25 Most Important Things

[just another ref]

Don't like 2 & 3.

Like 5 & 22.

Really like 7.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Don't like 2 & 3.

Like 5 & 22.

Really like 7.

The number may be high, but the fact is the vast majority of most jobs is being a people person. That's what separates varying levels.

And nothing in life is really "fair." That's just how it is, and ignoring it tends to lead to violating #1.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

The number may be high, but the fact is the vast majority of most jobs is being a people person.

This strikes a chord with me because I've heard a coach use this very term.


"___________ is a people person. It's hard to stay mad at him."

The unspoken part is that he gives you so many opportunities to get mad.

You can be a people person and still be a lousy official.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This strikes a chord with me because I've heard a coach use this very term.


"___________ is a people person. It's hard to stay mad at him."

The unspoken part is that he gives you so many opportunities to get mad.

You can be a people person and still be a lousy official.

I do not think this list or anyone has said that being a people person is the only gauge of ability. But if all things being equal the person that can deal properly with people will be put higher on the list as opposed to the person that only calls the game and pisses everyone off. Right or wrong, we have to communicate and deal with people. That also does not mean you have to be liked by everyone either.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think this list or anyone has said that being a people person is the only gauge of ability.

You're right, they didn't say it was the only gauge.

Originally Posted by jeschmit

2-Ninety percent of officiating is being a “people person”

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

You're right, they didn't say it was the only gauge.

I get out of this that most of what we do is dealing with people. I really do not make it much more complicated than that. You seem to think this is mutually exclusive to other things we do.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This strikes a chord with me because I've heard a coach use this very term.


"___________ is a people person. It's hard to stay mad at him."

The unspoken part is that he gives you so many opportunities to get mad.

You can be a people person and still be a lousy official.

Every official gives a coach many opportunities to get mad. That has to do with the coach mostly, not the officials.

But some officials know how to handle those coaches better than others do. And being able to handle a coach is not mutually exclusive to being a good "game-calling" official. Being able to handle those coaches is still a weakness of mine. It's something I have to learn to do better just like I had to learn better judgment, how to hustle, how to run, how to get in position, how to adjudicate rules.

[Freddy]

#3 is not correct.
Officiating, without bias, favoritism, and me-ism typical with fans, players, and coaches, is wonderfully fair.
What's not fair is the reaction to it, often.

#3 is, however, a good discussion starter on the topic. Worthy to keep on the list.

[Bad Zebra]

I took #3 to mean that officiating isn't fair in terms of advancement, or game assignments, or other aspects not relating to calling a game. In other words, there's going to be politics, favortism, good ol' boy stuff regardless of your skill or ability. It may not be fair, but we shouldn't be in it for the "fairness"....at least that's my interpretation of #3.

Every item on the list can probably be debated...but I like the list in it's entirety. It's a good thought provoker.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I took #3 to mean that officiating isn't fair in terms of advancement, or game assignments, or other aspects not relating to calling a game. In other words, there's going to be politics, favortism, good ol' boy stuff regardless of your skill or ability. It may not be fair, but we shouldn't be in it for the "fairness"....at least that's my interpretation of #3.

Every item on the list can probably be debated...but I like the list in it's entirety. It's a good thought provoker.

Agreed.

[jeschmit]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I took #3 to mean that officiating isn't fair in terms of advancement, or game assignments, or other aspects not relating to calling a game. In other words, there's going to be politics, favortism, good ol' boy stuff regardless of your skill or ability. It may not be fair, but we shouldn't be in it for the "fairness"....at least that's my interpretation of #3.

Every item on the list can probably be debated...but I like the list in it's entirety. It's a good thought provoker.

That's how I interpreted #3 as well.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Every official gives a coach many opportunities to get mad. That has to do with the coach mostly, not the officials.

But some officials know how to handle those coaches better than others do. And being able to handle a coach is not mutually exclusive to being a good "game-calling" official. Being able to handle those coaches is still a weakness of mine. It's something I have to learn to do better just like I had to learn better judgment, how to hustle, how to run, how to get in position, how to adjudicate rules.

And sometimes those situations are not about calling the game at all. I was reminded in the last few hours about a situation I had this year where the timer got into it with a team scorer and they started yelling at each other. I was the Referee and had to calm the situation. The visiting coach also was involved and I had to make sure that everyone was on the same page and that the situation did not spill over into the actual game. That situation was all about dealing with people and part of the job description.

Peace