Association Culture ...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Which is why there is a proposal on the table that the newer subvarsity officials (first year, second year, maybe third year) not rate varsity officials. The reasoning behind the proposal is that officials with only a few years under their "black belts" may not know how to properly rate varsity officials.

I'm more curious about the reasoning behind having JV officials rate varsity officials anyway.

1. Why do you need an evaluation every single game? That seems excessive and overly burdensome.

2. In general, I wouldn't think it's appropriate to have evaluations done by lesser officials actually count towards anything meaningful.

IOW, I agree with the proposal you mention, but I don't think it goes far enough. I don't think officials should be giving evaluations until they're working varsity games, at least not evaluations that carry any weight towards rankings, assignments, or status. Why would a 5 year JV ref have any input to give a 20 year varsity ref? I don't get it.