what you want me to say. You have one way of thinking, I have another. I am still going to feel the same way long after this conversation, and I am sure you will feel the same too. And I have read the very same thing in many publications and Referee Magazine or heard assignors and much more experienced officials than I am at this stage talk about the very same thing. We are just not going to agree, that is OK ya know.

Peace

I have had a similar situation Zebraman. We have an offical who takes the test every year (H.S.) Passes it. With just above passing every year. ( He has been officiating forever.) During game situations who ever he is partnered with has to watch his back. He knows the rules from 15-20 years ago and that is how he remembers and manages his game. I can only assume that the overall NFHS has not changed greatly over the last 15 years, so he can pass the test, but his judgement and knowledge has not progressed in 15 years.

AK ref SE

JRut wrote "I myself have many things I need to work on and it ranges from rules application to court demeanor."

with that said, it would seem to me then that you would prefer to work with a partner that could make up for your deficiencies, i.e. rules applications.

if you're not good at rules applications, but one of your two partners is, then he/she can save your butt from incorrectly applying rule 2-10 like you recently did in an AAU game. you yourself came back on and admitted that you kicked that.

on the other side of the coin, if you're working with something that lacks the ability to "manage a game" the way you do, then you'd be able to help that person work a better game.

part of being a R and not a U1 or U2, is recognizing the abilities of those on your crew and letting them utilize their strengths to better the officiating team.

jake

I am only human.
 

Sorry to disappoint you. But I have very little problems getting rules right, especially in a basketball game. Had two different situations with correctable error this past year, and my partner and I got both right. I probably study more rules and mechanics as anyone that officiates. I have to to keep up in 3 sports at very different levels in each.

But unlike some people I look at officiating as basically a team sport. We are a team, not an individual. And it is not like I was the only person that kicked the call, so did my partner. We discussed the issue and that is what we came up with, with the information that I had. Actually I did not even remember everything that happen before the error. Mistake on my part during a summer game that my head was not as much into. Not an excuse, just a fact.

I attended two camps this weekend, and I overheard some evaluators talking about a particular crew on a court and kind of joking about how "there are not a lot of tournament officials on the floor." Interesting that they did not kick any calls. I wonder why they would say such a thing.

Peace

I have had the opposite experience. (Of course I have had problems with blow calls, misapplied rules, etc.) I have also had partners that I knew would be a problem from the time I saw their name on my contract. Why? Because they have no presence. Coaches will chew them (and me) even if they get the calls right. Why? because they have no presence and they are not believable. Maybe you haven't had this experience, but believe me, you will at some point. Some of these guys can quote rules, at length, but coaches don't buy their act.

Z, I don't believe that anyone will say anything to change your mind, but I do believe that you are in the minority on this one.

<i> Coaches will chew them (and me) even if they get the calls right. Why? because they have no presence and they
are not believable. Maybe you haven't had this experience, but believe me, you will at some point.</i>

I've had that experience, but it doesn't last long. If I have a partner who is getting "picked on," by a coach, I will put a stop to that real quick. If my partner isn't experienced enough in the coach management area, I can handle it. If my partner hasn't read his rulebook, however, there is not much I can do to help him there.

<i> I don't believe that anyone will say anything to change your mind, but I do believe that you are in the minority on this one.</i>

Maybe so, and that's OK. That makes for a good discussion. Like I said earlier, it has to do with our experiences. You've had more trouble with your partner's game management issues and I've had more trouble with partners who don't ever crack a rule book. Maybe I'll have a partner next year that changes my mind.

Z

Sure Z. I guess you would not mind if that same official curses out the coach, grabs a player or punches a fan that gets on them. But they knew the rules. Whatever. :rolleyes:

Peace