There is not "besides."
 

Good grief Rocky, ya think there is not a "besides preference" in my decision? Ya think I might just made a decision on one and only one factor? Or because you cannot make a decision without several factors being made, I have to be just like you?

There is no other reason except for my perference, that is why I answered the question the way I did. Sorry that does not fit your way of looking at the world. I am sorry it is not about the money, assignor, mechanics or anything else for that matter have anything to do with why I just want to do Men's Basketball at the college level. Plain and simple.

Peace

This is better than Springer. :p

...and in the meantime I still want to know why Chuck was showering with the girls HS basketball team. Before the game!!!

Forget why! I want to know how he was able to shower with the girls HS basketball team and how can I go about doing it!?! :D

On the off chance the FBI (or my wife) is monitoring this thread:

"I can't hear you!!! I can't hear you!!!"

:D

Zebra,
2 things to consider
i. The ball is round and the cash is green. Two is Two and Three is Three. It is the game of basketball and it is at the highest level. Getting 325 for a women's game is a lot better then getting 55 for a boys varsity game. Maybe I am a hopeless romantic (Hey I did get married in Vegas) but basketball is basketball and if I have a chance to work the highest level I would do it.
ii. The old addage "A bird in the hand is worth to in the brush" applies here. You may NEVER get the chance to work D1 men's. Why give up a sure thing?

Also, when we are talking about "preference" or "preferance" between boys and girls, could we use the word "basketball" after them? It just sounds odd saying "I prefer boys over girls". Same with men or women, unless we are talking about dating styles. Thank you.

another question
 

Thanks for all of the responses to my question. I appreciate all of the replys that have been listed. It has made my decision a little easier. While most of my friends will be applying for mens ball, I will try for womens ball. In this area (MD, DC) there seems to be more officials trying to get into mens ball vice women. That is not to say that the competition is not as stiff with women ball, but I feel my chances are better. My next question is: Is it harder for a man to advance in womens ball vice a woman advancing in womens ball?

Brian,

Not that it's "harder" for a man to advance in the Women's game, but the reality is that Supervisors and Coaches want to see women working the Women's game! Makes sense.
So if there's a choice between the two, the woman may be given first priority. Not always, but still something to keep in mind.

Re: another question
 

Assuming equal ability, yes.

the stupid elvis link still didn't work. never mind :mad:

[Edited by ChuckElias on May 13th, 2003 at 09:59 AM]

Re: another question
 

That depends on who you talk to. But when I look at the top games in the Women's games, I usually do not see many men. I think it is easier for women to advance, because that is what the assignors and coaches seem to want. But then again, it depends on who you talk to.

Peace

Re: another question
 

I will answer that by telling you what a D-1 Women's Supervisor told me (and this is close to an actual quote): "If I have a choice between three officials - all of the same skill and ability level - and one is a white male, one is a woman, and one is a minority male, I will hire the woman first, the minority second, and the white male third."

I am not trying to make any type of political statement here, just repeating what this supervisor told me. That's all part of the "game" of getting hired and moving up... good luck with it, and keep us posted on how it turns out...

And a minority woman (with superior ability, like Violet Palmer) is a "home run".

Re: Re: Re: another question
 

I totally agree with you. But you realize you started some sh!t now? :D

Peace

Yes you did start some stuff, because that statement makes no sense whatsoever. And of course JRutledge "totally agrees" because he is used to arguing points that make no sense as well.

What does the color of ones skin or the plumbing in ones body have to do with whether or not someone has the ability to officiate a game? There are many fantastic officials at all levels that are of all races and genders. I would venture a guess that these are not the reasons that this assignor has developed this criteria for hire with all factors being equal. S/He probably has developed it because the amount of females and minorities calling ball or disproportiate. If the numbers were more proportionate, I would guess that this criteria would not play as big a role in hiring decisions and others factors would play in. This hiring order is not all that different from what you see in business today, therefore I would expect it to be the same here. Also, let me say that I am not opposed to this practice either. I believe that all things being equal, females and minoriities should be considered for positions over white males if the data shows that these populations are under-represented in the organization. Everyone should have an equal opportunity is the bottom line.

This is probably not the right forum to discuss this topic. It just chaps me when people say that people should be assigned to games because of their gender or race and not because of merit alone! Off my soapbox now.