Physical tests...

[Nevadaref]

Yes, starting last season.
I believe that my local association is not unlike many others in that there are several officials who are overweight. Of course, each of them holds the opinion that they can keep up and that their physical appearance or size doesn't hurt his calling ability. Sadly, it does. They just don't see it because they aren't in a position to observe what they are missing. I wish we could have video from a different angle to show them.

We time two agility/speed drills.

1. A ladder drill. Start on the endline. Go near FT line and back, midcourt and back, full court and back. Takes about 14 seconds for the fit and quick people.

2. A box drill. Using the FT lane. Start where one lane line intersects the endline. Run forward to the elbow, sidestep across the FT line to the opposite lane line, run forward to the endline, sidestep across the endline to the opposite lane line (starting point), reverse the last two parts of the drill, sprint from the elbow to a point on the endline near the 3pt line, sprint to midcourt. Takes about 17 seconds.


You wouldn't believe how much whining we got from people after implementing this last season. Many people have no desire to run or to get themselves into physical shape. They just want to work games and get a paycheck. It's really sad. The worst part is that several of these people have been considered amongst our top officials for the last decade.

[tomegun]

Nevada, is that the association up north or California? I would love to implement that here; it is hard enough trying to convince the board to NOT cut our meetings.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Nevada, is that the association up north or California? I would love to implement that here; it is hard enough trying to convince the board to NOT cut our meetings.

That is the NV association. We hold a clinic at a local HS on a Saturday in October each year. We have access to the gym. We have four stations which each last about an hour. We simply made one of the stations the fitness drills.

Attendence is mandatory and people are informed well ahead of time about what is involved and asked to come dressed appropriately to participate.

[Judtech]

One thing to consider is that for associations who are struggling to have enough members to cover games adding one more hoop to jump through could thin the number of people available or who are willing to go through them. (yes all puns intended)
While there are some associations that have plenty of officials there are others who need as many warm bodies as they can get. I personally have no problem submitting to one but can understand why some associations don't have them.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Judtech

One thing to consider is that for associations who are struggling to have enough members to cover games adding one more hoop to jump through could thin the number of people available or who are willing to go through them. (yes all puns intended)
While there are some associations that have plenty of officials there are others who need as many warm bodies as they can get. I personally have no problem submitting to one but can understand why some associations don't have them.

Depending upon the situation of the individual association, the fitness requirement can be mandatory for postseason eligibility, regular season Varsity games, regular season sub-varsity games, or any combination thereof.

[truerookie]

@Tomegun, fortunately I am not a real estate agent… Don’t want to be one either. So this would not apply to me. This company wants to maintain its 503( c ) status, yet want to put requirement on individuals for their service.

@Cameron, this same organization found these unfit officials useable when the cupboard was bare of officials to covers games for this organization. Now the cupboard is full we need to weed them out so younger officials can stay around… I will be the first to say once the economy picks back up these younger officials will find better ways to spend their time when the money start consistently.

@Navada. SEE comment address to Cameron.

@BNF, I cannot disagree with that. Yet, those jobs provide health insurance or contribute to health insurance for their employees. (Key word is employees). They also don’t have 503 ( c) status either. So that dog doesn’t fight…

Keep in mind, 1% of the population speaking here. It burns me up that people wants to implement system when things are good for them. Bunch of BullSh#t. Where was this process back in 2008?

[APG]

I don't get the issue truerookie...organizations in all walks of life place requirements all the time to be eligible...heck, most state associations and well as local associations already have requirements one must meet to be able to call games...like scoring a certain score on a floor or paper test.

My thoughts are in theory, this is a great idea but only really practical if covering games isn't any issue. Otherwise, in areas hurting for officials, I don't think this could be realistically put in place...maybe if they restricted it to only varsity officials.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by truerookie

@Tomegun, fortunately I am not a real estate agent… Don’t want to be one either. So this would not apply to me. This company wants to maintain its 503( c ) status, yet want to put requirement on individuals for their service.

Come on man, you get my point! APG brought up a good point; what do you think about test score determining who gets games? Knowing the rules is something we have to (should) know too right?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by truerookie

@Tomegun, fortunately I am not a real estate agent… Don’t want to be one either. So this would not apply to me. This company wants to maintain its 503( c ) status, yet want to put requirement on individuals for their service.

Isn't that the very nature of a contract...that each side sets requirements that the other agrees to or doesn't agree to???

Originally Posted by truerookie

@Cameron, this same organization found these unfit officials useable when the cupboard was bare of officials to covers games for this organization. Now the cupboard is full we need to weed them out so younger officials can stay around… I will be the first to say once the economy picks back up these younger officials will find better ways to spend their time when the money start consistently.

That's the nature of basic supply and demand. When the supply is high, the consumer can be more picky. And who is to say the organization didn't want to implement such a system in the past but just couldn't get it organized.

It is not necessarily the younger officials that are showing up due to the economy. Sure, they are there, but I see a lot of 40-60 year-old rookies looking to make a few bucks.

[Judtech]

So if I beat a fellow officials fitness score will have have grounds for action if my schedule does not improve? Theoretically my written test scores are confidential so I would have no way to compare scores and any proceeding jump in schedule. But if I have 10 years in and someone else has 10 years in and I have better 'fitness' scores then they do wouldn't it be assumed I would have the better schedule? I have never been the swiftest or most agile person in the world, yet I was able to play the sport at a relatively high level. IMO, the criteria should be "Can this official keep up with the pace of the game for the entire time OF the game". If the official is incapable of doing that they should be assigned levels of games where they can meet this standard. If there is some empirical preseason fitness test that can do that, then I think it would be a more valid delineator.
Now leave me alone, I'm having some fried butter sticks I got from the Iowa state fair for a midnite snack!

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Judtech

So if I beat a fellow officials fitness score will have have grounds for action if my schedule does not improve?

Depends on how the test and assignments are set up.

If it's set up so those who score higher / run faster get better games, and you do and you don't, then you have a complaint.

But, mostly, they're set up as a minimum requirement and all who meet that requirment are eligible and the ranking of those who exceed the requirement doesn't matter.

[Rob1968]

Several difficulties arise in the use of physical fitness tests for officials.
In our area, only mens' varsity is using 3-man mechanics. Thus, the fitness of the officials at that level of games is not so much a factor. (We probably can agree that a 3-man game doesn't require the same physical exertion as a 2-man game.)
Very often, the lower levels of play are more strenuous, physically, because of the lack of structure, lack of organized play-running offenses, and poorer spacing of players on the court. Many of the younger - sub-varsity - games are played by participants who are trying to impress someone with their abilities, and so they run more.
There never can be an absolute standard or performance for such tests of the officials, just as there is no absolute standard for the performance of the players. Simply stated, we try to take the best for the highest levels of competition. If the over-all pool of applicants happens to perform better than the pool of some former group, then the selected few will be better. But, the games will go on. No one is going to say that the season will have to be cancelled because none of the applicants, whether players or officials, didn't meet a particular standard of performance.
And since the performance of either group is considered to rise with experience, there will always be some of the selected participants that are chosen for higher levels of competition based on factors that are quite foreign to some standard of physical performance. Just as the best point guard may not be able to dunk, but he/she can really manage the game, and distribute the ball, a particular official's game management, judgement, repoire (sp?) with the coaches and players, etc, may far out-weigh a somewhat lower level of pure athleticism.
Yes, I understand that the physical fitness of an official is only one of many factors considered in their ranking, and assignment to levels of play. As one in my area who has been held as an example of good physical performance for many years, I appreciate and welcome the advent of such criteria in the ranking/selection of officials. When all is considered, it must be a smaller factor in the cosideration of assignment to the higher leves of play.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by truerookie

@Tomegun, fortunately I am not a real estate agent… Don’t want to be one either. So this would not apply to me. This company wants to maintain its 503( c ) status, yet want to put requirement on individuals for their service.

@Cameron, this same organization found these unfit officials useable when the cupboard was bare of officials to covers games for this organization. Now the cupboard is full we need to weed them out so younger officials can stay around… I will be the first to say once the economy picks back up these younger officials will find better ways to spend their time when the money start consistently.

@Navada. SEE comment address to Cameron.

@BNF, I cannot disagree with that. Yet, those jobs provide health insurance or contribute to health insurance for their employees. (Key word is employees). They also don’t have 503 ( c) status either. So that dog doesn’t fight…

Keep in mind, 1% of the population speaking here. It burns me up that people wants to implement system when things are good for them. Bunch of BullSh#t. Where was this process back in 2008?

With all due respect, are you overweight, Stats?