postseason, votes, and technicals

[biggravy]

I want to hear how things are done in other states.

In Kansas, officials are selected for post season play by the number of coaches votes they receive. Coaches have a form to list officials and it is mandatory they send it to the state by a certain date or face a fine. In my area (southeast KS) we've been told for two years straight that there are not enough officials in our area doing post season. Officials from outside the area are brought in to do our substates. That tells me that coaches in other areas of the state are voting for officials. The problem is that opinions I hear from coach friends is that most coaches here feel officials suck across the board and therefore will only vote for a couple officials. It is like an us versus them mentality. The other problem is we have been hammered for two years straight by the state, our assigner, and our supervisor that we are not enforcing penalties for unsporting behavior. I have yet to see a coach happy about getting a T, and it seems every coach you T is one more coach that isn't listing you for post season.

How do other states do things?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by biggravy

I want to hear how things are done in other states.

In Kansas, officials are selected for post season play by the number of coaches votes they receive. Coaches have a form to list officials and it is mandatory they send it to the state by a certain date or face a fine. In my area (southeast KS) we've been told for two years straight that there are not enough officials in our area doing post season. Officials from outside the area are brought in to do our substates. That tells me that coaches in other areas of the state are voting for officials. The problem is that opinions I hear from coach friends is that most coaches here feel officials suck across the board and therefore will only vote for a couple officials. It is like an us versus them mentality. The other problem is we have been hammered for two years straight by the state, our assigner, and our supervisor that we are not enforcing penalties for unsporting behavior. I have yet to see a coach happy about getting a T, and it seems every coach you T is one more coach that isn't listing you for post season.

How do other states do things?

This is one of my biggest complaints. Allowing the coaches to select the post-season officials is absolutely absurd. It compromises the integrity of the game and makes the officials more worried about collecting the coach's vote than properly enforcing the rules.

Fortunately, in my state the coaches have no part in the process. The state office allocates slots in the regional and state tournaments to the various associations in the state and those associations select the officials. My association uses a peer ranking process for the selection and the executive board and commissioner handle assigning which games those who are selected get to work.

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Fortunately, in my state the coaches have no part in the process. The state office allocates slots in the regional and state tournaments to the various associations in the state and those associations select the officials. My association uses a peer ranking process for the selection and the executive board and commissioner handle assigning which games those who are selected get to work.

Same in my area of Norcal.

[dbking]

I have worked in a number of states due to real job. I will give them the ranking that I perceive them to be with some editorial remarks.

KY - Assigning is a state run thing for all games by region. You can only work your region. B+ Playoff assigning process is done by region assigner / state, B+

CT - IAABO is the ruling organization and have a fantastic rating system used for assigning games and playoff, A+ ( a lot of work to tabulate and evaluate )

IL - You have seen the details. From my perspective, home grown officials in local associations and some associations skew results. It is very difficult to move in from out of state and be seen by enough assignors and leagues. I worked in suburban Chicago area and had schedules from 8 assignors. Difficult process to manage. Assigning, C- State Playoff, C+

KS - Assigning is all done by conference. Many fewer schools that IL. I work for one HS assignor who has 31 schools. Plenty of opportunity, decent ball, B+. State playoff assignment, C-

[representing]

Originally Posted by biggravy

I want to hear how things are done in other states.

In Kansas, officials are selected for post season play by the number of coaches votes they receive. Coaches have a form to list officials and it is mandatory they send it to the state by a certain date or face a fine. In my area (southeast KS) we've been told for two years straight that there are not enough officials in our area doing post season. Officials from outside the area are brought in to do our substates. That tells me that coaches in other areas of the state are voting for officials. The problem is that opinions I hear from coach friends is that most coaches here feel officials suck across the board and therefore will only vote for a couple officials. It is like an us versus them mentality. The other problem is we have been hammered for two years straight by the state, our assigner, and our supervisor that we are not enforcing penalties for unsporting behavior. I have yet to see a coach happy about getting a T, and it seems every coach you T is one more coach that isn't listing you for post season.

How do other states do things?

I think coaches should be allowed to express their opinion about certain officials, but I don't think they should be given the right to pick and choose who officiates their games. I think it's too much control, and it would be too much pressure on me to know that Team A preferred me. It would be like "well, that team thinks I'm gonna be doing them some favors since they've preferred me to do their game" if you know what I mean. We have a ridiculous system in our chapter where coaches can pick and choose their officials, but I left that to be in another thread so I don't hijack your thread.

[zm1283]

Our state uses a rating process where coaches are required to rate their officials, with 5 being the worst and 1 being the best. They average your number out at the end of the year. I'm not entirely sure how much stock they put in your rating for district/playoff assignments, but it's pretty obvious that some officials refuse to TCOB because they fear a bad rating from a coach.

[representing]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Our state uses a rating process where coaches are required to rate their officials, with 5 being the worst and 1 being the best. They average your number out at the end of the year. I'm not entirely sure how much stock they put in your rating for district/playoff assignments, but it's pretty obvious that some officials refuse to TCOB because they fear a bad rating from a coach.

Agreed. +1

Coaches have too much power these days, it has become a political thing. It has been confessed to me by some officials that they haven't given out warranted Technical fouls because of the fear of being scratched. Me, I don't care. You get a T if you deserve it.

[JRutledge]

I like our current system. Coach’s ratings are a factor, but it is a very small part of the overall process. Officials make a bigger deal out of it than the state does, but that is because most people cannot read the information they are given. Oh well, that is the way it is sometimes.

Peace

[LocDog249]

To expand a little on how IL does things..... They have a power rating of 40 pts max. Each school, assignor and officials association is allowed to submit a top 15 list. The state then takes all the top 15 lists, and ranks everyone in the state based on how many they have been on in the past 3 years. If you are in the 90th percentile, you get 5 points, 80 = 4 points and so on. Then, each certified official is allowed to rate other officials. Coaches also rate officials each game. (1=best, 5=worst) these scores are added up and you are ranked again based on your percentile 90%=5, 80%=4 etc. In IL there are 3 different levels of advancement as official, certified=5, recognized=3, registered=1. You also get up to 5 points based on previous tournament experience. You get points based upon how recently you went to clinics, and a few other things that I don't remember. The state says that postseason assignments are made based on your power rating. They do take things like geography into consideration also.
Frankly I like the way IL does it. A few bad ratings from coaches won't kill your rating because your peer votes can balance it out. There are always things you can do to bring your rating up, like going to clinics to try to become better.
Where I am now, it is also a combination of coaches and officials votes for playoffs, and the commissioner gets a few picks also. The only weird thing to me is that you can't work playoffs back to back years here. Although from what I understand, this is just for going "down state"