Evaluations...
 

As a newbie trying to move up (I'm in my third year in my local association) I got my first evaluation in three years recently for a 9th grade boys game. It didn't go so hot. My evaluator docked me because I would not wait for my partner to "relieve" me so I could report the foul. (i.e. If I was lead and called a foul, I'd have to stay there with my arm in the air until my partner got to my spot BEFORE, I could go and report the foul).

I've spoken with a few other officials and they just laughed at that.

Am I wrong to say this "rule" that I got docked for is a bad idea? I'm all for getting the game flowing. When I call a foul, I wait to make sure we're not going to see a fight, inform my partner what I got, and go report.

Thoughts?

Not something I've ever been docked for, and I thought I had been docked for some weird stuff in the past.

It sounds weird, but if it's what your association wants you to do then do it.

Two man or three man? By the book in 2-man, non-calling official holds his/her position watching the players until calling official is done reporting. Not quite as sure about 3-man. Sounds more like, when in Rome type of situation.

This is your first review ever?

I'm in my first year and have had 2.

NFHS is the opposite of what your evaluator appears to require.

2-whistle or 3-whistle, non-calling officials freeze their field of vision to observe players until the calling official completes reporting and turns to observe players. IOW, everyone maintains their position until the calling official has completed his duties, then the switch is on.

Admittedly, many (me included) freeze, wait for the calling official to get into position and begin reporting and then initiate the switch before the calling official has completed reporting. Keeping players in view at all times.

Just had my first one as well..

I got "satisfactory" on everything, but was told that as T, I needed to "work the arc" more, and as L to close down more often. I've worked 2 man pretty much all season working the jr high games. ( and have had a blast)

I was recommended for a full frosh schedule with some JV. Is this about the usual place I should be after one season?

Thanks

For Colorado, yes. For southern California, you should be doing Varsity and Junior College next season, D3/D2 after that, and D1 in your 4th year.

BTW: getting advice to work the arc as T more and close down as L more are typical things newbies need to do more of. You're right on schedule.

My question would be did this thing the evaluator make that big of a difference in the entire evaluation?

Remember in evaluations there are things said that do not make that big of a difference. I agree with others that this critique was rather silly, but it is what it is. Take the information under advisement, and if no one agrees with it, then do not use it. Then again, I am not in a world where an evaluation means that much from a local association. My perspective on what to listen to could be skewed.

Peace

For us who weren't around to understand it, can you explain the southern California joke? Or is it not a joke...

In the clinic I attended in my first few meetings prior to working any game, the clinician had a great quote regarding non-calling officials' responsibilities during a foul call: freeze your eyes but not necessarily your feet. That was at the time of 2 person only (at least at that level) but the idea still stands in 3 person: either the L or the C (or the T in transition) freezes their eyes on the players. They may or may not move, depending on the circumstances but to suggest the calling official should wait until his or her partner gets to their spot is absurd.

On the other hand, the calling official should not just make a break for the table. This is a good place to slow down, but not to stay put.

I agree. When I work two-man, I'll freeze my eyes for a moment, just to make sure I have the right jersey number of the person that committed the foul, and if needed, the jersey number of the person shooting the free throws, and announce whether it's spot throw-in while pointing at the spot or free throws and how many. But I don't stand there like a mannequin in the store, and wait for the world to start moving again. I make a slow move towards the table once I have eye contact with my partner and see that he/she got the info needed (shots or spot).

Perhaps I'm getting a little old, and cranky, and tired of some of the baloney that passes for feedback and evaluations in this game, and therefore you ought to take what I say with a grain of salt. But here goes anyway...

Truths about evaluations #1) Not all evaluators are created equal. The very first thing I learned in English 101 is that when you consider a piece of literature, you need to also consider who wrote it, and why. When you consider an evaluation, you should also consider who is giving the evaluation, and why. Is this person a highly regarded, successful official? Is this person a thoughtful student of the game? Is this person generally acknowledged to be "that guy" and considered a pariah by knowledgeable officials? Was the evaluation given in a spirit of helping you to improve? Or was it given to fulfill some quota or to demonstrate how smart the evaluator is? Knowing this will help you know how strongly to consider his or her opinion.

Truths about evaluations #2) The game looks different from the stands. It just does. Feedback you get especially about calling traveling more, about movement at trail, and about handling coaches, based on what the observer saw from the stands, needs to be considered suspect. Universally, if you stay to watch your evaluator work his game, you'll notice that he doesn't call traveling as often as he says you need to, he doesn't move as much at trail as he says you need to, and he isn't as strict with coaches as he says you need to be. Sure, they mean well, but it's a different game when your on the floor.

Truths about evaluations #3) You need to consider the advice separate from the individual. In seeming contradiction to items 1 and 2, don't let the tenure, quality, or abilities of the evaluator put you off from considering his or her feedback. Just because somebody is new does not mean that they don't have something you can make use of to improve your game. Just because somebody doesn't do what they tell you in their own games, does not mean it's not good advice.

Truths about evaluations #4) Surprising or unusual advice should be confirmed from multiple sources. Don't get played by the official who has a scathingly brilliant idea he wants you to try out for him. Or be fooled by the guy who has some whacked out, non-standard mechanic that he truly believes is the one true way. If it sounds weird, run it by a few other people before you incorporate it into your game. Like you've done here. :)

IMHO, your evaluator is full of stinky brown stuff. As much as possible you want the two officials to be in two different locations with two different looks at what is going on. It gives better coverage, both during dead ball and live ball. Plus, after a whistle, getting the players busy moving to start the next play is the best tool we have to prevent stupid stuff from happening during dead balls. So why would we want to prolong the dead ball period immediately following a foul call?

When calling a foul, communicate enough information at the spot so that players and partners know what happened, and how we will resume play. Then hustle off to the table to report.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee View Post
For Colorado, yes. For southern California, you should be doing Varsity and Junior College next season, D3/D2 after that, and D1 in your 4th year.

BTW: getting advice to work the arc as T more and close down as L more are typical things newbies need to do more of. You're right on schedule.
For us who weren't around to understand it, can you explain the southern California joke? Or is it not a joke...

Some people are unaware of how fast some officials have moved up levels in officiating and have made a running joke out of it. I am aware of people in Southern CA that have moved from 1st year official to the college level very quickly. Two examples: one official's 1st year officiating was 2005 and they are currently 2nd year in D1 and 1st year in the D League. Another official worked in Division 1 in their 4th year of officiating. There are other examples as well.

BITS - You're dead on IMO about your Truth about evaluations.

I've had some much better evals this year (meaning critical) and I've learned to say "Yes Sir" and acknowledge much of what is being said, even if I don't agree. Much of what they tell me is true AND usable, but other "advice" is throw away and officials getting evaluated need to determine which is which.

My biggest issue is "advice" on the block/charge or IMO a no call. I call my share of all three. I see no calls in HS and college, but when I see a defender go down without much contact or an offensive player go to the side of the offender to avoid contact, often I am told "I've got to call something." When I am told that, "I acknowledge it." They may be right in some cases, but not all IMO. I just don't like to call a block on the the flop! Maybe I'll grow out of it.

For the most part though, my evals this yr have been dead on as for the areas I need to improve - and they have helped me tremendously.