![]() |
|
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
|
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! |
|
|||
|
Quote:
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. |
|
|||
|
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.
__________________
To be good at a sport, one must be smart enough to play the game -- and dumb enough to think that it's important . . .
|
|
|||
|
from the old fat guy
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
Thirty Years And Counting ...
Not for me. I relish the physical, and mental, challenge of a two person varsity game, pretty much the only kind of games we work here in our little corner of the Land of Steady Habits. I know that the three person game is better for the kids, and better for the game, but I still love the challenge of a two person assignment, at any level.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) “I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36) |
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't think physical testing is a bad idea necessarily; I've seen guys working varsity games in all the sports who literally cannot run anymore and really need to hang it up. But relegating the guys who don't measure up to the games that actually require more physical exertion seems like a poor solution to me. You also can't just drop those guys because lets face it, someone has to fill the games and you can't fill all of them with guys who look and move like Kobe Bryant. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Never hit a piñata if you see hornets flying out of it. |
|
|||
|
Agreed. I find it much more tiring (physically and mentally) and off-ball contact is something I really try to watch for - but it's difficult.
__________________
There was the person who sent ten puns to friends, with the hope that at least one of the puns would make them laugh. No pun in ten did. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Old Tests | bossman72 | Football | 2 | Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:05am |
| Tests | Whowefoolin | Baseball | 12 | Tue Dec 13, 2005 07:05pm |
| Physical Abuse | aussie_ref | Basketball | 4 | Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:41am |
| FED Tests | Whowefoolin | Baseball | 5 | Wed Feb 19, 2003 11:54am |
| TESTS | hoopsrefBC | Basketball | 6 | Tue Oct 03, 2000 06:02pm |