You call yourself a Referee, but You never played varsity hoop?
 

I played HS varsity and small college hoop. This gives me insight on what players go through during a game, for example I can see how they get annoyed by pesky defenders which causes them to commit violations, how they experience stress of waning time and being down by 1 or 2 pts and the urgency that envelopes them, and also I know how they feign fouls--like initiating contact on drives when defender has LGP and they are looking to exploit the "gray areas" of the call. (i.e., 'flopping'). Also, there are just some aspects of hoop that I cannot verbalize but I can sense during a game--simply because I've been in the same situation that the players have been in. I know that my hoop playing experience gives me unique insight and I use it in the execution of my officiating practice. I don't mean to sound erudite, but officials who have not played competitive hoop are more prone to be duped by players who are prone to deceptive feigning.
I'm sorry to say this and will likey recieve feedback from the posters here. Yet, it also begs the question: can a coach who has never played varsity actually be an excellent varsity level coach? Can a ref who has never played in the nba be a good nba ref? But that is not really the point here.

Huge disparity here. How many high school coaches didn't play high school ball? Very few, I imagine. How many NBA refs didn't play in the NBA? Practically all of them.

Many wreck league players are former HS players. Does that make them capable referees?

As long as we are asking hypothetical questions, can a former player pass a rules or mechanics test?

No doubt, being a former player gives one perspective as a referee, but most everyone in the gym (fans and players included) have played the game at some point. It is not the top credential for a referee by any means.

You are entitled to have any opinion that you want to have, no matter how ludicrous it might be.

New refs always have misconceptions to shed, such as giving too much advantage against pesky but legal defenders.

The higher level the newer official played, the harder those misconceptions are to shed.

And to be a poor writer, even when trying to use big words to make yourself sound intelligent. (I am not talking about you, Rich)

I never played past 7th grade and I like to think I'm pretty capable on the court.

I don't think they have anything to do with each other. Experience is the key factor...if you're seeing plays over and over...you're more prone to not to get fooled by the player. Now does playing experience help with the learning curve? It can. But I also don't think, for example, Leon Wood's ( current NBA official) former experience as an NBA player somehow gives him an upper hand on Joe Crawford.

Everything you've alluded to can be learned by experience aka seeing plays (and something that experience comes the hard way) and if you're fortunate enough, through watching film.

What is the point, man?

Just one: Leon Wood (#40 in your program).

MTD, Sr.

According to Travelling Man's logic, airplane pilots should be selected based on how many times they've been a passenger. :eek:

1) You need to get a proof reader who will help you break your posts into readable paragraphs.

2) Your posts always read like a "fanboy's" posts.

3) Come on, you are a fellow Jayhawker, unless you are a dreaded K-Stater, :p.

4) Much to the consternation of officials who only officiate soccer and no other sport, any competent H.S. basketball official can become a competent H.S. soccer officials in four to six weeks. Which nullifies your premise. Officiating soccer is easier than officiating basketball.

MTD, Sr.

Is Haywood Workman still on the NBA staff?

:eek:, me bad! Yes he is, #66 in your program; this was his fifth year in the NBA. And lets not forget the retired Bernie Fryer.

MTD, Sr.

"You call yourself a Referee, but You never played varsity hoop?"

No, I don't call myself a referee, I am a referee (or more technically, an official).

Having never really played competitive basketball, it was a higher learning curve in some aspects to learn the game. One nice thing is that I had few misconceptions about the rules and got to build the foundation from an official's perspective.

If one has the opportunity to play competetive ball and then takes up officiating then I can see the point that Travelling Man is making.

IMO, all that playing experience does is reduces the amount of time or the steepness of the learning curve.

Anyone can become a very competent official given enough time.

Or a criminal defense attorney unless they are formerly a criminal defendant

-Josh

I think this is a good point. I think there are clear positives that having played basketball competitively help as an official (such as understanding how plays develop; knowing how to be in a good position to observe a play; being prepared to the pace of the game). But this helps in the first couple years. After that, experience as an official takes over.

Likewise, experience as a player can create and misconceptions as an official, which, like the advantages, can be offset through experience officiating.

For starting out officials, I do think it is easier if they have experience playing. 5 years in as an official, and I doubt it makes a difference.

So many good responses, so little time to add mine . . .
Three years ago, while conducting a training meeting for 140+ HS officials, all levels, I asked for a show of hands of those of us who had played at least JrH, HS, or College basketball - 7 - less than 5%. Every one of those present are better officials than are the fans. Every one was there to improve. And, most of them would be considered good to excellent officials on the floor!

Yes, when I work with a newer official, I can readily tell whether he/she has a player's comprehension of the game. Some of his/her perceptions may be an advantage, some are not. And then I have to approach their training differently - trying to remove the misconceptions of a player, rather than those of a fan, coach, parent, etc.

All officials have the same goal - to be a great official. And we each have our limitations. And every official deserves respect, especially from his/her peers.

I get the feeling the OP just wanted everyone to know she played Varsity and college basketball to establish some aspect of credibility here. Based on her posts so far, if that was her goal, I think she failed.

*That is exactly what I woud have expected you to presume; and I must say that I'm a bit disappointed that you have actually confirmed it. No one who writes on this web forum is in need of "credibility" affirmations---I mean for all we know you could be just a kid hiding behind a computer screen spouting off about hoop officiating?

The purpose of my post was to ascertain the utility of real life competitive playing experience in regards to how this prepares one to be a good hoop official. And, as evidenced by the variation in replies it is apparant that such playing experience tends to help in the earlier phases of the profession but levels off as more technical and practical experience is obtained.

For the exact reasons you stated, I choose to respect the opinions of those who I observe to know what they are talking about based on their experience and how they communicate here. I have learned more about officiating from this site than anywhere else. You've been here 5 minutes and irritated most of the people I respect. Not a great start, but whatever works for you. It is a public forum. At least your posts are about basketball officiating...can't say that for a few others during the off season.

How do we know you are a working mom? ;)

Your personality on the forum is not consistent with someone who felt intimidated being a woman in a man's game, which is how you presented yourself initially.

We've seemed to inspire a new level of self-confidence. :cool:

Some of the WORST officials I have seen are former star players.

I worked with a guy this summer at camp who was a former D1 player. He said the biggest surprise when he started officiating about 5-6 years ago was how little he really knew about the rules.

Yup.

Former players often are very poor on the side of rules...at least for a while, and sometimes, forever. They may understand the plays and what the players experience, but that doesn't really matter if they're calling over-the-back and reaches as they wanted their entire playing career or calling a block because a defender stepped backwards before being charged into.

I know many officials who, being former players, get by more on charisma and presence than they do by getting actually calls correct. Some just make stuff up but get away with it due to their ability to sell it.

So, I want to get this straight, so help me if I'm wrong.

You're disappointed that you've been judged; but you fully expected us to judge you.

Is that about right?

I got the impression that she's had these deep thoughts brewing in her for some time and she thought it would be helpful to share them with the officiating world now that she's found an outlet that will facilitate that.

I can relate. The world is entitled to my opinions, after all.

You're wrong. He didn't asked to be judged. He asked for feedback. Very little was given. You judge a referee after his performance on the floor, their attention to detail, coach/player control. Rule knowledge, and how to properly call them [do not defer to NBA IMO]

When I first started umping baseball, it helped me tremendously having good game knowledge. I felt I got a much better head start advancing. In some cases that also came back to bite me a little in the butt. I was one of the few willing to work with raw, no baseball knowledge, umpires. I had to umpire, watch my partner, and the play too. I had to take my heat right there with the newb also.

I think it's sad that posters that started at point A at one time can't help those starting at point A themselves, and are wanting to try, and move up the alphabet. It says something that the maker of the OP gets the impression that that, "Hey, you played at a somewhat higher competition level than most, so you probably wouldn't be the best fit as an official.

+ 1

This is a huge leap from what has been said and is not remotely what anyone has said or implied. Except you.

This is absolutely false. The one thing that makes this web forum useful is that you can pretty quickly notice who has experience and knows what they're talking about and who doesn't. In any web forum, it pays, as a newbie, to lurk for a while and see how things "work" before diving in head first and thumping your chest, without earning some respect yourself. Maybe this is your way of trying to earn some respect, but your years of experience (and at what levels) in officiating and rules knowledge define your credibility here. Not when and where you played - that's virtually irrelevant. Credibility is everything in this forum.

Sounds pretty much like all of us at one point or another.;)

Basically we have a poster who - compared to many of us - is fairly new at this, and is wanting to share his/her deep thoughts on the issues of officiating. Some don't like the new people expressing their opinions and so they fire back. Others of us just smile and remember ourselves 10, 15, 20 years ago and don't get all worked up over it.

Lots of experiences could help you be a good official
 

I agree that having played basketball at the level you are officiating may be helpful.

Playing experience helps since you understand the game from that perspective. Simarly, experience in the followiing roles and an understanding of what they want from officials would also be helpful.

Coach
Athletic Director
Assignor/Evaluator
Scorekeeper
Timer
Officiating other sports
Officiating other levels of play

Parent
Teacher
Preacher

EMT
etc.

However, all people really care about is whether the official is professional and good/fair/consistent. The experiences that shaped that official are just background.

Any opinion expressed is going to get scrutinized. All of us have had our comments dissected and scrutinized. Put your big boy or big girl pants on and get over it. And you can be a veteran here and still have people go back and forth about your opinions. We really need to stop being so sensitive all the time.

Peace

No doubt having experience in playing the game helps understanding the rules, but you don't need to be in HS or College game to learn that, any games should give you some insight.

But i seriously doubt there's any refs whom never played a basketball game ever.

It's like a Race Car Driver turned Mechanics, he might not know the mechanic part as well as other experienced mechanics but he has other insights gained by having previously driven race cars. Having experience of both players & ref is nothing else but a good thing. If you never dined in a fine restaurant before you probably have hard time understanding what the diners wants, sure the manager can teach you all that but nothing beats actually experiencing it & learning what a diner wants from a diner point of view. Then you'll be able to see both sides of a coin before passing judgement.

*pretty good analogy!

Don't bet on that. I've seen some enter our training program that really seem like they've just seen the game for the first time.

I believe one used to frequent the board.

Nah, despite the range of abilities of those I know, I've seen some that make the everyone I know on the board look like championship officials.

The irony of you using that word is fairly hilarious.

You do not have to play high school or college ball to see these things —*they are easily learnable, if not simply obvious from the get go.

What's better imo is when you have been in the same situation before as an official. It's a completely different perspective —*one that almost no one thinks about during their playing years.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/f.cl.ly/ite...ion_needed.png

Why are you sorry it will receive feedback? That's what this entire forum is about —*the idea that no single individual possesses all of the knowledge on any given topic, including officiating.


Clearly. Many very successful coaches at every level —*high school, college, NBA did not play or were poor players.

Since there are only two NBA referees that ever played in the NBA, I would say so. Maybe look at their performance compared to others and see how much their playing experience had an impact.

I did not play high school ball. Well, I did, on the 9th grade B team for about half a season before I quit because, well, I sucked (and, thus, got almost no playing time). Plus, I was also a year younger than everyone else and, honestly, probably didn't want it enough.

As an official I had great success — moved up in my high school chapter quickly, hired to work college ball 5 years in, then 3 years later hired to work NCAA D1 Men's (which I worked for 7 years before I took a "year off" to focus on my business and family).

So, yes, you can be successful as an official without having been successful as a player. I'm sure that your experience helps you, but not all former players make the transition to official so easily and it can be a hindrance to some. Any experience that gives you greater insight into the game is great though. So, my suggestion is put that experience to use for yourself—but don't hold it against others if they haven't had the same experience as you.

Not sure why you are using examples from your 7th grade hoop playing experience to rationalize your point. Also I"m not sure that you know the definition of "erudition"--if so you'd have understood the context in which it was used.

Now, let me turn my attention to the key issue that inheres. When I used to umpire baseball I knew that some of my fellow umps were "pitcher's umps' and some
were "hitter's umps" in terms of what strike zone allowances they accorded.
I'm a "defensive ref" because as a result of playing I know the feigning offensive sets tend to use. I don't give offenses a bias--I make them earn it.

What in the hell are you talking about? Pitcher umps?

I umpired for some years and played each of my sports in high school at some point and I have never heard of someone being a "pitcher's ump."

It is clear that you are trying to spew some wisdom to something that really does not need that much conversation. Who cares if you played, that does not make you a good official. It might help on the front end to learn some rules and understand the strategy of the game, which can help you officiate. But playing does not mean you know the game better than others that officiate it for years. Actually many that played cannot get over their mentality of being a player and instead of calling the game based on rules, they call the game based off of expectations as a player. Stop trying to convince everyone how knowledgable you are in some statements and let the collective body of work prove that over some time. And no, it will not take long to prove to others you know what you are doing. But you are certainly off to a bad start.

Peace

His point is that your efforts to show your intelligence (in spite of your claim to the contrary) and learning are backfiring. You're likely very intelligent, but you're not coming across that way. It's coming across as someone trying to use words just a bit out of her league in order to impress a bunch of strangers.

Honestly, it reads like a freshman comp paper that's trying just a bit too hard to impress the professor.

If you want to get the most out of this forum, I'd recommend a bit more moderation in your approach. You're diving into a fairly well established social group, and that's terrific.

Hitter's Umps, Pitcher's Umps, Offensive Refs, Defensive Refs, If you haven't played the game you aren't going to be very good......

Once you quit dropping the TV announcer cliche's on the group, you'll enhance your credibility.

Here are my couple of cents.. Players may have a sense about the game...but that does not make a great referee. Good referees study the game and study officiating. They know the rules.

I think I am a good referee, I have been to camps, I think I understand the game, I watch video and games and discuss calls all the time about calls...I never played Varsity basketball ....

I Mean, Why bother (sarc)
 

Guess Sarah Thomas has no shot at success as the first permanent, female NFL referee........:rolleyes:

I played more baseball than any other sport -- including a year at the juco level. The first time I got behind the plate to umpire, I hated it. I played HS varsity hoops but not varsity football (9th grade only). I work both sports and have done pretty well at them.

A kid for who basketball is not a priority but still plays on the JV team can make a capable official, just like a superstar hoops player may not be worth a darn in stripes or as a coach. The best coaches are often those players who had some talent but worked their butt off to achieve it and continued working hard at all levels.

There is a misconception that we miss calls because we don't understand the game. By "miss calls," they mean the call didn't go their way.

The one aspect of playing basketball (organized and high-level pick-up) that has helped me personally is that I am keenly aware of flash points and potential bad behavior. It is something that has been intuitive since my first days of officiating, not something I had to learn.

Of course I am only speaking for myself and my experiences.

The nuances of game management is where experience can help quite a bit...though I found my experience officiating other sports translated very well to basketball in this case.

First Basketball, Then The World ...
 

I've heard from colleagues that the opposite can also be true, especially those who picked up volleyball (a real money making racket, according to them, especially those guys who are available in the late afternoon, toughest part is climbing the ladder), soccer, and lacrosse. We have a college lacrosse guy on our local basketball board, an outstanding basketball official, who has also achieved success working Division I college lacrosse, without ever having played lacrosse. Many of my basketball colleagues have started officiating high school volleyball, and have seen success, officiating state tournament games, without ever having played interscholastic volleyball, maybe just some volleyball in a middle school, or a high school, physical education class, many years, many pounds, and many hairs, ago.

Yes, I do call myself a referee...
 

and I never played HS ball. I also call myself a head linesman/line judge and I never played football (except for with my buds in the back yard). Ane I call myself an umpire and I never played t-ball or any form of organized baseball, unless you count slow pitch softball.

And I know the rules better and how to apply them better than any player or coach in all of those sports.

Was there a sharper learning curve? ABSOLUTELY, but I study and learned to work in the grey area and not the black and white.

(And I'm thinking about calling myself a volleyball referee and I've only played intramurals and and in the pool.)

A lot of very accomplished officials worked other sports at some point. As a matter of fact I cannot say that I know any that worked D1 for example in my area that did not do some other sport on some level. Maybe they were not the top varsity or college official in those sports, but they did other sports. And usually when you work other sports you see another sport as another learning experience as to how to deal with players and coaches on some level.

Peace

At the point I started refereeing basketball, I had never played outside of gym class. Since then I've probably played 5 rec games. I suppose that doesn't technically count as not having played basketball ever, but I don't consider myself to have played.

For that matter, one would be left wondering whether a female official could effectively work high level boys high school basketball (the opposite question is also in play).

It certainly helps to have played. It is beneficial in the ways that you state, but also it means that the person has a passion for the game and enjoys being around it, which is probably even more important. People will do what they enjoy and put in the time to improve.
I played FR and JV basketball in HS, but due to a coaching change and my average ability, I was one of the last cuts and never played a minute of Varsity. I did play three years of Varsity soccer in HS.
I've officiated both sports for almost 15 years now. Between the two, I've worked about 20 State Championship games. I'm currently working JC basketball and D1 soccer.
I will say that I strongly believe that gamesmanship and game control transfer equally across all sports. If you played one and can relate to the current athletes and coaches, and understand how people are going to try to gain an edge, then you can officiate them almost any sport. (There are a few exceptions in my opinion, such as wrestling, for which it would be considerably more difficult to officiate well without participation experience.)
I believe that I would have no problem calling softball, baseball, or american football, if I so desired. I don't because I don't have the time in my life or the passion for those games which would compel me to make the time.

Definitely agree. Just to expand on this, I'd say the biggest benefit comes when you've reached the point that you have an innate, internal sense of the game and can anticipate and predict what will/should happen in a given situation. Not on an expert level or anything, but if you know enough to sense that 1 out, man on 3rd, 2-1 count might be a good time for a suicide squeeze, then you probably are plenty aware of the flow of the game. If you know the basics of when it's a run or pass down or can recognize an overpursuing defense and that a misdirection play would be wise, you've got the intuitive feel for football. You can get that feel in a variety of ways - playing is a great way but by no means the only way. It could be coaching, it could be passionate fan watching, etc.

For me, I do NOT yet have that for basketball. I know the basics, I can intelligently watch the game, I know the rules. I can process and analyze what happened. But I don't have the intuitive feel to anticipate what *should* happen. I couldn't really draw up a play or install an offense. I couldn't really coach it. And that's why I have no desire to move up too quickly - I wouldn't even think of getting to varsity for another 3-4 years (I'm 2 years in already).

How in the world has this thread gone 4 pages?

What a waste of bandwidth.

Never mentioned anything about 7th grade.

Why wouldn't my experience be relevant to making my point? You used your experience to rationalize your point. What other experiences do we have to base things on other than our own?

Yes, I understand it. You are basically saying, “I don't want to come off as thinking I am smarter than everyone else.” … The irony is that by using a word that is so uncommon, you are actually coming off exactly like that. It's irony. You know, ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife and such.

I see the mods deleted this part, but it got quoted. I'm kind of glad it did because it shows your mindset and attitude.

I may not have been a successful high-school athlete, but I certainly had success in officiating. In one D1 game I worked one of the assistant coaches was being a huge pain—chirping about calls, etc. The veteran official I was working with went over to him during a media time-out, pointed his finger at him, and gave him some advice that would serve you well as you try to move up the officiating ladder:

“Hey! Don't be an ass-h&%e.”

Rut, you have been known to “spew” every now and then yourself*…*but this is one of the best things you have ever said.

just want to add a quick two cents even though this topic been talked about enough


I went to this early training ref session and there were a few really good basketball players trying to be refs. Two of the three were just awful. One was good. A few other people who hardly played ball at all were great. If you've played higher level basketball it helps but it can be a hindrance as well. But what it comes down to is being able to control the game, knowing the rules and when and when to or not call fouls and so far I've seen NOTHING that points to the conclusion that experienced basketball players make better referees.
I still play a lot of ball but I've met too many good basketball players who think they can ref just because they know how to play. They tend to let too many calls go- "let them play attitude"
The inexperienced players trying to be refs may have bad game management, calling minor falls that they should let go. The lack of playing there may hurt them. For anyone out there thinking about being a basketball ref, don't think you had to be a player to be a good ref. Under what makes a good ref, put "basketball player" way down on your list.

Well this is interesting and all but look at it bottom up.

I was told I was a lousy player.

I was also told I was a lousy official.

By the same coach.

The difference: When he called me a lousy official, his opponent got two and the ball.

At least he's consistent when evaluating your talents. ;) (sarc)

From a coach's perspective - everyone has to know their role. Players play, coaches coach, and officials officiate. But everyone needs a little help every now again so that's why as coaches we think we can do everyone's job better. :)

And sometimes we as officials just need to help you find where your seat is. :D

Welcome to the forum, even though you've been here for a while judging by the join date.

Fanatics ...
 

... and fans fan.