My daughter is Officiating her very first BB game tomorrow. As luck has it, I'm not scheduled to work tomorrow. So, I am going to ref. with my 14 yr. old daughter in her very first BB game (they do one man mechanics). She is scheduled to work Pre-K "Y". She works from 9am to 2pm tomorrow. She does not have a clue, But she is very excited about her first Ref job which also happens to be her first job in life. I was trying to teach her the mechanics for two person tomight and i can't remember the mechanics when we have a foul call. Do the officials always switch, if so then that means the calling official might be on table side, or does the calling official go away from the table.

Both officials switch on each foul call unless the foul
is in the back court. As for being away from the table,
it would depend on the foul and location of the throw
in......

Tell her good luck!!

Bart: Congratulations that you have a young daughter willing to give it a try! The initial mechanic for a FOUL is "arm straight up with closed fist, blow whistle at the same time, then birddog (direct other arm toward fouler's hips)." The calling ref reports the foul to the table (where they can hear color and # of player). Then the two refs will switch positions (lead becomes trail, trail becomes lead). If you are tableside when you call a foul (trail), just report it, then go down and become the lead after.

That being said, remember these are pre-K children, and your daughter is very inexperienced. There may be times when you will deviate from "proper" mechanics. I'm sure your time will be spent teaching a lot (like just about everything!). I meant teaching the little kids, moreso than your daughter. Have fun, and good luck to the two of you.

Good luck to your daughter! What's her name, by the way? Tell her welcome to the world of women officials. I hope she loves it as much as I do, and decides to do it forever! It's a great job for a young woman to pursue at any level.

Very cool, Bart !

Hi, i'm Bart Tyson's daughter(FoulBuster) my name is Jamie. It's really fun, on the count of I was scared to death, but that's ok! I can't wait for mr next game I'm so excited!(and nerves)

Attagirl, Foulbuster!
Don't forget to blow your Fox. ;)
mick

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bart Tyson

Quote:

Hi, i'm Bart Tyson's daughter(FoulBuster) my name is Jamie. It's really fun, on the count of I was scared to death, but that's ok! I can't wait for mr next game I'm so excited!(and nerves)

Congrats FoulBuster! You must be a unique 14 year old. As hot tempered as my daughter (also 14) can be at times she would be tossing people left and right (spectators included) :D

Jamie -- I admire and envy you. I wish I had started at 14! Stick to it. When you have a lousy game and feel crummy, come and post here, and we'll all cheer you up. And when you do something that feels fabulous, we're all cheering for that too. And when you need some advice from another woman (regardless of your age, when you're on the court you have the authority of an adult and deserve to be called a woman) feel free to e-mail me or ask your dad if there's a woman in your area that you can talk to. Good luck!!

Bart --

I'm sure you didn't mean anything by it, and you aren't one of those "women don't belong on the court" kind of guys, and I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but it does seem kind of ironic that the title for a thread about a young woman is "Two MAN Mechanics."

FWIW

Thats funny, lol, I was in a hurry and since 3 letters is faster than 5 letters, well thats the best i can do.

I do understand. "2-whistle" is a nice gender neutral substitute, but hard to type and not nearly as euphonious as "2-man". But when I was looking for this thread, it took me a minute, because the title isn't very, well... apt.

I just don't understand why we.....
 

....need a gender-neutral substitute.

To me, saying I worked in a 2-man crew has never implied that my partner was actually a man. I've worked with many good female officials (one even named my cat) and I'd gladly work with females every day of the week, as long as they hold up their half of the court. I can't say that my typically male partners are successful in that regard :)

2-whistle sounds contrived...forced even. Has any publication actually adopted this terminology?

Rich

Re: I just don't understand why we.....
 

You're right. We don't need a gender-neutral term. I suggest that as of right now, we refer to our crews as "2-woman", or "3-girl" crews. How do all the guys feel about that? That's what I thought. Maybe that's how some female officials feel.

How can the words "Two man" not imply -- or at least, suggest -- two men? I don't think it's that a big a deal. I don't think it's demeaning to the fine female officials who work with me. However, I can understand why some might think it's more respectful not to use the phrase "3-man" or "2-man". I have no problem with "2-whistle".

chuck

[Edited by ChuckElias on Jan 6th, 2003 at 08:20 AM]

Re: Re: I just don't understand why we.....
 

Man to Man defense?

Stan

Re: Re: Re: I just don't understand why we.....
 

Sportsmanship ?

Two man, three man, four man (in baseball). Just go with tradition, and customary terms. It's the female officials who insist on deviating from these (to single themselves out) that make it harder for women to "blend in" with the guys as equals. The more attention you draw to these gender inconsistencies, the more you set the women apart. We all know what those terms mean, and they apply to all officials and players. No need to emphasize being a woman while being a sports official. IMO.

2 Person crews?

Marty, I agree to a certain extent, but the point of my earlier post was to ask how you would feel if the "tradition" was to call them 3-woman crews. Would you, being a man, like to be called part of a 3-woman crew? I think I would not. Instead of blindly keeping a tradition that misrepresents the truth of the situation, what's the harm in adopting an inclusive term? As always, just my opinion.

Chuck

Re: Re: I just don't understand why we.....
 

I've often thought of the word "man" in this situation referred to "mankind." Common usage of terms has always favored the male term in the English language. I have no problem using a gender-neutral phrase, but many times such usage is awkward.

Just to make it absolutely clear, though: I mean no disrespect to female officials.

Rich

Re: I just don't understand why we.....
 

Contrived, forced and strange -- which is what "not euphonious" means, Rich. A gender-neutral term would just be less confusing. Maybe YOU mean "2-person" when you say "2-man", but not everyone does. 100 years ago "man" could be used to mean person. 100 years ago, "gay" meant frisky and happy. Do you insist on telling your friends you had a "gay weekend" because "gay" means happy? Of course not, things have changed. And "man" isn't assumed to mean "person" anymore, either. So a gender-neutral phrase would be more exact in its meaning.


Stan -- for defense, I think one-on-one works just as well, don't you?

Person?

Isn't that offensive? Why not perdaughter? ;)

Bob, I saw the smiley, so I realize your comments were in jest. I just want to make it clear that I don't think anybody is being offended when using a term like "2-man" crews. I think you'd have to be reallllllly thin-skinned to be offended. But I just think that it couldn't really hurt to find a term that means what it says and reflects the fact that women are becoming more common in officiating circles.

Chuck

:Confused: It is interessting how placing so much concern on politically correct terminology many times clouds and nearly obscures the objective at hand

3-man 3-women 3-whistle 3-person...3-zebras :rolleyes:

Aren't we all on the floor (or here) for the same reason...JMO

i think that 3 refrees it's better then 2 but if the 2 refrees are woman so in this situation we don't need another ref'...

But how many times have you heard the coaches in a girl's game yell out for everyone to get their MAN? More than one or two times I would bet, ur, surmize.

That's it! Why should people (guys) feel hesitant to speak, fearing using a wrong term and "offending" a woman official. Walking around on eggshells and attempting to use the "politically correct" wording only contributes to division between men and women officials. I guess each person should just use the terminology they prefer, and not try to force others to agree with them. Using "special language" to accomodate for a women is more offensive than just treating her like "one of the guys," as an official, I mean. Of course, IMO.

I hope that I haven't been coming across as trying to force a change in terminology. I personally couldn't care less what the accepted term is, as long as it's not "three blind mice". My point is only that it doesn't seem unreasonable to stop calling women "men".

Chuck

"Three blind mice!" I'm sure we could get the general population to accept THAT terminology without a problem.
Or, is it "three bline mice-ettes," or, "three blind lady mice?"
Just kidding.

Re: Re: I just don't understand why we.....
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rainmaker

Quote:

[i] Stan -- for defense, I think one-on-one works just as well, don't you?

Rainmaker,

Sorry I'm late in this reply, darn job anyway. To answer your question, No, I don't think one-on-one works as well. We would be trying to change the meaning of one term to fit another. Frankly, while attempting to speak as accurately as possible I find myself stymied and that interfers with the communication process. I've never thought mankind, humanity, sportsmanship, man-to-man defense, man the life boats, etc., referred to the male of the species. I also try not to be bogged down with those that do, from either side of the issue.

This is not a big issue with me and if someone starts using new terminoligy to define officiating crews, I'll adopt it quickly. This is issue is difficult to articulate and can be devisive so I'll be quiet before I unintentionally offend someone.

...and we are all part of "womankind" rather than "mankind"?...oh brother.(whoops...maybe I better say "oh sister")

Dude
Hmmmmm, what should we do about:
<*> policeman
<*> fireman
<*> journeyman


[Edited by RookieDude on Jan 7th, 2003 at 11:56 AM]