Pointing Mechanic

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

I still think the saddest thing is that you continue to reference it as a point of (misplaced, IMO) pride.

It's not a point of pride for me personally, it's about comfort, familiarity, and belonging to a local board that is flexible in some uniform issues. Maybe it is a point of pride that I belong to a local board that allows some flexibility in it's dress guidelines, my local board realizing that, although a proper uniform is an important part of officiating, it's not necessarily just the clothes that make the official.

Over thirty two years I've seen officials move up the ladder with, and without belts, so I figured, why change. Many of our top officials, the ones that work the state championship games, still wear belted pants, especially the more "mature" officials. Our flexible dress guidelines allow me this choice.

Officials on my local board are allowed to wear either pleated pants, or flat pants. I have both, I don't have a preference, and the next pair that I purchase will be either pleated, or flat, whatever is easily available, most comfortable, and less expensive. Our flexible dress guidelines allow me this choice.

Several years ago, many officials on my local board started to use the Smitty lanyard, so I gave it a shot for a few games, but kept pulling on it, a bad habit from many, many, years of using a noose lanyard, and broke a few jersey loops, so I decided to go back, for good, to the noose lanyard, and not the one that hitches up to your neck, the old fashioned one that is "loose" all the way down to the whistle. Our flexible dress guidelines allow me this choice.

Many years ago, we were forced to switch from the pea whistle, I think that it was a Acme Thunderer, to the Fox 40. I didn't like the larger size of the Fox 40 so I switched to the Mini Fox, that was similar in size to the Acme Thunderer. After several games, I had a few partners, and observers, tell me that my whistle wasn't loud enough, so I went the Fox 40, and eventually got used to it, so you can teach an old dog new tricks.

I'm not a very flashy dresser, so I've tried to stay away from patent leather shoes. I'm getting to an age when I have to really start trying to take care of my feet, and everyone on my local board, as well as many on the Forum, have been raving about the Reebok Zigs, "they're light", "they're comfortable", etc. I finally relented and bought a pair of patent leather Zigs. I've only worn them once and the comfort more than balances out the flashy appearance of the patent leather, so it looks like I can live, and work, with shiny shoes.

I firmly believe that an official should be appropriately dressed, but there's more to a good official than unbelted, pleated pants, Smitty lanyards, Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes. I also realize that flexibility in an official's uniform is not possible in many local associations, but it is in mine, and I'm lucky that I can take advantage of the flexibility in our local dress code (comfort, familiarity, availability, cost), where many of you are not so fortunate. If I were on a local board with less flexible dress guidelines, then I, like many of you, would be wearing unbelted, pleated pants, Smitty lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes.

Once again, as we've heard so many times on the Forum, "When in Rome ...".

And finally, there is another reason why I keep referencing my black belted pants, because some Forum members keep making fun of those officials, like me, both Forum members, and non Forum members that they've observed, that wear belted pants, so I always respond: I wear them because I like them, and I can, and if you think that it makes me a lesser official, then you're dead wrong.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's not a point of pride for me personally, it's about comfort, familiarity, and belonging to a local board that is flexible in some uniform issues. Maybe it is a point of pride that I belong to a local board that allows some flexibility in it's dress guidelines, my local board realizing that, although a proper uniform is an important part of officiating, it's not necessarily just "the clothes that make the (official)".

Over thirty two years I've seen officials move up the ladder with, and without belts, so I figured, why change. Many of our top officials, the ones that work the state championship games, still wear belted slacks, especially the more "mature" officials.

Well that might be correct and what you observe, but I do not recall most of of here ever suggesting that someone automatically would not move up because of them wearing a belt. But wearing a belt or any number of uniform items will make you stand out. It might not be in a positive way, but you will stand out. No one one the court is wearing a belt, so why would the officials wear one? It looks silly for that sport and when no one from the top to the bottom as a rule wears one, then why wear one. That is what a tailor is for to make them fit you perfectly if needed. People in my areas stopped wearing belts because of how bad they looked when you were the only one wearing them. I do not think it had anything directly to do with moving up or not moving up.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Several years ago, many officials on my local board started to use the Smitty lanyard, so I gave it a shot for a few games, but kept pulling on it, a bad habit from many, many, years of using a noose lanyard, and broke a few jersey loops, so I decided to go back, for good, to the noose lanyard, and not the one that hitches up to your neck, the old fashioned one that is "loose" all the way down to the whistle.

False equivalence, I have never heard or seen anyone care what kind of lanyard someone wears. I haven't warn a Smitty lanyard in years and cannot think that anyone even noticed.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Many years ago, we were forced to switch from the pea whistle, I think that it was a Acme Thunderer, to the Fox 40. I didn't like the larger size of the Fox 40 so I switched to the Mini Fox. After several games, I had a few partners, and observers, tell me that my whistle wasn't loud enough, so I went the Fox 40, and eventually got used to it, so you can teach an old dog new tricks.

Another false argument when the only issue with a whistle was sound. I worked with a guy that used a Fox Mini and I never heard him when the crowd got very loud. Who cares about style of your whistle if it makes enough noise to be heard when you need to be heard.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm not a flashy dresser, so I've tried to stay away from patent leather shoes. I'm getting to an age when I have to really start trying to take care of my feet, and everyone on my local board, as well as many on the Forum, have been raving about the Reebok Zigs, "they're light", "they're comfortable", etc. I finally relented and bought a pair of patent leather Zigs. I've only worn them once and the comfort more than balances out the flashy appearance of the patent leather, so it looks like I can live with shiny shoes.

People did not buy the shoes to be flashy. People bought the shoes because they were comfortable, period. That is why in several situations this year me and my partners were all in the Zigs because we all independently liked the shoe. No other reason. Honestly if I could have found a pair without the patented leather design I would have. And the shoes before that I had patented leather were comfortable too. I have never bought a shoe and only liked them because of how they look. They have to be comfortable first. I bought some Reebox years ago that were patented leather and I wore them twice. They are still sitting in my closet and I would never wear them again.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There's another reason that I occasionally post about my conservative dress. I firmly believe that an official should be appropriately dressed, but there's more to a good official than unbelted slacks, Smitty lanyards, Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes. I also realize that flexibility in an official's uniform is not possible in many local associations, but it is in mine, and I'm lucky that I can take advantage of the flexibility in our local dress code, where many of you are not so fortunate. If I were on a local board with less flexible dress guidelines, then I, like many of you, would be wearing unbelted slacks, Smitty lanyards, and shiny shoes.

Once again, as we've heard so many times on the Forum, "When in Rome ...".

Again, I do not believe that anyone has said "you must wear this or else." Most of these discussions or items you have brought up have been about personal preferences, even with pants styles. I think the western flat front pants look bad, but that does not stop anyone from wearing them or working big games because of them. Actually all these things you talk about are minor if you can officiate, but most people have no problem changing. You are not the only one that started wearing one kind of uniform and as time changed we changed or move to something else. We all know that some things might be local and certain areas might have some preferences, but I have never heard anyone say you will not work a single game because you have (fill in the blank) item. My associations have absolutely no say over what we wear because they do not hire us to do anything and hire people outside of association affiliations in the vast majority of cases for HS games, but you will be judged as an individual and if you look a certain way for all kinds of reasons, that is what is going to hold you back, not one item in your uniform.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

People in my areas stopped wearing belts because of how bad they looked when you were the only one wearing them.

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, we wear both, no one stands out on either side of the issue, unlike some posters on the Forum, who believe wearing a belt seems to be, in some manner, associated with inferior officiating, which I'm sure it is in some associations, where the dress code is stricter. It just isn't an issue here. Really.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have never heard or seen anyone care what kind of lanyard someone wears. I haven't warn a Smitty lanyard in years and cannot think that anyone even noticed.

Agree, just giving an example of another choice that we are given.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Who cares about style of your whistle if it makes enough noise to be heard when you need to be heard.

We have to use a pealess whistle, period, no exceptions. The brand, or style, of pealess whistle is up to us, but it has to be a pealess. And I did switch from one Fox style, to another, to be heard.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

People did not buy the shoes to be flashy. People bought the shoes because they were comfortable, period.

I never said that they did. I did say that I thought that the patent leather would be too flashy for me because I normally dress very conservatively. I wore Zig patent leathers last week for the first time and felt like Fred Astaire (ask your parents, or grandparents) out there. I'm sure that I'll get used to it after a few games next season.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not believe that anyone has said "you must wear this or else."

My own local board says so: Black dress pants, not sweat pants, or any other style, no exceptions. Pealess whistle, no others allowed, no exceptions. 100% black shoes, no exceptions. Local board jacket, no others allowed, no exceptions, other than both officials not wearing a jacket. Black socks, no exceptions. For those that wear an undershirt that shows above the jersey neckline, it must be black, no exceptions. For those that wear a belt, a black belt, no large buckles, no exceptions. No jewelery, with an exception for wedding bands. With an exception for rookie "cadets", we must wear a jersey with an IAABO patch, either a jersey with an embroidered patch, or a jersey with a patch that we've had sewed on, no other exceptions.

There's a lot more to a good official than unbelted, pleated pants, Smitty lanyards, Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes. I believe that JRutledge, and I, are on the same page on that point. And, as usual, there may be exceptions when one checks their local listings.

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, there are good officials that wear unbelted, pleated, pants, Smitty lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes, and there are bad officials that wear unbelted, pleated, pants, Smitty lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes, in addition to good officials that wear belted, flat, pants, noose lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and flat black shoes, and bad officials that wear belted, flat, pants, noose lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and flat black shoes.

Bottom line, I'm just sick and tired of a few Forum members, based on their own local customs, equating black belts with inferior officiating. I observed some of my local colleagues work state championship final games this weekend, with belted pants, that would probably officiate circles, with their hands tied behind their backs, around a few Forum members, including me.

Of course, we mostly work two person games here in the Land That Time Forgot, but we no longer wear Byron collars.

[OKREF]

Our association has said in JH and below, we can wear any kind of shirt as long as they match.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, there are good officials that wear unbelted, pleated, pants, Smitty lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes, and there are bad officials that wear unbelted, pleated, pants, Smitty lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes, in addition to good officials that wear belted, flat, pants, noose lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and flat black shoes, and bad officials that wear belted, flat, pants, noose lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and flat black shoes.

I do not think anyone has ever told us in my state that you should have a pealess whistle. That is just something does not need to be said as people do not go buy their stuff and the Sports Authority or Dick's Sports to get their uniform. Maybe Honigs, Gerry Davis Sports or others have those whistles, but that is about the first thing we tell officials and if they do not figure it out after their first game they will be told so in a camp or by a partner. There is after all peer pressure to many things we are discussing and people will "make fun of you" if you do not in the funniest of ways. In other words no association would allow their officials to go out there looking like they are clueless.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bottom line, I'm just sick and tired of a few Forum members, based on their own local customs, equating black belts with inferior officiating. I observed some of my local colleagues work state championship final games this weekend, with belted pants, that would probably officiate circles, with their hands tied behind their backs, around a few Forum members, including me.

Of course, we mostly work two person games here in the Land That Time Forgot, but we no longer wear Byron collars.

Well maybe that says more about the overall respect that your state has in the world of basketball. Also working the State Finals (in any state) has little to do with who is the best of the best based on what I have read or witnessed personally in my state. At the HS level, there are all kinds of non-ability factors that will go into any assignments. If they only picked the best all the time then some officials would never get there at all.

But if someone was wearing a Byron collar, then I guess that would be OK with you as well?

And the fact that you guys still only work 2 man says a lot as well.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And the fact that you guys still only work 2 man says a lot as well.

Blame the coaches, not the athletic directors, or the principals.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Blame the coaches, not the athletic directors, or the principals.

I thought the these people rate you guys as well right?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I thought the these people rate you guys as well right?

No. 80% of our local rating comes from peer ratings, the other 20% includes things like refresher exams, meeting attendance, and availability, all controlled locally, by officials. Coaches are not involved at all with local ratings, local rankings, and thus, our local assignments.

The coaches do have total control over state tournament officials. State tournament assignments are based on coach's votes, period. The more votes you get, the deeper you advance into the state tournament.

Many school athletic directors, and school principals, would be for three person games, especially if there were some type of adjustment in the payment from a two person game to a three person game.

The coaches here in Connecticut have a very strong coaching organization, run by a small group of the most successful coaches. Most of these successful coaches play a very aggressive, very fast paced, defensive style of basketball and most believe, whether it's true, or not, that a change to three person games would have a negative impact on their success. The state interscholastic governing body takes the advice of the coaching organization very seriously, and thus we have very few three person games here in the Constitution State.

[jeschmit]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

...Another false argument when the only issue with a whistle was sound. I worked with a guy that used a Fox Mini and I never heard him when the crowd got very loud. Who cares about style of your whistle if it makes enough noise to be heard when you need to be heard...

I'll throw my two cents in on the whistle-sounding talk. I think it does matter as to what kind of pealess whistle you use. The difference between a Fox Mini and a Fox 40 Classic might not be that noticeable, but the difference in sound between a Classic and a Dolfin or Sonic are pretty noticeable, imo. If you have two different sounding whistles on the floor, coaches can tell who's whistle is sounding in the case of double whistles... It could get you into trouble in the case of a travel/foul double whistle (it's happened to me on a game before).

[Rich]

Originally Posted by jeschmit

I'll throw my two cents in on the whistle-sounding talk. I think it does matter as to what kind of pealess whistle you use. The difference between a Fox Mini and a Fox 40 Classic might not be that noticeable, but the difference in sound between a Classic and a Dolfin or Sonic are pretty noticeable, imo. If you have two different sounding whistles on the floor, coaches can tell who's whistle is sounding in the case of double whistles... It could get you into trouble in the case of a travel/foul double whistle (it's happened to me on a game before).

I've moved to the Eclipse. Most comfortable whistle ever. It also is rated the same as the Fox 40 Classic.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's not a point of pride for me personally, it's about comfort, familiarity, and belonging to a local board that is flexible in some uniform issues. Maybe it is a point of pride that I belong to a local board that allows some flexibility in it's dress guidelines, my local board realizing that, although a proper uniform is an important part of officiating, it's not necessarily just the clothes that make the official.

....

And finally, there is another reason why I keep referencing my black belted pants, because some Forum members keep making fun of those officials, like me, both Forum members, and non Forum members that they've observed, that wear belted pants, so I always respond: I wear them because I like them, and I can, and if you think that it makes me a lesser official, then you're dead wrong.

I've never, ever seen a guy wear a belt in a serious game in any place I've lived since the early 1990s who was a top flight official. There are a few guys here locally who are politically connected that wear belts, but an independent evaluation of their work on the court would show a difference between what those guys get in the postseason compared with their actual ability. One of those guys stubbornly wears the belted pants and then matches it with an Acme Thunderer rubber-tipped metal pea whistle and always lets everyone know he's "using the pea whistle." No clue what HE'S trying to prove, but he's the kind of guy I hope I'm never paired with.

When someone has the choice of wearing something that 100% of the officials who work at the top levels wear (on TV and elsewhere) and it's actually the standard wear for the sport, I just don't understand why you'd make a different choice.

I started working HS ball in 1987. No idea what I was wearing back then with my Byron collar. I know I've been wearing beltless pants since at least the early 90s, though, and maybe earlier. The only change has been the addition of pleats between then and now. I feel the same way about flat front pants today as I feel about belts -- why would an official buy flat fronts when all the top officials wear pleats and they've become the standard.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

I've never, ever seen a guy wear a belt in a serious game in any place I've lived since the early 1990s who was a top flight official. When someone has the choice of wearing something that 100% of the officials who work at the top levels wear (on TV and elsewhere) and it's actually the standard wear for the sport, I just don't understand why you'd make a different choice.

Then you have never lived in my little corner of Connecticut. The standard here, and I've served on the training committee for several years so I know that I'm talking about, is that officials have a choice of wearing belted, or beltless pants, and for that matter, pleated, or flat, pants. Of our 325 members, we only have about a dozen NCAA officials, and of those only a handful of Division I officials, and the college guys, universally, wear beltless pleated pants, however, not all of those guys are considered by either their peers, or by the high school coaches, to be our best officials. Of our dozen, or so, officials, who work the "top level" high school games around here, only a few are college officials, and with exception of those college guys, the rest wear both types of pants, in terms of belts, or pleats.

But things are changing. Back when I started 32 years ago, only the college guys wore the beltless pants, and, back then, nobody wore pleated pants. Now most of the "young guns" coming up choose to wear beltless pants, although the pleats haven't followed suit, for some reason.

We're a board that services high schools, and we're, for the most part, high school officials. Most of us really don't care what the NCAA guys wear on television. We watch how they officiate. We watch how they manage a game. We watch their mechanics. But we don't really care what they wear.

That's our local standard. I'm 100% sure that standards vary all over the country, state to state, association to association, NFHS versus IAABO, etc. I don't make fun of other's standards, and I see no reason why others should make fun of ours. We're old fashioned, but we're comfortable in our own skin.

For some reason, Connecticut was one of the last IAABO states to even consider a switch from the gray, and blue, to black, and white, jerseys. My local board was one of the last local boards in the state, IAABO, or otherwise, to make jackets mandatory. Almost all of our games are two person games. There is a reason why Connecticut is called the Land of Steady Habits. I may be a Red Sox fan, but I'm a Connecticut Yankee through and through.

In the immortal words of St. Ambrose, who in 387 A.D., after Saint Augustine questioned why the Church at Milan did not fast on Saturday as did the Church at Rome: "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Then you have never lived in my little corner of Connecticut. The standard here, and I've served on the training committee for several years so I know that I'm talking about, is that officials have a choice of wearing belted, or beltless pants, and for that matter, pleated, or flat, pants. Of our 325 members, we only have about a dozen NCAA officials, and of those only a handful of Division I officials, and those guys, universally, wear beltless pleated pants, however, not all of those guys are considered by either their peers, or by the high school coaches, to be our best officials.

This says more about their peers and the coaches than it does about them, IMO.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

This says more about their peers and the coaches than it does about them.

For some reason, it's real easy around here to get a Division II, or Division III, women's schedule, and only slightly more difficult to get a men's Division III college schedule. I really have no idea why, I know nothing about the politics of college officiating, assigning etc.

We have college officials on our local high school board who aren't even full varsity high school officials. Some of them have what we call a split schedule, working both varsity, and junior varsity, high school games. That's how good some of them are. Maybe, in your part of the woods, all of the college guys are the top dogs in the high school ranks, but that certainly isn't true around here.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

For some reason, it's real easy around here to get a Division II, or Division III, women's schedule, and only slightly more difficult to get a men's Division III college schedule. I really have no idea why, I know nothing about the politics of college officiating, assigning etc.

We have college officials on our local high school board who aren't even full varsity high school officials. Some of them have what we call a split schedule, working both varsity, and junior varsity, high school games. A few of them only get junior varsity high school games. That's how good they are. Maybe, in your part of the woods, all of the college guys are the top dogs in the high school ranks, but that certainly isn't true around here.

For the record it is rather easy in a lot of places to work women's college for some very obvious reasons. It is easier in other areas to work men's college when an area requires more travel or you need a people with the ability to handle those kinds of games. Not everyone is willing to travel what it takes to work a college game. From what I have heard form those in this part of the country that there are much more politics to work HS games then they ever have to deal with working college. In my area we have so many colleges that it is harder than most areas to even break in and more officials.

Peace