Coach's Question, Need Help Responding

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

I don't really get it either... I'll take the first game that's offered to me by any assigner that will offer me games on any date that I have open. Girls, boys, Jr High, rec league, whatever.

But then again, I'm only a second-year basketball official, so I rather doubt that I'm considered one of the "top officials" anyway.

At least, not yet. But I'm working on it.

Well you obviously do not work in a system like mine. Every level and every conference has an assignor. You have to accept games from different sources and the higher you go up they do not care that you are working levels below, but if you are not available when they want you, they will find someone else. So often officials have to choose or they have to adhere to the standards of that assignor.

Peace

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well you obviously do not work in a system like mine. Every level and every conference has an assignor. You have to accept games from different sources and the higher you go up they do not care that you are working levels below, but if you are not available when they want you, they will find someone else. So often officials have to choose or they have to adhere to the standards of that assignor.

Peace

Nope. Our association gets all of/a share of the games from a handful of conferences, at all levels from Jr High up to Varsity, and then our assigner doles them out to the officials in our association based upon experience, ability, availability, willingness to travel, how many times you've worked a game for that school already, etc.

I also do some rec league stuff, with a different assignor, and some travel-team stuff with 2 different assignors. I've told all four of them that the first assigner to schedule me for a game is the assignor whose game I will be working on that day.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

Nope. Our association gets all of/a share of the games from a handful of conferences, at all levels from Jr High up to Varsity, and then our assigner doles them out to the officials in our association based upon experience, ability, availability, willingness to travel, how many times you've worked a game for that school already, etc.

Not sure what you are saying "nope" to, because your system is still not like the system that many (not all) work in. I do not get any games from an association. I get games only from assignors. I get games from places where the assignor belongs to a completely different area or association than where I am located. And the assignor that gives high school games does not refer to the guy that assigns JH games.

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

I also do some rec league stuff, with a different assignor, and some travel-team stuff with 2 different assignors. I've told all four of them that the first assigner to schedule me for a game is the assignor whose game I will be working on that day.

Good for you. But I work for about 12 different people and one does not care what the other one is doing. And when playoffs and other considerations are being made, I am not working a JH game (even in my back yard) and turn away the college game even with the travel. Not going to happen. The only thing I will not do is take a game at one level and then take another game at that same level. My goals are not to work the Men's league championship game so all levels have different priorities.

You say that this is your second year, you will learn soon enough.

Peace

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not sure what you are saying "nope" to, because your system is still not like the system that many (not all) work in. I do not get any games from an association. I get games only from assignors. I get games from places where the assignor belongs to a completely different area or association than where I am located. And the assignor that gives high school games does not refer to the guy that assigns JH games.

"Nope" was supposed to mean "No, the system I work in is not like the system you work in." My apologies, I should've phrased it more clearly.

Good for you. But I work for about 12 different people and one does not care what the other one is doing. And when playoffs and other considerations are being made, I am not working a JH game (even in my back yard) and turn away the college game even with the travel. Not going to happen. The only thing I will not do is take a game at one level and then take another game at that same level. My goals are not to work the Men's league championship game so all levels have different priorities.

True enough, one assigner doesn't care what the other one is doing. And there's some games that I'd definitely prefer to work over others (I'd rather work a high school game then a rec league game, and I'm sure most everyone here feels the same way). Thing is, if assigner A gets me a game on Thursday night, and assigner B calls me 2 days later with a game on the same Thursday night, I don't feel that it would be right for me to accept the game from assigner B and then have to turn around to assigner A and say "sorry, something's come up, I can't do that game on Thursday". If I do that too many times, pretty soon I'm not going to get calls from assigner A anymore. Better to tell assigner B "Sorry, I'd love to do the game(s), but I'm already booked on Thursday."

Luckily, it works out without too much problem, because there's very little non-varsity high school or junior high games on weekends. My travel team assigner primarily does weekend tournaments, and my rec league assigner does almost exclusively evening games (after non-varsity high school games are finished) or weekends.

You say that this is your second year, you will learn soon enough.

That's the plan. I'm still in the "get as much game experience as possible" mode. I'm sure that in a few years, I'll be as jaded and devoid of my idealism as the rest of you.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

True enough, one assigner doesn't care what the other one is doing. And there's some games that I'd definitely prefer to work over others (I'd rather work a high school game then a rec league game, and I'm sure most everyone here feels the same way). Thing is, if assigner A gets me a game on Thursday night, and assigner B calls me 2 days later with a game on the same Thursday night, I don't feel that it would be right for me to accept the game from assigner B and then have to turn around to assigner A and say "sorry, something's come up, I can't do that game on Thursday". If I do that too many times, pretty soon I'm not going to get calls from assigner A anymore. Better to tell assigner B "Sorry, I'd love to do the game(s), but I'm already booked on Thursday."

I do not have much of a problem with anything you said here. I am not talking about someone calling you 2 days before anything. That is always dicey unless the person asking knows the situation that you are currently in. But most assignors where I am from not only understand this, they would be glad that you are hired by someone that is put you at a higher level. And it is a lot easier to find someone for a rec. league than it is a high school game on a big night like Friday.

A lot of this discussion is local anyway. What happens in your area or my area is not likely to apply to everyone.

Peace

[Texas Aggie]

you could make a Title IX case here

No, you can't. I didn't bother reading your reasoning since the conclusion you have here is absurd. We as officials don't take federal funds. There's also a number of other statute specific qualifiers that I don't recall off the top of my head.

[Texas Aggie]

Policies that have the effect of differential treatment for men and women are routinely overturned in court, no matter what their rationale is.

Care to give some examples?

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

No, you can't. I didn't bother reading your reasoning since the conclusion you have here is absurd. We as officials don't take federal funds. There's also a number of other statute specific qualifiers that I don't recall off the top of my head.

While I agree that Title IX is not applicaple, it actually CAN be argued that we take federal funds. School districts receive federal funds which they use to set their budget. Since athletics is a line item on the budget, which is put together based on those federal funds, and funds distributed from that line item COULD be argued to be federal funds thus required to meet federal requirements.
It is "the long arm of the law" There is no such thing as a 'free lunch" I would bring up Hillsdale College here but that is a thread hijaker!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

While I agree that Title IX is not applicaple, it actually CAN be argued that we take federal funds. School districts receive federal funds which they use to set their budget. Since athletics is a line item on the budget, which is put together based on those federal funds, and funds distributed from that line item COULD be argued to be federal funds thus required to meet federal requirements.
It is "the long arm of the law" There is no such thing as a 'free lunch" I would bring up Hillsdale College here but that is a thread hijaker!

In which case football officials would be required to work volleyball, softball, or some girls sport in order to satisfy the requirements. The slope doesn't need to be that slippery to get there.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

In which case football officials would be required to work volleyball, softball, or some girls sport in order to satisfy the requirements. The slope doesn't need to be that slippery to get there.

That doesn't follow. Basketball is different: boys and girls use the same rule book, and anyone qualified to ref boys BB is qualified to ref girls.

Look, people don't like Title IX. Fine. I'm not trying to convince anyone that it's a good idea. It is, however, the law, and it does apply to schools and the people schools hire. Some states have already recognized the issue here and require their officials to work both. Others haven't. :shrug:

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Some states have already recognized the issue here and require their officials to work both. Others haven't. :shrug:

But you're stretching it to connect the fact that some (many?) states do require it and that it is a Title IX type of issue.

Oregon only requires it with regards to post-season eligibility. And that largely stems from the fact that the post-season tournament are run as a combined boys/girls tourney and the officials selected for the tourney must be able work any of those games. In the past, they'd have an official at the tourney who hadn't worked a girls game in years...and that didn't really work all too well. So, they put in the requirement.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mbyron

That doesn't follow. Basketball is different: boys and girls use the same rule book, and anyone qualified to ref boys BB is qualified to ref girls.

Look, people don't like Title IX. Fine. I'm not trying to convince anyone that it's a good idea. It is, however, the law, and it does apply to schools and the people schools hire. Some states have already recognized the issue here and require their officials to work both. Others haven't. :shrug:

Does that have to do with Title IX or that fact that you have a numbers problem in those areas? In my area that is not accepted because those do not think it is fair to have the same officials on a varsity contest work two games back to back. You are not even likely to work back to back in a tournament here with the same gender playing. Our Title IX fights were over times games were being played. And when they tried to even make the girls and boys play on the same night at the same place it was a disaster. It was clear the fans only cared about the boy's teams and would leave the minute the girl's games started or would not come until the boy's games started. We have over 700 schools that play basketball in our state and we largely do not have officials that work those games on the same night. Some of the rural areas do on occasion, but not as a regular situation. And then what would you do with the X-Mas tournaments where the tournaments are not even on the same level or played at the same place. I work a tournament that has a girl's and boy's tournament held in the same town and they play the championships in the same building the last night. But most tournaments are not even run like that. Most tournaments are one school hosting one gender and would not be capable to hold more teams. So what do you do then?

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mbyron

That doesn't follow. Basketball is different: boys and girls use the same rule book, and anyone qualified to ref boys BB is qualified to ref girls.

Look, people don't like Title IX. Fine. I'm not trying to convince anyone that it's a good idea. It is, however, the law, and it does apply to schools and the people schools hire. Some states have already recognized the issue here and require their officials to work both. Others haven't. :shrug:

I've got no real issues with Title IX; I just happen to be in favor of acknowledging its costs (such as the Iowa State men's baseball team).

A very good argument could be made that boys and girls are separate sports. Some states still have different governing bodies. Many states have different rules. If you're going to require a boys basketball ref to work girls ball, it's not much of a stretch to require wrestling refs to work a girls sport.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Judtech

While I agree that Title IX is not applicaple, it actually CAN be argued that we take federal funds. School districts receive federal funds which they use to set their budget. Since athletics is a line item on the budget, which is put together based on those federal funds, and funds distributed from that line item COULD be argued to be federal funds thus required to meet federal requirements.
It is "the long arm of the law" There is no such thing as a 'free lunch" I would bring up Hillsdale College here but that is a thread hijaker!

You could try to argue anything in court if given the chance. But to do this on that law would seem to be a stretch. I am not a lawyer like TA, but not sure how anyone could make a separate group work games they are not obligated to work. Even if you assign someone a game, the people could flat out turn it down. Unless the schools control whether officials take a game or not I am not sure how they would be able to guarantee the top officials work both genders. Most of all this would be very subjective anyway. Who decides who the top officials are anyway?

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not sure how they would be able to guarantee the top officials work both genders. Most of all this would be very subjective anyway. Who decides who the top officials are anyway?

Peace

It wouldn't have to be the "best"...as long as all the officials worked both....which would cover best at the same time.

The schools could schedule their games in double headers and only offer the games/contracts in a boys/girl double hearder. Not much way around that if an official wanted to work...if all schools did it.