Pants: Sansabelt vs. Smitty

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That statement alone is fair enough. But, back to the example of the other guy mentioned above. We've both been with the same association for about the same time. I'm the one everybody calls with their rules questions (no small thanks to this board) and he pulls a stunt like this. (among others) Now if this guy gets a playoff game and I don't and the reason given is "His pants look better," be it here or wherever, I find that disturbing.

I have never know a guy to get a game just because they are the go-to guy for rules. That guy you mentioned might be way too technical for someone's taste to hire them. I do know officials that get games because they can referee.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have never know a guy to get a game just because they are the go-to guy for rules.

To be sure, that alone is not enough. But which would you rather have on the floor, the guy who knows the game shouldn't be over, or the guy with the nicer pants?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

To be sure, that alone is not enough. But which would you rather have on the floor, the guy who knows the game shouldn't be over, or the guy with the nicer pants?

Those are not mutually exclusive categories. And I'd rather have the guy with the nicer pants as a partner, cause *I* know the rules.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Those are not mutually exclusive categories. And I'd rather have the guy with the nicer pants as a partner, cause *I* know the rules.

The fact that you know the rules won't keep your partner with the nice pants from calling a travel from the lead, 2 man, on a player who fumbled the ball near the top of the key, 10 feet from you.

The aforementioned guy did that to me once.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The fact that you know the rules won't keep your partner with the nice pants from calling a travel from the lead, 2 man, on a player who fumbled the ball near the top of the key, 10 feet from you.

The aforementioned guy did that to me once.

I'd still rather work with a guy that knows which pants to buy. If I see someone in Dockers and a belt, I just assume he's going to stink on the floor, cause he probably will.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I'd still rather work with a guy that knows which pants to buy. If I see someone in Dockers and a belt, I just assume he's going to stink on the floor, cause he probably will.

Because he does not have enough sense to find out what he/she should wear, I doubt they are going to find out the difference between a live ball and a dead ball.

Peace

[just another ref]

For the record, if the style of pants is an issue where I work, I am blissfully unaware of it. I honestly do not know how many wear belts or not, I'm thinking it is close to an even split. Is appearance an issue? Of course. Is it more important than knowing whether the game should be over or not?

If an association wants all officials to match, simple, it should specify the brand, the style, whatever it takes. If that same association allows all kinds, but favors officials who wear one because someone (who?) said it looks better, that is a bad policy. If that same association penalizes an official for anything, without at least letting it be known that that one thing is discouraged, I find that unacceptable.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

To be sure, that alone is not enough. But which would you rather have on the floor, the guy who knows the game shouldn't be over, or the guy with the nicer pants?

They do not have the have nicer pants, just the pants style everyone else is wearing. And I know the game enough (and I am often a guy that gets asked rules questions by my positions I hold) to get through a game and not let something crazy happen.

Peace