Pants: Sansabelt vs. Smitty

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Because it looks more professional.

That is an opinion, not a fact, but apparently an opinion that is widely held.
So make it a part of the requirement.
I believe what we have says: Pants shall be black. A belt, if worn shall be black. That's it.
If the scheme of things actually is "Wear a belt if you want, but others will get more/better games," I think that is a bad policy.

Wearing a belt suggests you just went around to your local Wal-Mart and picked up a pair of pants.

I think they have beltless pants at Wal-Mart.

The same as it looks silly as a football and baseball umpire to not buy at hat that fits and use and adjustable hat.

How close does one have to get to even tell whether you have on a fitted cap, let alone notice, let alone care.

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

He didn't say it was more professional. He said it looks more professional, and he's right. Like it or not, it looks more professional to do as the majority does. That's true for the kind of pants you wear, whether you get patent leather, what kind of lanyard you use, whether you have side panels, which patches you wear, whether you wear glasses on the court, etc.

Jeff's right, perception matters.

That is just fashion. The majority of the big time guys on TV people wear beltless pants. Everyone sees this on TV so they wear them too. They are just following the fashion trends they see on TV. This is no different than wearing the same type of clothes you see a movie star wearing.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Cobra

That has nothing to do with it. Belted pants are not less professional. Byron collar shirts are not less professional. Shirts with side panels are not less professional. These are just fashion issues, in a few years everything will have changed again.

What is, or is not, considered professional is "a fashion issue."

And, the current fashion is that they are more professional.

I agree that in the future this likely will not be so.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Cobra

That is just fashion. The majority of the big time guys on TV people wear beltless pants. Everyone sees this on TV so they wear them too. They are just following the fashion trends they see on TV. This is no different than wearing the same type of clothes you see a movie star wearing.

Yep, it's fashion. And the preception is that professionals adhere to the current "fashion." When the fashion changes, the perception will still be that professionals adhere to the current fashion. For the most part, it's local, too.

In my last metro area, pretty much everyone wore belted pants. I did a varsity game with the president of the local association and he wore belted pants. It wasn't an issue there; and yes, I got my pants from Walmart.

Here, it would be a last resort. Last year we got a nasty-gram from the assocation regarding the side-panel shirts (a no-no). Other areas don't care.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

How close does one have to get to even tell whether you have on a fitted cap, let alone notice, let alone care.

As someone who works football and baseball, I'll say this: If I see an baseball umpire or a football official with an adjustable hat, it's fairly safe to say I won't be getting a top notch official in that game. There will be exceptions to prove the rule, sure. But for the most part....

And with FlexFit hats quite prevalent these days, it's not that hard to get a hat that *looks* like a fitted hat even if it technically isn't.

[stripes]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The pealess whistle literally speaks for itself. It's a matter of superior tone and volume. (It's easier to hear) If there is no specific dress code, but we should
"wear beltless pants if we wish to advance," I don't get that.

This seems to be the type of opinion that is held by people in my area who never advance. They think that things like this shouldn't matter so they do not need to do what other who are advancing do. It might be an arbitrary standard and you may not agree with it, but if that is what people are doing, play the game. Refusing to play the game because you don't like the game will not help you. I tell officials who are trying to climb the ladder that you want to stand out, but only for your abilities, never for your uniform.

If it is as simple as you will not advance without beltless (or pleated or whatever) pants...GET THE RIGHT PANTS. This is something that is very easy and is in your control. Trying to move up the ladder is so much about things that you cannot control. Control the things you can and help yourself. If you don't want to play the game, don't complain when you lose.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stripes

If you don't want to play the game, don't complain when you lose.

+1
It applies to the rest of life as well.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by stripes

They think that things like this shouldn't matter so they do not need to do what other who are advancing do.

I'm amused by the guys who think that, because fashion shouldn't matter, they can single-handedly make it not matter by declining to follow it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I'm amused by the guys who think that, because fashion shouldn't matter, they can single-handedly make it not matter by declining to follow it.

Some that decline to follow it in the name of principle, wouldn't get a better schedule if they did follow it. They simply use the uniform/appearance as a scapegoat for the reason they don't get better games.

[just another ref]

There are exceptions, I suppose? Who would look better/more professional?

Felix Unger with a belt, or Oscar Madison without one.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That is an opinion, not a fact, but apparently an opinion that is widely held.
So make it a part of the requirement.
I believe what we have says: Pants shall be black. A belt, if worn shall be black. That's it.
If the scheme of things actually is "Wear a belt if you want, but others will get more/better games," I think that is a bad policy.

Well it is a fact that people will make judgments about you and anyone based on their appearance and what you wear. It applies to a guy trying to get a date a woman or a person going to a job interview. I am not going to try to impress a woman by looking like a slop on a date and I am not going to go to a job interview in blue jeans and tennis shoes. And I am certainly not going to work a basketball game with belted pants when everyone else is not wearing them.

Originally Posted by just another ref

I think they have beltless pants at Wal-Mart.

I am sure they do. But I doubt they sell the brand that most officials use or you can buy at Honigs, Gerry Davis Sports or any number of officiating outlets sell. Just like I would not buy a officiating shirt from Wal-Mart, Target or some named sporting good store, I would not buy pants from them either.

Originally Posted by just another ref

How close does one have to get to even tell whether you have on a fitted cap, let alone notice, let alone care.

Actually they do care and they do not have to be close. They can look at your uniform. Just like people can tell someone has sweats on instead of the black pants sold at the places I mentioned for football. Just like I could tell an official was wearing black jeans and not officiating pants years ago. And yes it was reflected in his officiating (surprise!!!!! ).

Peace

[constable]

Originally Posted by tjones1

Are there still officials who use a pea whistle?

It is in my boards constitution that one must use a fox 40. They don't care if it is a mini, classic, or sonik but it's gotta be a fox.

[Rich]

I talk with lower level officials and I've frequently had guys ask where we buy our pants. I give them the names of official supply houses and brands and then they ask how much the pants cost. When I tell them, they say something like "Walmart is good enough for me." I can tell. Maybe the average fan can't, but when people's pants have white pockets that show when they run up and down the court, an official certainly can. Part of this game is credibility and yes, I want to be seen as credible by other officials and my partners.

I would never dream of buying an officiating shirt "off the rack" at Dick's Sporting Goods or another one of those places that sells the 30-grit polyester shirt that would've been stylish in 1977. Times have changed. We do get paid for this gig and expecting us to spend a couple hundred dollars a season to buy decent pants, shirts, and shoes isn't too much to ask, really.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Who would look more professional?
Felix Unger with a belt, or Oscar Madison without one.

Are these names mixed up, or have I been drinking too much nog?

[just another ref]

The point I was trying to make is that I hope no one lets the exterior of the package overshadow the contents. The guy who declared the game over in the thread

Officials dismissed between games

is one from our association who does not wear a belt.