I'll be Seeing These Guys Tomorrow

[SAJ]

Originally Posted by Brad

Well, in the first play, the same guy would have been trail and had the play right in front of him in his primary!

Probably would have been trail opposite table with the C having the play in front of him. That trail official would have had a good look at that one even from that position though.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The officials don't seem to lose composure.

Originally Posted by Brad

True, but they don't have things under control either.

Are either of these officials old enough to drink? Are either of these officials old enough to shave? I bet that I have underwear older than these two kids.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by SAJ

Probably would have been trail opposite table with the C having the play in front of him. That trail official would have had a good look at that one even from that position though.

He was trail coming up the floor, the ball was on his side as it crossed the half-court line, and remained on his side of the floor until the illegal screen. Don't think there would be any reason for a rotation.

[SAJ]

Originally Posted by Brad

He was trail coming up the floor, the ball was on his side as it crossed the half-court line, and remained on his side of the floor until the illegal screen. Don't think there would be any reason for a rotation.

I agree with how it played out on film, however, if it were 3man the T would be on L side, thus opposite table. The lead may have rotated over before the play started so you may still be correct.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by fullor30

"You know guys, if it's that bad, get out of officiating and get into teaching so you can take advantage of all these perks. No one forces you to officiate. "

The above says you don't get the point.

Sure I get the point: You want them to cut pay or eliminate the amount of people at events to pay for a third official. My point is that they obviously don't care about a third official enough to do that. If they are getting along fine with two officials, why would they change?

Originally Posted by fullor30

Bingo.......quite secure in saying most additional 'help' are on par or close to ref pay, which is fine, just cut a little 'pork' and you have the real thing as far as officiating.

Have you done a study on this? In this area of the country, I can tell you that this is completely false.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

And then have no scorekeeper or clock operator, or not enough management on site in case anything goes wrong...or do you for some reason think that all those people should just volunteer their time?

Fwiw, around here the schools do not pay teachers extra for doing this stuff. There are paid security personnel, but they are not teachers. Teachers are "paid" by being given season passes for volunteering at a certain number of after school activities.

These are the same guys complaining about not being able to find an administrator or supervisor when something goes wrong and they need game management. They want to have it both ways.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Sure I get the point: You want them to cut pay or eliminate the amount of people at events to pay for a third official. My point is that they obviously don't care about a third official enough to do that. If they are getting along fine with two officials, why would they change?

You're right, they don't care. But our point is simply this: the money is there if the priorities are. Don't tell us it's about the money.

Originally Posted by zm1283

These are the same guys complaining about not being able to find an administrator or supervisor when something goes wrong and they need game management. They want to have it both ways.

False dichotomy.

However, the coaches seem to want it both ways. We hear all the time, "someone's going to get hurt out there" on plays where we miss a foul because we can't get the right position with two officials.

I know for a fact I had a missed elbow to the face in one of my games this year. I was lead, and the ball was in my primary. Just as the players moved and changed my angles, the player with the ball pivoted and clocked the defender. I was sure it happened, but I couldn't see it because I was straightlined. It was exactly the play that the T would have had a great view of in his PCA.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Sure I get the point: You want them to cut pay or eliminate the amount of people at events to pay for a third official. My point is that they obviously don't care about a third official enough to do that. If they are getting along fine with two officials, why would they change?



Have you done a study on this? In this area of the country, I can tell you that this is completely false.

I work in the Chicagoland area and am in a wide variety of schools in both wealthy and low income neighborhoods and the in between. I have a pretty good sampling of what goes on in this densely populated area of the country. I still feel safe in saying 'most'. Where are you from?



These are the same guys complaining about not being able to find an administrator or supervisor when something goes wrong and they need game management. They want to have it both ways.

An adminstrator or supervisor does not fit under the term 'pork.

I'm talking about the hall guard sitting at a small desk playing words with friends for a few hours before she drives home for 50, 60 bucks.

As Adam said, it's priorities, the money is there, just don't say we'd like to but can't afford it.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by fullor30

An adminstrator or supervisor does not fit under the term 'pork.

I'm talking about the hall guard sitting at a small desk playing words with friends for a few hours before she drives home for 50, 60 bucks.

As Adam said, it's priorities, the money is there, just don't say we'd like to but can't afford it.

So either you have asked that lady how much she is being paid, or you are just throwing numbers around to make your point. Which is it?

And again...you think that those people should just volunteer their time? Or should take a pay cut?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

So either you have asked that lady how much she is being paid, or you are just throwing numbers around to make your point. Which is it?

And again...you think that those people should just volunteer their time? Or should take a pay cut?

I cannot speak for him specifically, but I have been told or even asked what we get paid and the people in those positions often will tell you what they are being paid. It happens a lot in football because you have more time to talk to chain gangs during games and they often have a lot to say and pay often comes up. It might come up in basketball when there are multiple games, but one game not much talk is associated about pay.

Peace

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

So either you have asked that lady how much she is being paid, or you are just throwing numbers around to make your point. Which is it?

And again...you think that those people should just volunteer their time? Or should take a pay cut?

I've asked.................several schools and various people

No, they should be paid.

My arguement is schools crying poor to have a varsity game properly officiated by adding an additional official for say roughly sixty a game
when in some cases, staffing could be reduced and everybody wins.

I don't begrudge someone for making extra money after school or on a weekend.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by SAJ

I agree with how it played out on film, however, if it were 3man the T would be on L side, thus opposite table. The lead may have rotated over before the play started so you may still be correct.

Not necessarily ... it's just as likely that the L would be on the same side that the T is on.