Zig Zag Help ???

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's not bragging. It's a running commentary on the credo, "When in Rome ...", that seems to permeate throughout the officiating world.

What mystifies me, in reference to belts, is how some seem to follow the credo, and accept the fact that belts can be considered acceptable in some, but certainly not all, places ...



... while others strongly believe that this fashion choice makes someone somewhat less than a good official.



As I've stated several times, here in my little corner of Connecticut, black belts may be worn, and one's rating, and ranking, and number, and level of games assigned, does not depend on whether, or not, one wears a black belt. Locally, black belts are neither encouraged, not are they discouraged. I've worn a belt for thirty-two years. I'm comfortable in belt, I'm allowed, without penalty, to wear a belt, and the next time I buy pants, they will be belted ... until I'm told that the rules have changed and that we're no longer allowed to wear black belts, at which point I will purchase beltless pants. Same thing applies if I'm ever locally advised that my rating, and ranking, and number, and level of games assigned, will suffer if I continue to wear a black belt, in which case, I'll run to the store and buy beltless pants.

On the other hand, here in my little corner of Connecticut, we consider it completely unacceptable for our members to have any amount of white on an otherwise black shoe. Wearing shoes with white showing could effect one's rating, and ranking, and number, and level of games assigned. Rookie officials are cautioned not to purchase shoes with any white on them, or are advised to "paint over" the white. Yet, I would never criticize another area of the country, nor the officials in that area, where local rules allow some white to appear on the shoe.

I realize that everything in basketball officiating can't fall under, "When in Rome ...", but how an official dresses should fall under local, rather than international, or universal, guidelines.

Until you've walked a mile through my little corner of Connecticut in my 100% black shoes ...

Do officials with belts work your state tournament?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Rich

Do officials with belts work your state tournament?

Is that really a deciding factor in your state?

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Is that really a deciding factor in your state?

I can certainly see where it would be. You have 2 officials with equal ratings, knowledge, evaluations, etc. There has to be a deciding factor. Whatcha gonna use? Appearance means things. Some places, wearing belts is very looked down upon. Look the part!!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

Some places, wearing belts is very looked down upon.

From what I can gather from the Forum, certainly not a very scientific poll, it's probably most, if not almost all, places, just not here in my local board.

Originally Posted by Rich

Right, he doesn't need to bring it up.

Yeah, he did mention it in the OP. However it was to let us know why he needed some plain leather Zigs. Other guys came in with the jokes, which are old and stale.

Billy is a vet, as many on this board are, and as long as he can run, make calls, and deal with coaches, his minor choice on uniform shouldn't be an issue.

Originally Posted by Rich

Do officials with belts work your state tournament?

Should that even be a factor? No.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Yeah, he did mention it in the OP. However it was to let us know why he needed some plain leather Zigs. Other guys came in with the jokes, which are old and stale.

Billy is a vet, as many on this board are, and as long as he can run, make calls, and deal with coaches, his minor choice on uniform shouldn't be an issue.


Should that even be a factor? No.

Billy is a vet, sure, but his mentioning of it here was purely a joke. He's the one who keeps mentioning it, ad nauseum.

Now, as to whether it should be a factor in determining whether one goes to the state tournament. How many officials work the state tournament in a Byron collar?

It's going to go into the same category as facial hair, girth, and glasses. Nothing says we can't wear glasses, but you just won't see many (if any) officials at that level wearing them.

Should it be that way? I don't know. It doesn't really matter to me. One could argue how you are dressed when you arrive on site should not matter, either, but it will (in most locales).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Billy is a vet, sure, but his mentioning of it here was purely a joke.

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 ...

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Why can't some of you just let it go?

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

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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

Originally Posted by BillyMac

They clashed with my non patent leather black belt.

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:

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

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

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Is that really a deciding factor in your state?

Originally Posted by AremRed

Should that even be a factor? No.

It is a factor here. Not so much by the person that assigns the state tournament, but if the assignors will not give you games in the first place, yes it will affect your opportunities in the playoffs here at least. And I would suspect that is the case in a lot of places. Just like being bigger will affect you in the same way.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is a factor here. Not so much by the person that assigns the state tournament, but if the assignors will not give you games in the first place, yes it will affect your opportunities in the playoffs here at least. And I would suspect that is the case in a lot of places. Just like being bigger will affect you in the same way.

So your assignor will NOT assign games to an official simply because that official wears a belt? No regard to how well that official can call the game, manage the coaches, etc., etc...just simply because he/she wears a belt???

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

So your assignor will NOT assign games to an official simply because that official wears a belt? No regard to how well that official can call the game, manage the coaches, etc., etc...just simply because he/she wears a belt???

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

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... and yes, this is one of those for many that I work for ... 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 ...

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?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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

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.