The 3-person battle continues
 

Southeastern Wisconsin's three-person system featured in Referee Magazine

Can't believe in this day and age that many conferences still refuse to go to 3-person. Matter of fact, an assignor for about 30 schools has told me that a majority of his coaches have no desire to go to 3-person officiating, so that's pretty much the end of that.

It's frustrating having to work both systems. With all honesty, if I could build a schedule with 30-35 3-person games, I wouldn't ever work another 2-person game. But the 3-person games in my area are too few and far between to ever consider that.

Just a Tuesday morning vent before going to work a 2-person boys game with two schools with enrollments in excess of 1000.

There really is no valid reason for these schools to continue fighting against going three-person...all of the studies done (NBA, NCAA, various State Associations) have shown that three-person crews cut down on the rough play and clean the game up, making it more fun for the fans to watch. The reason thrown around the most often is cost, but even that does not fly as states that have gone to 3-person crews have shown that the cost increases are just not as severe as these people claim.

As for the coaches being against it...they just don't want to have their star players picking up fouls that the third set of eyes would be catching. It means they would have to teach proper defense, proper screens, etc., etc...again, a stupid and selfish reason.

My Tuesday morning rant with Rich.

We had a local league that went from 3 to 2 for a year or two to try and save money. They went back to 3 man this year. There was talk of keeping the girls to a 2 man, but there might have been Title IX implications.

I dislike going back and forth as well. Here you go 2-man or 3-man depending on the size of the schools. The pay is the same for a varsity game, whether you work 2 or 3 man. Sometimes we work 2-man for the JV then add a third for the Varsity. That is a fun adjustment.

We have 7 classes here. B, A-6A. Only 5A, and 6A have 3 man crews, and they are required to have that by our state association. The coaches at the lower levels say they don't like 3 man, because they think stuff gets missed. They really wouldn't know since they have never had a 3 man crew. I officiate both and any sensible person will say 3 man is so much better.

:eek: Statements like that make me glad I'm not in OK now - Do they have clue what they're talking about at all?!.

But you are referring to coaches here, so...

There was a study done by one of the eastern states ( one of the Carolinas I think) that showed that the first year of three person crews, the number of fouls called on average per game went up. In years 2 and 3, the average went down. They attributed it to two things: 1) the coaches and players cleaned it up knowing they could not get away with stuff away from the ball; and 2) the number of " marginal" calls - ones where we didnt have a good luck at the play but called something based on a partial look - went way, way down. The number of calls considered correct went way up.

We're a bit different in CO. There's slightly higher pay for 2 man vs 3 ( for both V and JV/lower levels), but a lot of the schools ( even some of the larger ones in the cities) are either staying with doing 2 man for all levels, or doing like Smitty mentioned and going to a 3 man system for V games only. Definitely a fun adjustment.

We do all our Varsity games here in MT with 3-man. In some of the tiny gyms it is almost too many people out there but we do it anyway.

Last year I was doing a JV game in 2-man. The H coach was asking me to watch off ball screens so I said "I'll watch what I can and that is why we have 3 refs at the varsity level to catch that stuff easier". He looks at me and says "all having 3 refs does is make you all lazy. You had 2 refs for all those years and were just fine, now you all are lazy" :rolleyes: I swear...

everything here is done in two man until the quarterfinals of the section playoffs.there are certain tournaments that are done in three man but not very many.

Went to watch a friend coach at a tournament over the summer. Very high clalibre basketball. For some reason games in 1 gym we two man games in a another were 3 man. We went and watched a shoot around where the HC asked their assistant if they were playing the next opponent in a 3man game or two man. As soon as they found out 2 man they implemented/ went to a package they had where all screens were being set in dead zones/ difficult zones that they never even looked at running in the 3 man game.

Coaches . . .

I can get the cost thing for smallers schools (MS/ High School) in rurla areas that have to ship in crews but overall its just a better game with 3.

This is really a stretch.

Why?

I coached summer league stuff for my sons when they were playing in HS, and we had specific screens we set in specific area when we had two person crews. Not hard to do at all.

This is the most difficult part of 2-man for me. I hate that we miss those illegal screens. Doing a 2-man game tonight where the host sets a lot of questionable screens. This school sometimes uses 3-man. Tonight, if I think it might be illegal, I'm putting a whistle on it. Coach can fuss all he wants (which wouldn't be anything new).

What We're Trying Here
 

We used to have one conference assigning 3-man for F/JV DH's, which was an excellent learning ground for many who are now doing 3-man for varsity in our area (V is all 3-man/woman/person/human). The superintendents axed it against the advice of their AD's. Now, unless a guy gets what he needs from summer camps or from the various off-season scrimmages, he ain't never gonna get to the V level. :mad:
There are two prominent, large-school conferences who also cut back to 2-man for F/JV DH's, but several of us always bring in a third--splitting the two checks three ways. Though this sets a bad precedent, giving the schools something they don't pay for, we're hoping they are able to contrast the outcome of the 2-man games with those done by the freebie 3-man crews.
We don't give 'em chronic ballwatchers, only good, young, up-and-coming officials already doing varsity 3-man.
Time will tell if our sales pitch pays off.
The Referee mag article states the case quite well. Should be sent to all AD's and their budgetary-conscious supers.

Why? Because any good crew is going to work better with 3 than with 2. There is no specific spot that is consistently a "dead zone" in either 3 or 2 man - there may be spots that are difficult to see at specific moments, but to imply there are spots that consistently don't get seen is really naive, and comes from a coaching mindset that assumes the referees are motionless - like cameras at the prison block. But in either 2 or 3 man, the referees are in motion.

I am blessed to live in a state where 3 Person has been used since 1997 for all playoff assignments. That turned the tide and those that did not go to 3 Person for everything soon did. And now I have only done a single 2 person game on purpose at the varsity level. Well not really on purpose, I was asked at the last minute to cover the game and I did even though in the past I had turned down assignments from that particular school previously (conference does not have a policy and somehow this school did not use 3).

I have never understood the position to only have 2 Person when if something happens the participants want to talk about safety or claim we should be watching everything. But hey, it is their liability on the line.

Peace

There was one school in particular outside of DC (Howard or Montgomery County) that used to run an offense with a lot of picks. Every time I went to the school I knew that I had to avoid a lot of extra movement at the Lead so I could see all of the screening. I also have less time to talk to coaches in two-man games. I think there is more to take in on the court.

This past summer one tournament had the Oakland Soldiers versus Mac Irvin Fire - in an auxiliary gym. These are two of the top 17U teams in the country and they both will let you know it (with their mouths) from the time they walk into the gym. It was scheduled for two-man, but I worked with my friend and his campers came over that day to work the games at the site three-man. It was a tough game for three officials! The crowd started piling into the gym for that game the game before. A situation occurred where I came onto the court to "deal with" a parent, the tournament director was called in (by me) for a situation, the school cops were almost called to deal with a parent. But it was good basketball and fun!

I'm not a coach, but it would take me about five minutes to put together several plays that would allow a shooter to get open looks based on knowing where two officials' eyes would be. Just move a post player to screen for the ball handler in an area close to dual coverage. While this is happening, my best shooter would be getting free. A good shooter only needs half a step to get off the shot. The officials and opposing coaches would probably miss some of that action. In basketball, missing some of them with a good shooter can make the difference between a win and a loss.

Which Irvin brother was causing the problems in that game? :D

Peace

+1

Easy peasy

I had to deal with one of their assistants one time. He looked shocked that I called him out and spoke in such an authoritative/combative tone. :cool:

Perspective is not that program's best suit. And the fact that many of the people involved coach programs at the high school level coaching and some situations in some recent incidents, their reputation certainly is well known. That is all I will say.

Peace

Which validates the point of a better officiated game.

Funny.

Corey! Haha....... problem is watching her.

This. I had a game last week (3 person) where a team's star player fouled out. According to the coach, he never fouls out and our crew changed the game. :rolleyes: Two or three of his fouls were off ball stuff we never would have gotten in a 2 person game. Unfortunately it's back to 2 person tonight for me. 3 person still is not widely used here although more schools have adopted it this season.

For the guys who advocate a different approach with a two man crew, setting certain screens in potentially dead areas, what is it that you're doing that you don't want the officials to see?

I don't think anyone is advocating it...but like tome gun said, there are dead spots in two man coverage and coaches take advantage of that knowledge.

She is about to have another baby too. ;)

Peace

There are dead spots in the paint when large numbers of bodies are packed in there at times, so let's go nuts when that happens, guys.

I find the whole concept dirty.

And far be it from a coach or player to do anything dirty.

Right. We should get this line published somewhere.

We get $ 5.00 extra for working a varsity girls game with two people. Two private schools are the only ones that do this. One of the coaches got on me about a non call the other night and my reply was, tell your A/D that is what he gets for not coming off the extra $$$$$ to have 3 refs on the floor.

Objection.......argumentative

I wouldn't get into the habit of saying this to a coach.

jmo

It's not only specific spots, it's general coverage.

If all fouls were seen with 3 officials, then maybe only 2/3 of the fouls are seen with 2 officials. So, "play more agressive" and you'll be able to commit 7 fouls before you get called for 5.

(The math and logic isn't quite right, of course, but the general concept is.0

Easy now Bob...you are just being dirty now. :rolleyes:

For the coaches benefit, (can't believe I said that) putting any faith in a blanket concept such as this one has large potential to break your heart. Depending on a variety of factors, this 2 man crew, may call more/tighter and yes, possibly even a better game overall than that 3 man crew.

Of course.

And then the coaches and players adjust.

Well the game was much simpler when Custer County beat Missoula, 11-6, circa 1923. :D

I don't think it was us. We've been using 3 man for all varsity games for over 20 years. It's mandated by the NCHSAA.

Our local also works 3 man for all JV games in the one 3A and two 4A conferences that we work. How else can you prepare officials to work varsity?

+1

These are some the hardest games to work with two.

Life in the big city...
 

I had a public school AD tell me a couple of weeks ago he's going to push for 3-person crews. NYC only does 3-person in the regular season for AA Varsity in Catholic and Private schools, not public (AA is the highest level of ball in NYC/NYS) and his school is AA public. He said he can't see how we call that level of ball with only two people.

My BV assigner suggested to us a few years ago that we should go 3-person in exchange for a cut in pay to help schools deal with the cost. We're at $105 for 2-person. He said we should go $75 for 3-person, meaning it would only cost the schools $15 for the third, the fees would eventually go back up and more people would get Varsity work. Overwhelming majority of officials said no way. I thought - and still think - the folks who said no were nuts.

NYC publics go 3-person starting with the city QF at all levels (AA, A & B). A few years ago NYS actually went back to 2-person crews for the state semis and finals. The organizers said they were having trouble finding enough officials who understood how to work 3-person so they went back to two. It's back to three again.

I am friends with the A/D at that school and he refs with us some. I would not say that to just any coach. If the A/D rides with me to a game, we ususally have a chat about the $$$ he is savign by using two man crews.

So, did I just read about a suspension that is applicable to this conversation?

Here, you have to go to camp to learn 3 whistle mechanics and then you have to work summer ball and scrimmages to get noticed by the chapter leadership.

I really wish more places took your local approach.

We've used 3 person here in Ohio for BV and GV regular season and tournament games for many years now; but I remember in the beginning the most common remark against it by the coaches was "it's hard enough to get TWO good officials let alone THREE." Now, over the last dozen years or so, I don't think I've ever heard a coach or group of coaches comment that they would rather go back to 2. (they may be thinking it-esp. if I'm one of the 3) Wish all of you who want to get 3 person in your state/conference good luck.

Yes the things you quoted. It involved one of the coaches that is involved with that program we mentioned, but in one of the coach's high school jobs.

Peace

Is it wrong for me to ask what any of this stuff has to do with 3-person officiating?

It doesn't. I did have to do with a story told and a reference to that story.

Basically it is Wednesday on this site.

Peace

The dean of high school coaches in our area, who is also an AD as well as a state-tourney level football official himself, commented to me regarding 3-man recently:
"3-man is not going to go away."
I further probed for what seemed to be a negative opinion on 3-man vs. 2. What he didn't like about 3-man he summarized in two words: "More Whistles."
His point was not the occasional double whistle by good crews reacting to plays on the border of their PCA's, rather than he too often gets saddled with 3 guys who, as ballwatchers all, call violations and fouls at the same time. Triple whistles. That tells him that he, as an AD, was better off just having two ballwatchers cuz it's cheaper than having three.
Given the respected status of this veteran coach, I accepted this as somewhat a valid commentary on the state of 3-man officiating in our area and as an emphasis to continue in our scrimmages and rules meetings.
Some have simply gotta be doing a better job at PCA coverage.

It's a vicious circle.

People who don't work 3-person more than the occasional summer camp aren't going to feel comfortable. People who aren't comfortable are going to make mistakes, and coaches who see those mistakes argue they'd be better off with 2. The coach you talked to is right. If we don't have a third to get the off-ball stuff missed with 2 officials, why have a third?

What I don't see in this area are officials taking a third to JV or lower class games, splitting checks, and WORKING AT IT in an environment where, quite frankly, nobody cares. I know if I was a younger official coming up, I'd be doing this at every possible opportunity. And yet I'll work 50-60 varsity games this season and never see a JV game worked 3-person. And no freshman games being worked 3-person. And no weekend youth games being worked 3-person. And so on...

While I'm ranting -- I do work quite a few 3-person varsity games where people are clearly uncomfortable with it. They hesitate and then don't rotate when it needs to happen, they reach out of their areas -- or worse, they hold a whistle they should have because they figure someone else will get it.

If we're going to win this battle, we have to show we have a plan and are competent at every varsity level contest -- or why WOULD we get an extra official hired?

This is the problem I always had, am slowly getting past it now. When you do something one way for 20+ years, then the number of people involved increases by 50%, it is hard to shake the feeling that you are in somebody else's way.

I do not put too much stock in anything coaches say. They complain when a guy works one person and they "screw up" on a call. So what a coach thinks is really silly to use that as the standard of what they want in their games. It takes time to get used to the system if you have never worked 3 Person. Coaches advocated things that are usually ignorant and self-serving. And coaches think we miss stuff when we do not call it there way. Just like yesterday in my game the home coach wanted us to call illegal screens on the other team when all they were in the first place were bad screens with no displacement. When I said to the coach, I can call that, but I will have to call the same on the other end, he did not have an answer. And most coaches just thing we should call what they want and they then use that as an excuse to not advocate the best system available to them.

Peace

+1. I was going to post something along these lines. We have a metro area of about 400,000 people with around 275 officials in our association and we serve quite a few schools. Only one conference (About 10 schools) use 3-person for every home game. Another conference lets the schools choose, and even then only a handful of those schools choose to use three. So we have about 15 schools that use three officials. It's safe to say that the vast majority of officials don't work 3-person very often, and yet a lot of them are thrown into it during the district and state playoffs with little experience and are uncomfortable.

The state only mandates that you work a 3-person camp during the summer if you want to work the playoffs, which for us consists of working about two camp sessions. It's good experience, but not nearly enough IMO.

Basketball is at least better than baseball when it comes to 3-person officiating. Baseball is an unmitigated disaster when the state throws three guys on the field for playoff games.

I think how many games you work at 3 person are not going make you any better at that system. If you are bad at 2 person you will be bad at 3 person. There are people that work 2 person with no concept of looking off ball or realizing when they should help their partner and when to call something in their own area. So when you have guys have no concept, working 3 person in the summer is not going to make you better. It is really about becoming a student of the game. We do not even have guys that stay and watch the varsity game anymore if they worked in front of us. You have to see plays and see how things work beyond working the system yourself.

Peace

I agree with JRut not putting too much stock in the coach's comment. Doesn't matter to me if he's the dean of coaches or is a state tournament football official. He might just be a guy who has an "attitude" about the 3-man system. On the other hand, if you, Freddy as an official, feel his comments have some validity and with the examples you cited to illustrate his point, then perhaps the problem might be a "half-fast" effort on the part of the state and local associations to implement, teach and improve the 3-man concept. And, if there are some "officials" who just don't get it or continue to be habitual ballwatchers...oh, well. When Ohio first adopted the system there was an official in our area who would insist during the pre-game-"We're not rotating tonight." Didn't get many games after that season.

There's one guy in the area who says to me, "I'm sure you're going to ping pong back and forth tonight." I used to laugh it off, but now I reply, "Yes, and so should you."

When I work with top 3-person officials, I know I'm on the same page. When I work with people who could use a "3-person mindset transplant", I feel like I should have a mechanism (or an electric cattle prod) to shove them (or pull them) across the lane.