Bad Partner

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Having a regular partner does not eliminate these problems or create them. I have worked in both situations and have seen problems in both situations. For one having a regular partner you often will not go against that partner when needed. Having different partners that are hired by a person that put you together for a reason, the assignor might know who is the stronger official and puts you there accordingly.

This situation was more about the official over stepping his responsibility and not willing to come off of the mess he made. Heck the fact he made the call and went to the table is telling that he knows he was ultimately in the wrong if he had to do that much explaining. If he made the call and was confident in his decision, he would have just made the call and walked away. He looked disheveled in how he was acting.

Peace

I've worked with the same partner for 10 years. This would never happen in one of our games. Simply put, we both know that this doesn't belong to the new lead in any way.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OKREF

I've worked with the same partner for 10 years. This would never happen in one of our games. Simply put, we both know that this doesn't belong to the new lead in any way.

I used to work with the same partner or partners for the first 3 to 4 years of my career. I went another 8 years or so not working with a partner and literally working with a different person just about every single game (when I moved to the Chicago area). Then I went back to working a lot of games with two guys that helped mentor me for about 5 years. Then I have gone back to not having a partner and this or anything like this has never happened to me in any basketball game.

This to me was about the individual, not what the rest of us are used to.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by OKREF

I've worked with the same partner for 10 years. This would never happen in one of our games. Simply put, we both know that this doesn't belong to the new lead in any way.

Working with the same partner doesn't eliminate such occurrences. This is simply a case of an official f'ing up and not backing down in the aftermath.

I like working with multiple partners b/c it gives me different perspectives. If I were to work with the same partner all the time I feel like we would get too comfortable with bad habits. Working with new partners, I'm more likely to have someone ask, "hey, why are you doing that?"

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Working with new partners, I'm more likely to have someone ask, "hey, why are you doing that?"

For you to be open to that kind of peer critique is laudable. In fact, for a whole association or assigning pool to be nurtured to have that kinda attitude would really be a benefit. Self-inviting peer critique is an asset towards sure improvement.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Freddy

For you to be open to that kind of peer critique is laudable. In fact, for a whole association or assigning pool to be nurtured to have that kinda attitude would really be a benefit. Self-inviting peer critique is an asset towards sure improvement.

I always welcome constructive and productive criticism. I especially crave it from supervisors. There was a five year period before I got picked up in D3 ball that I worked in a JuCo where my closest games were at least a 2 1/2 hour drive. The supervisor was a multiple D1 Final Four official who could nit-pick your game to pieces. There was many a lonely ride home where I would ask myself if I was really good enough to be pursuing this avocation above the HS level.

I finally reconciled myself that he wouldn't bother to spend all that time breaking my game down unless he felt 1) that I could handle it; and 2) that he saw potential me, and felt I was worth the effort.

Now when I get the chance to mentor or observe younger officials I tell them I can either pat you on the back and say "great job", or I can point out those little things you need to work on that will help you move up whatever ladder you're trying to climb.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I always welcome constructive and productive criticism.

One crew I work with is accustomed to "Goin' 'Round the Horn" for post-game every game. Official A, then B, then C each offers something -- anything -- a call each made that each might like to either "have back" or review on video. Discussion of each by the group. Then another round where each suggests something he saw of each of the other two that might merit reconsideration or special review on the video. Healthy interchange and enabling introspection always results. And thereby it seems track of improvement is laid. I'm confident this is nothing new to most of you...

Contra . . . Post season partner last year, as I tried to enact the same kinda post-game analysis: "No, we don't do that kinda stuff with our crew. We figure, if a partner called it, he wouldn't have called it if it wasn't correct." Poor guy. Lack of self- and peer-critique showed.

Lack of a good post-game seems closer to the latter than the former.

[Raymond]

Freddy,

APG and I attended a camp run by a very successful NBA official this past off-season. He swears by peer criticism. The camp includes group breakdown of camp games. He would get highly irritated when we would be afraid to candidly assess our fellow officials on tape.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Freddy,

APG and I attended a camp run by a very successful NBA official this past off-season. He swears by peer criticism. The camp includes group breakdown of camp games. He would get highly irritated when we would be afraid to candidly assess our fellow officials on tape.

I really like peer criticism, but it depends on the area and level. I've noticed NBA and NCAA-W officials are quick to offer criticism but among mens college officials where I live the unspoken rule is you don't talk plays. I had to learn that the hard way.