I'm thinking about giving it up.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by ThatOneRef

. . . these YOUNG refs that can "RUN" or be "mentally" able to handle a 2 man game.

A young ref who can run OR be mentally able . . .? Does this have to be an "either/or"?
We have such a "younger" guy on our regular crew. We are amazed at his mental acuity and judgement and he is amazed that guys nearly twice his age can get up and down the court as well as he.
I've been with OLD refs (same age as I) who can neither RUN nor be mentally able to handle a 2 man game. Not at the varsity level, but on the way down and out. Not always the easiest thing to suggest that a long-time official "hang it up" and, perhaps, volunteer to man the association video crew or something.
As for MSNRich, without seeing him in action, just sensing the fast-paced schedule he maintains over in that part of the country, I'd say he's not one of those guys at this time. Therefore my vote is for him not to render it over to those unable at this time to provide the quality of service he is still providing.

[APG]

Originally Posted by ThatOneRef

Seems like you guys are just getting OLD, maybe let these YOUNG refs in that can "RUN" or be "mentally" able to handle a 2 man game. (not that hard....) I don't see any reason to have 3 officials. If the TWO officials are "on the same page" (so to speak) then they should be MORE than adequate.

I'm a young official. I don't have any trouble running up and down the court. I don't think that those on the boards couldn't mentally handle a two person game. I'm sure most of them have been doing two man a lot longer than you and I have. I realize that even if I'm on the same page with my partner, we will miss calls even if we're both on the same page. Two man is an absolute joke compared to three man. Angles, court coverage, positioning, consistency, no guessing...the list is long about why 3 man is heads above 2 man.

Plus, you'll find with doing 3 man, it actually benefits us younger officials because we can be paired up with two veteran officials. You go back to 2 man, and you're going to have assignors only putting two veterans on the bigger games and that younger official on a lesser or lower level due to all the varsity slots being taken up.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I'm a young official. I don't have any trouble running up and down the court. I don't think that those on the boards couldn't mentally handle a two person game. I'm sure most of them have been doing two man a lot longer than you and I have. I realize that even if I'm on the same page with my partner, we will miss calls even if we're both on the same page. Two man is an absolute joke compared to three man. Angles, court coverage, positioning, consistency, no guessing...the list is long about why 3 man is heads above 2 man.

Plus, you'll find with doing 3 man, it actually benefits us younger officials because we can be paired up with two veteran officials. You go back to 2 man, and you're going to have assignors only putting two veterans on the bigger games and that younger official on a lesser or lower level due to all the varsity slots being taken up.

This friend speaks my mind, excpet the part about having trouble running up and down the court. 3-whistle is definitely all about angles and coverage. Male players are so big that it's impossible for two refs to see everything. Female players are so much more physical, with so much more contact, that it's impossible to be consistent and to cover everything. 3-whistle is unquestionably the better way to go.

[tref]

One of our major HS leagues went 2 person this year & those were some of the toughest games I've ever worked!! I hear that other leagues plan on going 2 next season. This is a tough game to call with 3 whistles let alone going back to 2

My message to assignors will be, "if its not 3 dont pick me."

[Loudwhistle2]

Originally Posted by ThatOneRef

Seems like you guys are just getting OLD, maybe let these YOUNG refs in that can "RUN" or be "mentally" able to handle a 2 man game. (not that hard....) I don't see any reason to have 3 officials. If the TWO officials are "on the same page" (so to speak) then they should be MORE than adequate.

You are obviously a green reff to have an opinion like that! Experience will show you that 3 man provides way better court coverage and less things are missed. Sounds like you have an axe to grind because you may not be getting the higher games. I would suggest you change your tune about older officials. I'm not old and I treasure the time I get to spend officiating with the veteran reffs. If I ever have the choice of who will work with me in a varsity game, I'll pick the senior reffs every time! Officiating basketball isn't all about being fast up and down the court, senior reffs through their experience have learned to have a slow whistle and superior game management.

[PIAA REF]

Every Year we discuss on here about who does 3 and who uses 2 whistle crews for varsity. I am just so shocked that some areas still even consider using 2 on any varsity games. We have been doing 3 on all varsity games in my district in PA for I believe 6 years now for all varsity contests. Playoffs and bigger schools had went to 3 a few years before that. THere are just parts of the court that a 2 whistle crew cannot cover to the fullest. Fouls eventually get harder when players realize certain things can't be seen. I know money is an issue, but you would think that AD's and even school board members would look at the safety of their student athletes when making these decisions. My district really stepped years ago when negotiating our contracts. We went to various school districts, talked to reps for the district and presented why 3-man (woman) crews are so vital to the game. It worked, not right away but soon all schools followed suit. Best of luck to all of you, but I encourage you as officials in the same region to keep fighting for 3 whistle crews. It is so much better for the game!

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by PIAA REF

Every Year we discuss on here about who does 3 and who uses 2 whistle crews for varsity. I am just so shocked that some areas still even consider using 2 on any varsity games. We have been doing 3 on all varsity games in my district in PA for I believe 6 years now for all varsity contests. Playoffs and bigger schools had went to 3 a few years before that. THere are just parts of the court that a 2 whistle crew cannot cover to the fullest. Fouls eventually get harder when players realize certain things can't be seen. I know money is an issue, but you would think that AD's and even school board members would look at the safety of their student athletes when making these decisions. My district really stepped years ago when negotiating our contracts. We went to various school districts, talked to reps for the district and presented why 3-man (woman) crews are so vital to the game. It worked, not right away but soon all schools followed suit. Best of luck to all of you, but I encourage you as officials in the same region to keep fighting for 3 whistle crews. It is so much better for the game!

+1

The schools in our area which went from three-man ("man" used here generically to designate "human", not necessarily "not woman", that way I don't have to always say "-person") to two- apparently did so not on the recommendation of the athletic directors, in fact in spite of the AD's fervent insistence. It was a case where the administrators above them elected to go to two-man.
To the ones who count the beans goes the final decision.

[DesMoines]

I get really sick of hearing about ADs and Boards trying to make a financial argument for cutting back on the number of officials on games.

As has been well documented in the last month (Louisiana thread, among others), pay rates vary. But the overall difference in a school or athletic budget between 2 and 3 officials for HS Varsity contests over the course of the season is negligible.

Assuming they don't raise the game fee, the total savings might (MIGHT) be $1,000 for 11 V double headers over the season -- that's in Iowa, if you're working at a school district that pays well. But if you're taking away the 3rd set of eyes, you darn well better be paying the other two people more or you're not going to get people who want to do it. The bottom line savings will end up being $500 or less... and you're gonna get exactly what you pay for.

Sorry for the rant, I just hate the bean counter argument.

Who posted the quote, "I don't do this for the money, but I wouldn't do it for free either..." ??? Love that.

[jophyal]

I agree with the thre man crews being more advantageous... I am in my first year of recieving three man varsity games and notice the difference. I notice the speed of the game is faster but I am able slow down my primaries so much better than in two man. I also teach and foresee budget cuts but here in Austin area, A.D.'s are more apt to stay with three man crews. Good luck Rich and take your time in deciding.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by DesMoines

I get really sick of hearing about ADs and Boards trying to make a financial argument for cutting back on the number of officials on games.

As has been well documented in the last month (Louisiana thread, among others), pay rates vary. But the overall difference in a school or athletic budget between 2 and 3 officials for HS Varsity contests over the course of the season is negligible.

Assuming they don't raise the game fee, the total savings might (MIGHT) be $1,000 for 11 V double headers over the season -- that's in Iowa, if you're working at a school district that pays well. But if you're taking away the 3rd set of eyes, you darn well better be paying the other two people more or you're not going to get people who want to do it. The bottom line savings will end up being $500 or less... and you're gonna get exactly what you pay for.

Sorry for the rant, I just hate the bean counter argument.

Who posted the quote, "I don't do this for the money, but I wouldn't do it for free either..." ??? Love that.

Double that unless the schools are only fielding one varsity basketball team.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ThatOneRef

Seems like you guys are just getting OLD, maybe let these YOUNG refs in that can "RUN" or be "mentally" able to handle a 2 man game. (not that hard....) I don't see any reason to have 3 officials. If the TWO officials are "on the same page" (so to speak) then they should be MORE than adequate.

You're clearly an idiot, but I'll humor you anyway. It has nothing to do with my physical condition or my age or my mental state. It has to do with the angles I get and the stuff we simply can't see because 4 eyes can't watch all four corners of the court at the same time.

It has to do with providing the best possible product. There's no way in God's green earth that you can do as good a job 2-person with any partner than I can do with 2 experienced 3-person officials. It just isn't possible.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Loudwhistle2

You are obviously a green reff to have an opinion like that! Experience will show you that 3 man provides way better court coverage and less things are missed. Sounds like you have an axe to grind because you may not be getting the higher games. I would suggest you change your tune about older officials. I'm not old and I treasure the time I get to spend officiating with the veteran reffs. If I ever have the choice of who will work with me in a varsity game, I'll pick the senior reffs every time! Officiating basketball isn't all about being fast up and down the court, senior reffs through their experience have learned to have a slow whistle and superior game management.

No, he works in Oregon, a state that at my last check was just as backwards and slow as starting 3-person officiating as we appear to be.

[PIAA REF]

I really think it is funny that some officials want 2 man over 3, It has nothing to do with physicality if you ref a 3-man game correctly. You will run and work for angles almost as much as you would in a 2 man game. I do think that there are some areas that try to do 3 man but it doesn't work because they are stuck in a 2 man mentality and ref that way. There is an art to working 3 man for sure.

[JRutledge]

Work with players when darn near everyone is over 6 foot and plays consistently over the rim, then come back and tell me that 2 Person is better than 3 Person.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ThatOneRef

Seems like you guys are just getting OLD, maybe let these YOUNG refs in that can "RUN" or be "mentally" able to handle a 2 man game. (not that hard....) I don't see any reason to have 3 officials. If the TWO officials are "on the same page" (so to speak) then they should be MORE than adequate.

What does running have to do with handling a 2-man game as opposed to a 3-man game? Running is the easy part to adjust to. Being on the same page applies to 2-man and 3-man and has nothing to do with the argument.

The difference between 2-man and 3-man is coverage and call accuracy, pure and simple.