Criminal Background Checks

[ref18]

OK, within this past few weeks, I learned that one of our officials in our province was arrested and charged with a very serious offense. Let's just say, now this official is not someone you'd want around kids.

I'm just curious as to if any officials are subject to criminal background checks before officiating?

I have a feeling that within the next year or two it will be mandatory for us. Just wondering if anyone else has to get them, and if so...who eats the cost of them.

At $40 a pop in my area, it's not something I'm too keen on doing, not that I have something to hide, I just don't think it's necessary as we really have no isolated contact with children. All our contact with the kids is in public, so the possibility of us doing something bad would be basically nil.

[MJT]

Last year it became mandatory at our church if you were going to teach Sunday School. It will be interesting to see if it does become something that happens in officiating. I see it happening for teachers and coaches before officials, but you never know.

[ref18]

We actually had a bill in the provincial house that would've mandated sports officials get criminal checks, however the house was adjourned for the legislative session before the bill got out of committee so it died.

I wonder if after the election they're going to try and revive the bill.

Not like it would've made a difference in this situation, the background check would've come clean as it's his first offence.

[SWFLguy]

It has been law here in Florida for the past couple of years. I just had
mine renewed and is good until 2012, well past my intended retirement from high school football officiating.
It is a minor annoyance to me. A real molester/kidnapper would not go to all the trouble of becoming an official. Read the news, they simply pick a kid off in a mall parking lot or at a school bus drop off.
I'm guessing that in time it will fade away. Just my 2¢ worth.

[Jim D]

I know Florida went through this hassle last year. I'm not sure how an official who shows up at a game maybe once a year and is only around kids when they are in front of a crowd of parents and friends (who have their eyes glued on their little darlings) could be considered a creditable threat but such is politics.

[JRutledge]

You cannot maintain your license in the state of Illinois (IHSA) without getting agreeing to a yearly background check.

Peace

[Canfootball52]

Originally Posted by ref18

We actually had a bill in the provincial house that would've mandated sports officials get criminal checks, however the house was adjourned for the legislative session before the bill got out of committee so it died.

I wonder if after the election they're going to try and revive the bill.

Not like it would've made a difference in this situation, the background check would've come clean as it's his first offence.

There's been some discussion about background checks for officials in Manitoba as well. I'm not sure of the details.

I think it's a good idea. Especially at the lower levels. Being a father myself, I would not want just anyone officiating or coaching my daughter's Soccer games. Before I could coach my dauther's Soccer team last year, the Community Club did a Criminal Record Check, and Child Abuse Registry Check. The C.C ate the cost.

They should start to consider Criminal Record checks for some fans too. A couple of weeks ago, a local High School Soccer Official was attacked by Players, Coaches, and Fans of one of the Teams

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Canfootball52

There's been some discussion about background checks for officials in Manitoba as well. I'm not sure of the details.

I think it's a good idea. Especially at the lower levels. Being a father myself, I would not want just anyone officiating or coaching my daughter's Soccer games. Before I could coach my daughter's Soccer team last year, the Community Club did a Criminal Record Check, and Child Abuse Registry Check. The C.C ate the cost.

They should start to consider Criminal Record checks for some fans too. A couple of weeks ago, a local High School Soccer Official was attacked by Players, Coaches, and Fans of one of the Teams

The negative part that I see from the criminal checks si that it will deter some officials from continuing to officiate if they also need to pay for the service of having a check done.

Don't get me wrong: I have no problems with the concept of the police checks. However, the person mentioned in the OP had a clean police record, and even had an exemplary work record.

Maybe a person just needs to have a check done every 2 years as a normal part of life and presents it when asked for. To referee groups, to coaching groups, for volunteering, for work, for this, for that.....

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by ref18

We actually had a bill in the provincial house that would've mandated sports officials get criminal checks, however the house was adjourned for the legislative session before the bill got out of committee so it died.

I wonder if after the election they're going to try and revive the bill.

My problem with the Ontario bill was the wording in that anyone who hires an official has to get the background check done. So in practice this would mean that each league and even some individual teams would ALL have to get the check done. There is no room for having a centralized agent do the clearing in the wording. Technically, you could have a single agent hire the officials for all the contests to get around having them all do it.

My problem with the process in general is suppose an official when he was young and 18 makes a mistake and gets a DWI conviction. Thirty years later when those mistakes are long behind him he has to allow the leagues that hire him to know about this mistake and have it possibly bar him from officiating their games?

The only way this could work is to have a set of offences that would make an official fail their certification and then have a central body do the check so as to preserve the officials privacy.

[Canfootball52]

Originally Posted by wwcfoa43

My problem with the Ontario bill was the wording in that anyone who hires an official has to get the background check done. So in practice this would mean that each league and even some individual teams would ALL have to get the check done. There is no room for having a centralized agent do the clearing in the wording. Technically, you could have a single agent hire the officials for all the contests to get around having them all do it.

My problem with the process in general is suppose an official when he was young and 18 makes a mistake and gets a DWI conviction. Thirty years later when those mistakes are long behind him he has to allow the leagues that hire him to know about this mistake and have it possibly bar him from officiating their games?

The only way this could work is to have a set of offences that would make an official fail their certification and then have a central body do the check so as to preserve the officials privacy.

You're not "hired" by the teams or the leagues, your local Officials Association "hires" you. They would be the one's doing the background checks, not the teams.

There's a big difference between a DWI conviction when you're young and stupid, and being a sexual predator when you're a "mature" adult.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by ref18

At $40 a pop in my area, it's not something I'm too keen on doing, not that I have something to hide, I just don't think it's necessary as we really have no isolated contact with children. All our contact with the kids is in public, so the possibility of us doing something bad would be basically nil.

The local jail or prison in your area has a program where they are trying to rehabilitate convicted guys and they know there is a shortage of officials so they begin a sports officiating outreach where they train and provide officials free of charge to local groups. The officials are guys convicted of a variety of criminal offenses. You would be okay with them working your kid's games because you would be there to observe them? Not me.

[Jim D]

Originally Posted by TXMike

The local jail or prison in your area has a program where they are trying to rehabilitate convicted guys and they know there is a shortage of officials so they begin a sports officiating outreach where they train and provide officials free of charge to local groups. The officials are guys convicted of a variety of criminal offenses. You would be okay with them working your kid's games because you would be there to observe them? Not me.

I understand you're making up an exagerated senario to make a point, but let's put it this way - if these guys were ever going to be near kids, I prefer it to be on a football field on a Friday night in front of a couple of hundred/thousand sets of eyes. I'm not sure how a football official can be a realistic danger to kids who are helmeted and padded to the nth degree with all of the parents and fans watching them.

The money and time that would be spent of background checks would be better spent elsewhere protecting kids. I don't have a problem with the checks in general, I'd just put officials on the absolute bottom of the priority list.

[Canfootball52]

Originally Posted by Jim D

I understand you're making up an exagerated senario to make a point, but let's put it this way - if these guys were ever going to be near kids, I prefer it to be on a football field on a Friday night in front of a couple of hundred/thousand sets of eyes. I'm not sure how a football official can be a realistic danger to kids who are helmeted and padded to the nth degree with all of the parents and fans watching them.

The money and time that would be spent of background checks would be better spent elsewhere protecting kids. I don't have a problem with the checks in general, I'd just put officials on the absolute bottom of the priority list.

I think it should be at the top of the priority list. For the Official's protection. Where I live a Criminal Check is $10. Consideiring I make an average of $30+/game, and work 30+games/year, I think I can afford the expense.
Sports Officials aren't the most popular people in the world. Anything they say or do can and could be used against them. While most Officials would not intentionally cop-a-feel with so many people watching, there are times during a game where an Official will accidentally make physical contact with a player. The parents may see that, and misinterpret it as molestation. If the background checks were done, then the Official can be protected by showing that he has a clean record, and did not intentionally mean to make contact with the player.
For example I've had players approach me and ask for help adjusting shoulder pads when the pad is sticking outside the jersey. At the Umpire position, players may bump into you. The natural reaction is to put your hands out to protect yourself. Anything can be misinterpreted. The article posted at the link below may be one of those times where a touch by the Official was misinterpreted as unacceptable.

http://www.venturacountystar.com/new...ng-four-girls/

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by Jim D

I understand you're making up an exagerated senario to make a point, but let's put it this way - if these guys were ever going to be near kids, I prefer it to be on a football field on a Friday night in front of a couple of hundred/thousand sets of eyes. I'm not sure how a football official can be a realistic danger to kids who are helmeted and padded to the nth degree with all of the parents and fans watching them.

The money and time that would be spent of background checks would be better spent elsewhere protecting kids. I don't have a problem with the checks in general, I'd just put officials on the absolute bottom of the priority list.

When it comes to child sexual predators, there are many things that can bring them perverted pleasure that you or I would not even give a 2d thought to. Read some of the interviews that have been done with such folks over the years and you will be amazed at some of what can cause them to get their rocks off. They should be nowhere near a kid.

But I also think other convicted felons should not be allowed near the kids either even though they might not be a sexual threat. If you are a convicted felon you lose certain rights and privileges. Officiating should just be another one of them.

[Texas Aggie]

I think its more of a problem at the youth level (i.e. under jr. high) than it would be at the levels that most of us work through associations. That said, I'm certainly not against any kind of check.