First of all I do not have one assignor in any sport. It does not work like that here.

As it relates to basketball, there is usually a different assignor for each conference and each gender.

If you cannot fullfill basic expectations, you will not work for most of them at all. And yes, this is one of those for many that I work for. And you will never prove you can manage the coaches if you do not look the part. And many coaches are going to point you out (for all kinds of reasons other then a belt) if you do not look like someone that does not scream "He/she does not know what they are doing."

This is why every officiating association I belong to, teaches guys to wear the proper uniform and spends time every year discussing what is acceptable. It is the case in every sport and yes wearing a belt will hold you back just the same as wearing shorts will as a football official for certain level games.

I do not make the rules, I just agree with them. ;)

Peace

Took The Bait ...
 

Not really a joke, just a tongue in cheek comment regarding the inability of many Forum members to realize that the "When in Rome ..." credo may not always be acceptable, but should be acceptable for a local area that neither encourages, nor discourages belt wearing, in both training, and in rating guidelines, especially when the IAABO mechanics manual doesn't even broach this subject (not sure about the NFHS mechanics manual).

"When in Rome ..." shouldn't be a universal guideline, set in stone, for all local areas, or states, to "make up" all their own rules. It probably wouldn't work if all officials in a particularly area decided to allow two extra steps in addition to the limits already set in the traveling rule. I'm sure that the basketball officiating world would go crazy criticizing that local change.

But a "When in Rome .." guideline on a belt, or no belt? Why can't some of you just let it go? I'm not saying that your local area, or state, should have the same belt, or beltless, guidelines that we use, I never have. I'm just saying that that's the way we do it here, and ponder why some of your can't accept that. I've never criticized those of you that belong to an association that allows some white on shoes, whereas we don't allow any white at all.

When in Rome ...

When In Chicagoland ...
 

It appears that you have well known guidelines that officials must wear beltless pants. It also appears that your association teaches that to your new officials, and maybe even to your veterans, with same type of continuing education. That's great. I have no problem with that.

We teach otherwise. We rate otherwise. Wearing a belt will not hold anybody back here in my local area (I can't speak for the entire state). Why can't some Forum members wrap their arms around that?

We are independent contractors. You can do what you want. But just like going to a job interview, there are consequences for what you wear. I belong to several associations and have been on the Board of several of those organizations. All of them teach similar stuff when it comes to what pants to wear. And this is not like other sports where you have to buy several items. You basically have to buy 4 things (Shirt, pants, shoes, whistle) as a basketball official. How hard is it to buy something that not only will not cost you a lot of money in comparison?

You do not have to buy down indicators, mask, hat, long sleeve shirts, jacket, ReadyRef or flags on top of your basic uniform.

BTW, this is not a Chicagoland thing. Some of have expectations larger then the area we live. This is the case in all the surrounding states that Illinois borders and areas that others have when they come form other places. There was a guy that moved to this area from out west and no one had to tell him what not to do when it came to his uniform. He fit in just fine.

Peace

And yet the belt is included under the officials uniform section.

Oh well...I don't wear one. I think we all look better without the belt. But I honestly can't think of a time when I have based a decision on someone's officiating ability on whether or not they were wearing a belt. And that includes camps where I have been a clinician, evaluating officials at State tournaments, etc.

Exactly ...
 

And that's my point. Follow the state, or local, guidelines that are taught, and you can't go wrong. If I were to move to the Chicago area, I would hope that it would be made very clear to me that I should wear beltless slacks, especially if the number, and level of games, assigned, as well as my eligibility to work post season conference, and state tournament games, would be impacted by my uniform choices.

Are patches included? Well we have to wear them. If you wear an old patch or a patch inappropriately, you will be seen in a negative light too. ;)

Well I am a clinician, I assign no games, but the people that I work with do not wear belts. The times I have seen a varsity official wear a belt is so rare it would stick out if someone does. And just like wearing knickers now stands out and wearing an adjustable hat all brings more scrutinty then it should. I also think it is a cop out to act like the only thing we are judge by is abilty. That is never the case and I doubt that is all officials are evaluated by in your area or any area for that matter.

Peace

My officiating experience is not limited to or only subjected to Chicago area. I started my career in Central Illinois and until this year I would have worked more than one game in Central Illinois even while living in this area since 1999. If I wore a belt in other parts of the state, someone would have pointed it out in that part of the state too. You are so stuck on things I say having to do with one part of the state when clearly that is not the case. I work college too and people do not wear belts anywhere in college. You would get laughed out of any camp if you did just that. And officials are form Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Ohio in my experiences and no one would dare put on a belt.

Peace

Truth Or Consequences ...
 

Of course they don't. They'd be stupid to wear one. If an official doesn't do what he is taught to do, then he should expect some consequences.

There are absolutely no consequences if I wear a belt in my little corner of Connecticut, however, I do not expect that that would be true all over the country, or for that matter, all over the State of Connecticut.

College Education ...
 

None of my comments are in any way related to college. I don't work college games. My local association doesn't train for, or assign, college games. Only a very small percentage of officials in my local high school board work college games, although that percentage is slowly increasing, especially for womens college games.

Education Is The Key To Success ...
 

Because they were probably taught that, as well as a lot of other stuff about their uniforms (no lanyard, noose lanyard, regular Smitty, extra long Smitty, all black shoes, some white allowed on shoes, Fox 40 whistle, other brand non-pea whistle, different size Fox 40's, jacket styles, patches of various types, anniversary pins allowed on jackets, location of American flags on shirts, or jackets, etc.). How about hair, or facial hair, or wedding bands, etc.? Sure it would great if we all looked the same, but local traditions will prevail until there is some type of national high school association, and I doubt that that will exist before I'm on the wrong side of the grass.

The main reason most can't let it go is because you keep bringing it up.

I Want To Be Ignored ..
 

I agree that I did bring it up, as a self deprecating, tongue in cheek, comment. I was actually hoping that it would be, in my opinion, rightfully ignored. Unfortunately, it never is. Someone's always ready to bite. And I don't mind defending myself, and my local board. I just can't figure out why me "bringing it up" as a facetious comment would get so many Forum veterans in a "tizzy"? I will, hopefully, never bring up this subject as a serious topic, but why can't many on the Forum just ignore it? Which is exactly my point. Uniform guidelines can be a "When in Rome ..." local guideline, and as long as Forum members get flustered, I will keep "bringing it up" as a self deprecating, facetious, comment, until the comment is, I believe, rightfully ignored, at which point, my job has been accomplished, and I will, hopefully, no longer bring it up facetiously, or in any other way.

This, thanks to a great lead in post by JRutledge, says it all in a nutshell:

Uniform guidelines? When in Rome ... Local guidelines. How can anyone have a problem with that? That's the part that I can't fathom.

Sometimes people not looking the "part" won't get a serious look in the first place.

Serious Look ...
 

Show up in my local area with the "whole package" but with even a small amount of white on your shoes and you'll still get a "serious look", but you will also be told to get rid of the white. Way back, when I was wearing Spot Built shoes, and they were shoes, not black sneakers, I was told to black out the very small white spot on the back of the heel. I did it because that's a local guideline, and to ignore the guideline would have certainly created some consequences for me, even if the white spot was acceptable in other parts of the country.

"All politics is local." (Former Speaker of the U.S. House Tip O'Neill)