Article pointing finger at Racist Referees

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

That already happens.

He didn't ask if it happens, he asked if it was acceptable.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Berkut

He didn't ask if it happens, he asked if it was acceptable.

You have a person that is questioning the current system, and people here are defending that system. So it must not be a big deal to those that think everything is peachy.

Peace

[WreckRef]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You have a person that is questioning the current system, and people here are defending that system. So it must not be a big deal to those that think everything is peachy.

Peace

From what I've read, it sounds like you are an advocate for having refs officiate their own race more often than not. So what happens to me since I'm Asian, do I not get to officiate at all since probably less than 1% of players are Asian? Should I only ref 1% of the total number of games?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by WreckRef

From what I've read, it sounds like you are an advocate for having refs officiate their own race more often than not. So what happens to me since I'm Asian, do I not get to officiate at all since probably less than 1% of players are Asian? Should I only ref 1% of the total number of games?

Did you actually read what I said?

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Did you actually read what I said?

Peace

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

[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.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You have a person that is questioning the current system, and people here are defending that system. So it must not be a big deal to those that think everything is peachy.

Peace

You are avoiding the question.

Not accepting the claim that we should practice racism in officiating selection in one particular direction is not "defending the current system" or claiming everything is "peachy". Those are you straws.

So - is it ok or not if assigners decide that they should preferentially select white officials over black officials based on some criteria having nothing to do with the competency of the officials in question?

That deserves an answer regardless of whether you think it happens, or regardless of whether someone or anyone thinks that it is peachy if in fact it does happen.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Berkut

You are avoiding the question.

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.

Originally Posted by Berkut

Not accepting the claim that we should practice racism in officiating selection in one particular direction is not "defending the current system" or claiming everything is "peachy". Those are you straws.

I do not know how it is racism to have people that look like the people participating. Racism is a belief in superiority, not a practice to hire people that look like everyone that is involved. 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. You are telling me there was not one guy available to make that happen? And was it racism to exclude all Black officials from a game where one team in a game is Black? 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?

Originally Posted by Berkut

So - is it ok or not if assigners decide that they should preferentially select white officials over black officials based on some criteria having nothing to do with the competency of the officials in question?

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?

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? 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. 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?

Originally Posted by Berkut

That deserves an answer regardless of whether you think it happens, or regardless of whether someone or anyone thinks that it is peachy if in fact it does happen.

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

[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.

[Berkut]

I am curious if those who think that "affirmative action"-like activities in regards to officials should be engaged in in order to maintain "diversity" would also agree that the same practice should be engaged in with respect to the "racial" (understanding that the term "race" is largely fake) make up of the players as well.

Note that I am not asking whether this happens - I am asking whether they would advocate for it to happen. You know, in an effort to promote the appearance of diversity that is so important.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Berkut

He didn't ask if it happens, he asked if it was acceptable.

If it already happens and has been happening for years I guess it's acceptable already.

Being as I'm 1/2 Black (father, Republican) and 1/2 White (mother, Democrat; plus White step-mother, Democrat) I'm very comfortable any time this type of discussion comes up.

But I will make this comment based solely on my life's observations. When Blacks encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they get upset but they realize it's a part of life and are lot quicker to move on and realize "it is what it is". When Whites encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they react as if it's the worst thing that could ever happen to them and that someone should step in and make sure it nevers happens again. In other words, again based solely of what I have personally observed in my 45 years on earth, Whites have a lot more extreme reaction to being the victim of racism than Blacks do.

Originally Posted by Berkut

If the officer should lose his job, it should be because he is incompetent.

Whether he was incompetent because he is a racist, or incompetent while not being racist is both immaterial and almost impossible to ascertain.

But that race card is just too enticing to leave it unplayed.

It's very possible to ascertain. The officer has friends and co-workers. They know whether or not he is racist. The reason the so-called "race card" is brought out in these situations is because though African-American make up around 11-13% of the US population it seems as though African-Americans are involved in an over-whelming majority of these publicized incidents.

[IUgrad92]

Having known, and being good friends with the losing coach in the OP, I can guarantee that his focus was on his own teams' turnovers, missed free throws, and the number of defensive breakdowns that caused his team to lose that game. Much different than what would come from any parent, as Mr. Ray appears to be. And unfortunately, due to a public position he holds in the community, has a bigger platform to be able to spew from.

Likewise, I know one of the officials on that crew that Mr. Ray chose to target. He is from the Indianapolis area, works just as many 'diverse' high school basketball games as any other official in the state, and is regarded very highly amongst coaches and ADs in the Indianapolis area and where ever he works.

Unfortunately, Mr. Ray chose to take the stance that this team (his team) was a victim, instead of taking the stance that his team just didn't quite do enough to win. A stance that is seen all too much in today's society.

BTW, how does Mr. Ray know that the official said "he didn't want to impact the game"?? I seriously doubt Mr. Ray was allowed in the locker room after the game and I doubt any of the officials held a media conference after the game. How incredulous to make such a statement.

Mr. Ray, you deserve no less than to be given the status of 'fanboy'.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If it already happens and has been happening for years I guess it's acceptable already.

Lots of thing have happened before and happen right now that various people do not find acceptable. Again, avoiding the question.

Do YOU find it acceptable? Does Rut?

Quit avoiding the question by telling us how it is already happening. Is it or is not acceptable *with you* for assignors to preferentially choose "white" officials over "black" officials under some circumstances?

Being as I'm 1/2 Black (father, Republican) and 1/2 White (mother, Democrat; plus White step-mother, Democrat) I'm very comfortable any time this type of discussion comes up.

Congratulations. The only thing I am certain of about my race is that I am 100% human.

But I will make this comment based solely on my life's observations. When Blacks encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they get upset but they realize it's a part of life and are lot quicker to move on and realize "it is what it is". When Whites encounter discrimination and/or bigotry they react as if it's the worst thing that could ever happen to them and that someone should step in and make sure it nevers happens again. In other words, again based solely of what I have personally observed in my 45 years on earth, Whites have a lot more extreme reaction to being the victim of racism than Blacks do.

A nice generalization based on...what? How "white" does someone have to be to be certain that they will "have an extreme reaction"? Does the one drop white rule apply here?

I guess you are white, since you said you were 1/2 white - certainly you are just as white as you are black - do you find yourself having a "lot more extreme reactions"?

It's very possible to ascertain. The officer has friends and co-workers. They know whether or not he is racist.

They do? How could they tell? Is it possible to be a racist and not be obvious?

What difference would it make anyway - if we found out he was NOT obviously racist, would that make his actions acceptable? Is it ok to be incompetent, just as long as you are not "racist"?

What questions would we ask to find out if he was racist? Perhaps we could see if he makes overly broad and generalized comments about other based on this perceived "race" thing?

Would comments along the lines of "black people tend to react in a certain way, while white people react in some other 'extreme' way" suffice to ascertain if he is a racist? As an example, of course.

The reason the so-called "race card" is brought out in these situations is because though African-American make up around 11-13% of the US population it seems as African-Americans are involved in an over-whelming majority of these publicized situations.

And what does that tell us?

Is there *anything* that tells us beyond how terribly racist everyone is - anything at all? Is it *possible* that there are reason that have nothing to do with race or racism that explain why there are more "white" officials than "black" officials (and I defy anyone to come up with a coherent and objective definition of those terms to begin with)?

Does it bother you that while "black" people make up 11-13% of the population, they make up 100% of the starting corner backs in the NFL? Should we look into this to see if there is racism at work?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Berkut

Lots of thing have happened before and happen right now that various people do not find acceptable. Again, avoiding the question.

Do YOU find it acceptable? Does Rut?

Quit avoiding the question by telling us how it is already happening. Is it or is not acceptable *with you* for assignors to preferentially choose "white" officials over "black" officials under some circumstances?



Congratulations. The only thing I am certain of about my race is that I am 100% human.



A nice generalization based on...what? How "white" does someone have to be to be certain that they will "have an extreme reaction"? Does the one drop white rule apply here?

I guess you are white, since you said you were 1/2 white - certainly you are just as white as you are black - do you find yourself having a "lot more extreme reactions"?



They do? How could they tell? Is it possible to be a racist and not be obvious?

What difference would it make anyway - if we found out he was NOT obviously racist, would that make his actions acceptable? Is it ok to be incompetent, just as long as you are not "racist"?

What questions would we ask to find out if he was racist? Perhaps we could see if he makes overly broad and generalized comments about other based on this perceived "race" thing?

Would comments along the lines of "black people tend to react in a certain way, while white people react in some other 'extreme' way" suffice to ascertain if he is a racist? As an example, of course.



And what does that tell us?

Is there *anything* that tells us beyond how terribly racist everyone is - anything at all? Is it *possible* that there are reason that have nothing to do with race or racism that explain why there are more "white" officials than "black" officials (and I defy anyone to come up with a coherent and objective definition of those terms to begin with)?

Does it bother you that while "black" people make up 11-13% of the population, they make up 100% of the starting corner backs in the NFL? Should we look into this to see if there is racism at work?

Your reaction tells me alot about you. Very emotional as if someone has done something to you.

I don't go around worrying about what is or isn't acceptable. Why don't you answer your own questions? My answers aren't going to affect how you perceive this or any other situation. My opinions are based on my lifetime of experiences. And whether you like it or not my physical appearance allows me for hear things said by people who wouldn't say them in front of me if they knew what my parents looked like.

I, personally, have never really encountered any discrimination that has adversely affected me. But I'll let you guess which one of my 3 parents has relayed stories of racial discrimination that directly affected them. But I guess you would say those experiences are balanced out by racial make-up of cornerbacks in the NFL.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You're reaction tells me alot about you. Very emotional as if someone has done something to you.

I don't go around worrying about what is or isn't acceptable. Why don't you answer your own questions? My answers aren't going to affect how you perceive this or any other situation. My opinions are based on my lifetime of experiences.

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.