Article pointing finger at Racist Referees

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think many wonder if you even read what you say.

I do. I am just not coming from your point of view. I think BadNewsRef said it best. This is a situation that I know intimately and I am not shocked that someone talks about this like many here.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Berkut

LOL, no nothing has "happened to me", and my response was no more "emotional" than your own - certainly considerably less than this attempt to make this about me, rather than my argument.

Your reaction tells me a lot about you - and your reaction is that you refuse to address my points, and decide to play the man instead of the ball.

I play the cards that are dealt. I don't need to answer your question. Just like you don't need to address my entire post when you respond.

Like I've already said, I can easily have these conversations. But some people can't because they want to control the direction the conversation goes.

I don't find it acceptable that openly gay men and women can be booted out of the military. What do I get for that, a cookie or something?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yes, that is unacceptable. Answer this....Since Illinois is ~75% white, do you, in the name of consistency, suggest that several of those teams should have been disallowed from the tourney since they didn't match the population of the state?? ... I didn't think so.

In fact, the officials exactly matched the population of the sate. I'd say that, from looking purely at the numbers, the mix of officials was not suspect no matter how much noise someone made about it.


If 50% a team is black but only 20% of the school is black, should they kick 3 black kids off the team to make room for 3 white kids...all to make sure the team looks like those around them? (and no, I don't).

Again, the officials in your example above seem to represent the general society almost perfectly. The fact that the all-black team(s) beat the all/mostly-white team(s) from some other area doesn't imply anything about the ability of the officials and should have no influence one way or the other about who is selected to work the tourney. It should be the best 12...and in a large pool, that 12 will resemble the general population.

I can tell you that from the Portland area, the representation of minorities in the state tournament is at a level that is both greater than their proportion of the population and also greater than their proportion of basketball officials. And they're not selected by color either....they are simply getting the recognition of their peers (all officials)..who put them there based on their abilities. In other words, they earned it...it was not handed to them to make some numbers look good.

I do not think that Illinois is 75% white. For one the largest city in the state is the third largest city in the country and does not have that racial background. And if the entire city of Chicago decided to vote a certain way in an election, Downstate Illinois would be out voted. It might be closer to 50%, but I do not have all the data. But I grew up in rural Illinois and the town I currently live in has more people in that little suburb than where I grew up. Almost every big city in Illinois does not have an overwhelming white population in places like Aurora, Springfield, Peoria and even Rockford.

I do not even know what you are talking about when you say consistency, because most of the officials assigned to tournament assignments do not reflect many of the teams, and I have not been complaining or suggesting that there should be such a representation.

Maybe this is making you upset because someone is telling you that what you think is not the only voice on this topic.

Peace

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Let me make something very clear. I love these discussions. These discussions are conversations I have often and like having. I am not afraid of saying what I feel on them. I do not need to avoid any question. The reality is that people live in a different life perspective and these things shock them because they never have to face these situations head on.

I do not know how it is racism to have people that look like the people participating.

It is racism to suggest that the "race" of the officials ought to be a factor in deciding how they should be assigned to games.

Racism is a belief in superiority, not a practice to hire people that look like everyone that is involved.

Not necessarily - it is racism to base a hiring decision on the race of the person involved, whether you think theya re superior or not.

And if the players of one team are all Black, I do not see why it has to be racism to suggest one of the officials can look like them.

It is racism to demand that one/two/or three of the officials MUST look like them.

You are telling me there was not one guy available to make that happen?

I am telling you it doesn't matter if there was someone available or not - it is racism to demand that the make up of a officiating crew be decided based on the race of the officials involved.
[/quote]
And was it racism to exclude all Black officials from a game where one team in a game is Black?
[/quote]

This is a strawman - nobody had advocated excluding black officials from anything, least of all me.

Or are you saying that without a shadow of a doubt those were the best of the best and no one but those 3 could have worked the game?

I am saying the decision should be made in a color blind manner, and their "race" is not a variable that should enter into it in any fashion.

It baffles me when people do not actually read what people say. Did I not include places you work, where you live, experience, conference staffs you are a member or any number of factors?

It baffles me when people do not read what people say. I did not ask about those other factors, I asked about one specific factor.

Is it acceptable to you for assignors to exclude black officials from a game for ANY reason?

At this point, it is clear you will not answer this question - which pretty much answers the question, I think.

Why do people say over and over here that officials should not work in towns or schools they are associated with, but you cannot even mention that if one of the officials looked like one of the teams, the complaining would go away?

Sometimes complaining is is not worth making "go away". In fact, sometimes making intolerant people complain is a good thing.

Example: Do you feel Rosa Parks should have just quit being so much trouble, since if she had just gone along, then there would be no complaining?

I know of an official that worked a Christmas Tournament game where he shared the same last name as one of the top players. People complained because of this fact and those did not realize that the two had no tie to each other.

A fine example of where complaining should be ignored. Do you advocate that the officials should not have had the game because his last name was the same, so as to avoid complaining?

If people make that assumption based on nothing more than a last name, what do you think people start to accuse people of when the team that gets a close call or two is called by a crew that looks nothing like them?

I think people complain about games that go against them regardless. if they want to couch their complaints in terms that make their own intolerance clear, then I do not think we do anyone any favors by responding to them, much less accommodating them.

If you had read everything I said you would have known the answer. Also if you do not mind that someone accuses you of what is perceived as racism or racial bias, then keep doing what you are doing. Then there should be no reason to be upset by what people accuse you of. You are doing what works.
Peace

I disagree - I think it is perfectly reasonable to find unfounded accusations of racism contemptible and worthy of scorn. I do not think we should ignore it, or conclude that we are "doing what works". However, OTHER people being contemptible is not good reason to change something.

What a curious twist this debate has taken. I never thought I would be arguing with someone about race where their position is that we should and ought to make race based decisions so as to avoid upsetting people.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have not been complaining or suggesting that there should be such a representation.

Exactly!!!

RichMSN asked a specific question. I answered, as did JRut, that it already happens. Neither one of us complained that it happens.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Exactly!!!

RichMSN asked a specific question. I answered, as did JRut, that it already happens. Neither one of us complained that it happens.

That pretty much says it all.

Peace

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I play the cards that are dealt. I don't need to answer your question. Just like you don't need to address my entire post when you respond.

Of course you do not need to answer my questions. It would be polite todoso however.

Like I've already said, I can easily have these conversations. But some people can't because they want to control the direction the conversation goes.

These people being those that ask you hard questions?

I supect you cannot "easily have this conversation" - since a conversation implies give and take, questions and answers.

I don't find it acceptable that openly gay men and women can be booted out of the military. What do I get for that, a cookie or something?

What do you want for it?

I don't find it acceptable either. I don't find bigotry and intolerance acceptable in any form.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That pretty much says it all.

Peace

Sadly, it just repeats the original evasion of the question.

The question was not "Do you think this happens" the question was "Do you find at acceptable for it to happen".

I am still curious about your stance on the "racial" make up of the athletes themselves in relation to the racial makeup of the populations they come from.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think that Illinois is 75% white.

2006 numbers from Illinois Mapstats: White 79.3%
Black 15.0%

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Berkut

Sadly, it just repeats the original evasion of the question.

The question was not "Do you think this happens" the question was "Do you find at acceptable for it to happen".

Why are you so offended that there is a suggestion that there be a more diverse officiating staff or crew, but you are not equally offended when there is a complete exclusion of a group of people that clearly are participating in the event?

Originally Posted by Berkut

I am still curious about your stance on the "racial" make up of the athletes themselves in relation to the racial makeup of the populations they come from.

I cannot speak for where you live, but most schools I come in contact with; the kids that attend those schools come from those school districts. Even the private schools have kids that are relatively from the community in which the schools are located. I do not think you can have schools and exclude people that are from the community if the entire school reflects the community. I guess you could, but it would be very hard. Then again I am not sure what that has to do with who works games?

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Berkut

Sadly, it just repeats the original evasion of the question.

The question was not "Do you think this happens" the question was "Do you find at acceptable for it to happen".

I am still curious about your stance on the "racial" make up of the athletes themselves in relation to the racial makeup of the populations they come from.

LOL!!!

Peace

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why are you so offended that there is a suggestion that there be a more diverse officiating staff or crew, but you are not equally offended when there is a complete exclusion of a group of people that clearly are participating in the event?

Yet another strawman.

I am not offended by the suggestion that there may be a more diverse officiating crew. That is a a bald faced lie.

Nor have I said I would NOT be offended if in fact there was a complete exclusion of a group from participating - in fact I would find that *highly* offensive, and explicitly said do.

And again, you are avoiding the issue, now in favor of rather offensive personal claims about my position.

I cannot speak for where you live, but most schools I come in contact with; the kids that attend those schools come from those school districts. Even the private schools have kids that are relatively from the community in which the schools are located. I do not think you can have schools and exclude people that are from the community if the entire school reflects the community. I guess you could, but it would be very hard. Then again I am not sure what that has to do with who works games?

Peace

Again, that is not what I asked, and I certainly did not suggest that anyone be excluded - that is your claim, not mine.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

LOL!!!

Peace

So we are left with your claim that officials should somehow represent, on a ratio basis, the make-up of the players - but the players, however, should NOT represent on any kind of similar ratio, the populations that they are drawn from.

Gosh, seems kind of inconsistent.

Maybe we should just quit trying to make intolerant people happy, and select the best players and best officials, and ignore what color their skin might be. If that causes some idiots on either side to be unhappy, we should just congratulate ourselves. Bigots should be unhappy. It means you are doing something right.

Just a thought.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Berkut

What do you want for it?

I don't find it acceptable either. I don't find bigotry and intolerance acceptable in any form.

I want the same thing I would get if I answer your oft repeated question.

I answer questions that further conversations. Assume answer "yes, it's acceptable". What's your next question?

Now assume I answer, "no, it's not acceptable". What's your next question?

[Brad]

This thread has by far run its course...