Proposed bill in Missouri to protect officials
 

The article doesn't say what the punishment is. I think the offending parent should have to provide a few hours of community service by officiating a game. Let the punishment fit the crime. :p

Will a Law Inhibit Outbursts of Passion?
 

For some reason a similar law which seems to be flying through the legislature in the state of Michigan isn't being supported by the state association. Following is from the state director's weekly blog from back in February, offered here for any interested:


Supporting Sports Officials
February 20, 2015
There recently has been some criticism that the MHSAA hasn’t “had the backs” of sports officials regarding a proposal for a new state law.

To make a difference of opinion about legislative strategy the litmus test of MHSAA support for officials is misguided at best and manipulative at worst.

Moreover, from the standpoint of coaches and spectators, the MHSAA is much too ready to support officials, even when officials misapply a game rule or misjudge a contest situation. That we always back officials, even when they are wrong, is a criticism that resonates with the public far more than the recent, rare criticism that we don’t have officials’ backs on a piece of legislation that we believe lacks merit.

Despite the hype and hope, there are two things the proposed legislation will not do:

First, additional legal sanctions will not dissuade someone who has momentarily lost his or her mind to pause and think, “Oh yeah, If I slug this person, there’s an extra penalty.” There is no evidence that such legislation works as a deterrent to emotional outbursts.

Second, putting such legislation on the books will not improve sportsmanship on the front lines. Such laws are empty words; improving sportsmanship is year-round, grassroots work of real substance.

Because our energies are invested in the ongoing work of improving sportsmanship in interscholastic athletics’ special niche in the world of sports, the MHSAA has been known nationwide for several decades as a high school association with great passion for good sportsmanship and innovative programs to improve sportsmanship.

This week alone we have thousands of students and others voluntarily watching videos promoting school spirit and good sportsmanship as the fourth annual “Battle of the Fans” concludes. This program, born in Michigan, is now spreading to our counterpart organizations across the US.

This week, and almost every week, we have staff traveling “anytime, anywhere” to deliver face-to-face education to groups of high school coaches who, more than anyone else, influence the behaviors of both players and spectators.

Through the years, we have promoted sportsmanship with audio and video and print promotions. We’ve conducted statewide, league and local sportsmanship summits as well as team captain and student leadership workshops. We have rewarded good sportsmanship, and penalized bad.

The MHSAA’s Constitution requires every member school to adopt a code of good sportsmanship for its athletes, coaches and spectators, an educational program to promote good sportsmanship, and a system of progressive discipline for failure to behave according to the code of good sportsmanship. A condition of MHSAA membership is to demonstrate that those requirements are being met.

Time and money spent on real solutions, not symbolism, is the MHSAA’s approach to creating and maintaining a higher level of sportsmanship. And it’s the best way for the MHSAA to demonstrate its ongoing support for contest officials.

The article is sloppy. It isn't a bill in the sense of a law, but a concurrent resolution.

All it does is urge others to enforce what already exists. (And a cynic migh say to make it look like the legislature is doing something.)

The actual text of the resolution is here:

http://www.senate.mo.gov/15info/pdf-...ntro/SCR17.pdf

Yes, even if an official misapplies a rule or has poor judgment on a play, the MHSAA should be backing its officials against inappropriate, uncivil, or illegal activity by coaches, players, or spectators.

Does not inspire much confidence on the officials' part that now the state governing body thinks a "bad call" is justification not to back its officials.

Is there evidence that it is not a deterrent?

in a perfect world,
 

this would be awesome! Some fool actually being made to answer for his actions, whether in the heat of competition or not? That would be amazing.

Now to the real world, where youth sports is driven by money and egos. This kind of thing will never be enforced bc tourn directors, state boards, etc are too afraid to permanently ban chronic offenders. We have all seen it too many times.

Sad really.

Agreed. They would have been better off saying, "We think a resolution is not worth our support as it does nothing."

If you ever find yourself having to defend yourself in "physical confrontation" with an overly-irate coach or fan do remember to protect yourself at all times if/when you are accosted by them. First thing you ought do is to remove your lanyard whistle from your neck so it cannot be used against you (i.e., strangulation, controlling your freedom of movement, reflexes,etc...). I have done this and it works for me--if nothing more than to convey to said confronting party that you are not backing down and are not a wuss. They usually back off when they see you do this action.

Or wear a breakaway lanyard. Or spit. :D

No grown man would use "spitting" as a self-defense strategy.
Breakaway lanyard? Hmmm, could be an idea for "shark tank" tv.

Uh, they already sell breakaway lanyards for this very application: Purchase Officials Supplies - Smitty Breakaway Lanards and http://bit.ly/1GgbqBB.

And "spitting" is slang for what a lot of NBA guys do; use a whistle with no lanyard. I'm sorry, I thought that was common parlance. :o

*OK, I saw that web picture, but I'll just use the one I have and take it off if need be.

lol @ "spitting", though probably a more esoteric use of the term.

If you read Earl Strom's book, he talks about taking off his belt and wrapping it around his hand in case he needed to hit someone on the way off the floor.

My pants would fall down, :eek:! Besides, who wears belted pants anymore?

MTD, Sr.

A Royal Proclamation ...
 

Certainly no God-fearing IAABO members: Handbook of IAABO 2014-15 Page 2
IAABO Uniform: The approved official uniform established by the Executive Committee of IAABO shall be:
1) Long black pants (beltless, and not tapered)

Oh, I almost forgot. Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.: Shut up.

Quote: "First, additional legal sanctions will not dissuade someone who has momentarily lost his or her mind to pause and think, “Oh yeah, If I slug this person, there’s an extra penalty.”

Quote: "There is no evidence that such legislation works as a deterrent to emotional outbursts."

This statement is an extremely tranparent cop-out. By definition, and logistically, a deterrent cannot be tracked -- there is no data to analize if the targetted action has been thwarted/avoided - deterred. Simply, if it didn't happen, there's no way of confidently projecting whether it actually would have occured, if the deterrent factor were not in place.
One may say, "well, during such and such previous timespan, the occurence rate was X. And, a subsequent timespan, with the proposed "deterrent" in place, had a rate of Y, therefore, the "deterrent" was or was not successful."
However, even in retrospect, such statements are projections, and not actual supported data.

This is the fallacy of attempting to view law enforcement as a "deterrent", rather than an enforcement.

Any such legislation is only certainly in play as an enforcement. And if not on the actions of a perpetrator, it most likely would have a deterrent value and effect on future potential perpetrators.
But to dismiss the opportunity to sanction negative actions, based on the statements presented, is an affront to those injurred by the miscreant individuals.

Sports officials deserve better -- better representation by their legislators, better support by all parties involved, and much more respect for the services they render!

Wherever Chickens Are Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Have Chickens ...
 

Agree. Laws against drivers speeding on the highways don't seem to deter all drivers from speeding on highways, so let's not have laws against speeding? Laws against murder don't seem to deter murderers, so let's not have laws against murder? Laws against convicted felons owning guns don't seem deter many felons from owning guns, so let's not have laws against felons owning guns? Where does it stop?

I am an IAABO member and so is Junior. Junior has never (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirely, who was a Life Member of IAABO, if my memory serves me correctly) worn belted pants when officiating basketball and I have been wearing beltless pants for basketball for about 20 years now.

BUT!! Two years ago Junior had a JV basketball game with a guy who wore belted pants and wore a patent leather belt, :eek:!!

MTD, Sr.

If you're going to disregard convention, do it with style.

This guy owns the patent on leather belts? :eek:

How Many Is A Brazilian ???
 

He's probably a Brazilianaire.