Quote from Veteran Official that's seen the most A-11 Games in the Nation

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do any of you bother to read the garbage you write. This is getting insane. You are so wrapped up in this A-11 contoversy you'd rather jump to all sorts of negative speculations, presume the absolute worst about an individual you don't know and make all sorts of asinne accusations without any thing to back them up aside from your imaginations.

If you don't believe what coach Bryan, or anybody else has claimed, you are totally free to ignore it, but personally attacking someone you don't even know is what little girls do throwing a hissy-fit..

Why am I not allowed to dispute what someone has "claimed". Why must I ignore it? Does KB's right to make a statement superscede my right to dispute it?

Originally Posted by ajmc

RichMSN is ready to call this man a liar, and questions whether or not he's still active. Based on what?

Based on the same standard we use for everything here. If someone posts a ruling, we will ask for the rule reference. If someone makes a claim they should be prepared to have a reference.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Waltjp seems ready to question his integrity presuming he's getting paid to say certain things, whether they're true, or not. Where does that suspicion come from? .

The information is posted as a testimonial. Quite often testimonials are paid.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Daggo66 seems eager to questions the man's competence over a 50 year career. ("being old doesn't mean you're good"), and somehow feels competent to demand a resume' to prove what?? That his 50 years satisfyies Daggo66's standards? Just who the hell are you to define standards for judging anyone competent, Daggo66?

You never cease to amaze me! We are not allowed to dispute someone's statement since you feel it is personally attacking someone, yet that is exactly what you do each and every time you post here. The difference between you and me is that I will answer your question. You can't go into a job interview and state that you graduated at the top of your class in Harvard unless it is on your resume and it can be verified. As far as me being able to define standards, I have trained many officials over the years. My basic standard is whether or not I would accept that person on my crew. Our organization has officials that have been working for over 15 years that I would not accept, yet there are some with less than 3 years experience that I would accept in a heartbeat.

This is no different than requesting the rule reference. I don't care how long someone has been officiating, I want to know how good they are.

Originally Posted by ajmc

I am so glad I don't have to worry about ever stepping on a field with any of you. You are so quick, so eager to slash and burn a man who has spent 50 years on the field, for what? Because this man has rendered an opinion of doing something that doesn't fit your view of how something so stupid as this argument, over a formation whose legality and appropriateness is currently under discussion, may yet turn out.

What happened to the "3rd team on the field" concept, the idea of respecting those who do what we do, of supporting fellow officials because we understand the difficulty of the job and the unreasonable expectations we face.

I don't think petty sniping, throwing unsubstantiated allegations against the wall and spreading rumors as a defense against a differing perspective is what anyone had in mind when they speak of courage, honesty and the ability to remain calm and the force of reason and composure when everyone around us is being over emotional is all about.

Some of you are way, WAY too full of yourselves.

I think that I can safely speak for most of the members on this forum, that we are equally glad that we don't have to worry about stepping on the field with you!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Our organization has officials that have been working for over 15 years that I would not accept, yet there are some with less than 3 years experience that I would accept in a heartbeat.

The old saying is that some people have 15 years of experience and some have one year of experience 15 times. I'm with you - there are 30 year vets in this area I would not accept on my crew. They know it all.

(OT: My football crew consists of one guy who's got 5 years (all on my crew), one who has 4 years (all on my crew), one who has 3 years (all on my crew), and a 10 year guy who filled in when I sacked 2 other guys from my crew 3 years ago. I'd take this crew ANYWHERE.)

[ajmc]

Daggo66, allow me to offer you some sound advice; when you say something stupid, and it's pointed out to you, you have 3 options; consider the criticism, ignore the criticism or defend what you've said with even more stupid observations. You seem stuck in repeatedly choosing the latter.

I'm tired of saying there is nothing wrong with disputing what someone has said, disagreeing with anything you feel needs to be disagreed with or challenging something. The key is how you go about disagreeing or challenging something.

Again, you get to make choices, you can question, disagree with or challenge the subject matter with logic and common sense or you can attack the person who hold a differing opinion with ridiculous personal attacks, imanginary presumptions and smart alec little barbs, or demand ridiculous requirements to satisfy some higher sense of purpose that somehow you think you've been anointed to set.

I'm just guessing, but I imagine you've been doing this, thing we do, for somewhere between 3 and 7-10 years, because you seem stuck in that phase of officiating, we all have to get though, when we realize that we actually do know and understand more than most idiots who buy tickets and stoll along some sidelines, and think that makes us important.

If you last long enough to get through this phase, you'll realize that although you know and understand a lot more than you did, it's not nearly enough or anywhere close to knowing and understanding what you ultimately need to. You'll eventually realize that you still leave an oder in the bathroom, and you might understand that the reason God gave you two ears, and only one mouth was to teach a lesson. Unfortunately, some officials never get past that phase where they think they know everything and have become smarter than everone else.

Rather than direct all your focus on nit picling everything someone with a different perspective offers, you might consider that those tidbits, right or wrong, have been offered respectfully and usually stick to the subject matter, rather than attack or demonize some imaginary motivation for your disagreeing. The negative emphasis in these discussions has come from only one direction.

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, so long as you don't become disageeable or insulting. Manners and civility are things your parents were supposed to teach you, and although they may have tried valiantly, that message doesn't seem to have taken. I don't really care what your "basic standard" is, or need to know your specific objectives, because, as one official to another, I presume it's to be as good as you can be.

Here's another flash, you may someday grow to understand, some officials are actually a lot better at what we do than others, and you may actually not be as high up on that general list as you think you are. That doesn't mean you're not working as hard as you can to be the best you can be, or deserve less respect for your efforts.

I'll give you another piece of sound advice, don't presume you speak for anyone but yourself, because invariably you don't.

[daggo66]

Once again you've proved my point, thank you.

Stop guessing, you're way off.

At this point I have decided that I will no longer engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

Feel free to continue and have the last word, or couple hundred anyway.