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

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you telling me, that if I am using my real name and I say that I worked the Big Ten for 20 years and I worked in the NFL this past season, no one is supposed to not only try to verify that information, but just ignore it on its face?
And if I have a history of making claims that are not true, then people are going to challenge my motives.

Dude, wake up already.

Peace

I wouldn't presume to "tell" you anything, but I would never even think about verifying whatever you claim is your history or accomplishments. I choose, rather, to base how much attention and credibility I'll apply to what you say, to what I find the value of what you've said, actually is.

You seem to be awfully insecure about your credibility and what others think of your observations. I might suggest that if you're comfortable and secure with your credibility, and believe your observations have value, that's really all that you can do, and all that should be necessary.

I've read your input on multiple issues for several years and find it most often to be relevant, appropriate and instructive, because you usually stick to the salient specifics of whatever point or subject is being discussed. Occassionally you do tend to drift a little towards overbearing and pompous, but usually not to the extent of eliminating the basic value of your observations.

I've found most of your suggestions, even those I may not totally agee with, rational and reasonable and hope you wouldn't reject my right to disagee, should I feel disagreement was appropriate. However, I would hope I'm smart enough to offer any disagreement respectfully, and in such a manner that I might hope to persuade you, or others, to consider my perspective or create a discussion from which I might be persuaded to consider a different perspective. Otherwise what's the point in responding. Whatever my response might be, the manner in which it was delivered only reflects on me.

These discussions, on this subject, turned sour when some (I'm not going to bother to specify who said what, when) got off the track of the issue and went after the messenger. You mention our political process, which has over the past few decades, largely seen the political debate hijacked by spin masters, on both sides, who use rumor, innuendo, unsubstantiated accusations to slime and slander opponents for the express purpose of blowing smoke in voters eyes, unfortunately, often successfully.

I just hate to see these, normally valuable exchanges about very specific, relevant topics follow down the same road of, "if you don't see it my way, you're the devil". A lot of the pure garbage that has been offered in these recent discussions is nothing to be proud of, and what is saddest, is totally unproductive and unnecessary.

Don't roll your eyes, look in your mirror. I look in mine and what I see is always a long way from perfection looking back, and no matter how much I yell at the image to change it won't improve until I do.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Are you ever going to be able to write a response less than 500 words that says anything of substance?

The cure for verbal diarrhea, BTW, is a big glass of STFU.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Are you ever going to be able to write a response less than 500 words that says anything of substance?

.

I'll try. I doubt very much whether you have sufficient intelligence to grasp anything of substance. Usually when really stupid people have nothing to add, they try and shout or be obnoxious out of frustration. You are a perfect example. (40 words)

[JugglingReferee]

ajmc's observations are right on the money. Read them again if you don't agree.

In the meantime, maybe the mods should lock this entire Football forum for a week!

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I'll try. I doubt very much whether you have sufficient intelligence to grasp anything of substance. Usually when really stupid people have nothing to add, they try and shout or be obnoxious out of frustration. You are a perfect example. (40 words)

Enough already!

This forum has been a great sharing experience and at times has gotten a bit personal but overall you can exchange great thoughts and ideas with officials from various places.

Maybe you should not participate if you feel the need to personally attack.

[ajmc]

I wouldn't think answering a direct question, would qualify as a (uncalled for)personal attack, but then again, that's only my opinion and I've never suggested my opinions are always right. Just goes to show, knowing the rules doesn't mean you will always execute them properly.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I wouldn't think answering a direct question, would qualify as a (uncalled for)personal attack, but then again, that's only my opinion and I've never suggested my opinions are always right. Just goes to show, knowing the rules doesn't mean you will always execute them properly.

One of the things veteran officials learn is when to keep quiet. Maybe, that is why they are veteran officials.

I asked myself how many times have coaches questioned my judgement which is a personal attack such as "how can you see that?"

Now I could escalate that into something resembling insanity by making some personal remark or I could simply walk away and not justify the remark.

I ask any official on this forum what is the right thing to do?

Well, pretend this forum is the football field.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Well, pretend this forum is the football field.

Are you saying that I can eject someone?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I'll try. I doubt very much whether you have sufficient intelligence to grasp anything of substance. Usually when really stupid people have nothing to add, they try and shout or be obnoxious out of frustration. You are a perfect example. (40 words)

I would never go into a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I would never go into a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

Probably a good idea, RichMSN, I agree you likely wouldn't do all that well.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Probably a good idea, RichMSN, I agree you likely wouldn't do all that well.

Hmmm, sounds like a personal attack.

[mbyron]

Has the rules committee met yet? *yawn*

[Rich]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Hmmm, sounds like a personal attack.

I'm a hyena. He can't make a personal attack against a hyena.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I wouldn't presume to "tell" you anything, but I would never even think about verifying whatever you claim is your history or accomplishments. I choose, rather, to base how much attention and credibility I'll apply to what you say, to what I find the value of what you've said, actually is.

You seem to be awfully insecure about your credibility and what others think of your observations. I might suggest that if you're comfortable and secure with your credibility, and believe your observations have value, that's really all that you can do, and all that should be necessary.

It is clear that you have no credibility on this or many other issues. For one you have not been working very long and you have no idea what is expected of officials on or off the field. That is certain. If you cannot bring up a point of view without attacking someone personally, then I am trying to figure out why you are still here. You have contributed nothing but trying to tell people that have been here a lot longer than you have, how to take on points that are very relevant to the discussion.

Originally Posted by ajmc

I've read your input on multiple issues for several years and find it most often to be relevant, appropriate and instructive, because you usually stick to the salient specifics of whatever point or subject is being discussed. Occassionally you do tend to drift a little towards overbearing and pompous, but usually not to the extent of eliminating the basic value of your observations.

I am overbearing and pompous, but you tell the entire board, that they cannot dispute the facts of an "endorsement" with the only purpose to try to justify why a rule should be put in place or not? I think there are a lot of officials with a lot of experience here and they are irrelevant but some unnamed, unknown officials with 50 years of experience know more than everyone here. I do not know about you, but have you done the math on how old someone would have to be to have 50 years of experience. I know 50 year olds having trouble keeping up with the game physically without this offense, but a 50 year football officiating experience guy, is more knowledgeable than anyone else here? WOW!!!

Originally Posted by ajmc

I've found most of your suggestions, even those I may not totally agee with, rational and reasonable and hope you wouldn't reject my right to disagee, should I feel disagreement was appropriate. However, I would hope I'm smart enough to offer any disagreement respectfully, and in such a manner that I might hope to persuade you, or others, to consider my perspective or create a discussion from which I might be persuaded to consider a different perspective. Otherwise what's the point in responding. Whatever my response might be, the manner in which it was delivered only reflects on me.

Wait a minute, you can try to talk about what you feel I am thinking, but no one here can question the motives of a person that only comes here to talk about one issue. Then when he comes to talk about that issue, we cannot address their evidence (that they bring to the table, not anyone else) because it is a personal attack or unprofessional?

See the difference between you and me; I have no problem what you think of me. The fact is that whatever you think of me, I have proven on many occasions that what I say to be credible, because not only do I back those claims up, I use my real name and those claims or comments can be verified. And you have yet to give a name, a place you work or live or any relevant information that proves that you have not only the standing to say the things you do, but the experience to back it up. People on this board knew of things I did and I did not even have to tell anyone. And there are many others here that have that same transparency in their words.

Originally Posted by ajmc

These discussions, on this subject, turned sour when some (I'm not going to bother to specify who said what, when) got off the track of the issue and went after the messenger. You mention our political process, which has over the past few decades, largely seen the political debate hijacked by spin masters, on both sides, who use rumor, innuendo, unsubstantiated accusations to slime and slander opponents for the express purpose of blowing smoke in voters eyes, unfortunately, often successfully.

So is rumor or innuendo, when someone brings what they call a fact to the table and people see holes in those claims. Like I said earlier, if I claimed to have worked in the Big Ten or NFL that information is easily verifiable by a lot of people. And if it is not verified, someone is going to claim that I am lying or misrepresenting my history or resume. I do not know that you comments make sense. Actually based on this thread alone, you have made some rather personal comments about me and I do not see why that is OK, but we cannot figure out how one official knows more about one team than anyone else. IF you are an assignor and doing your job, you are not at that one school all the time. Sorry, but those are inconsistent facts given by KB and should be scrutinized on some level.

Originally Posted by ajmc

I just hate to see these, normally valuable exchanges about very specific, relevant topics follow down the same road of, "if you don't see it my way, you're the devil". A lot of the pure garbage that has been offered in these recent discussions is nothing to be proud of, and what is saddest, is totally unproductive and unnecessary.

I am sorry, but that is another lie. There is a difference between not seeing something someone's way, and challenging the motives of the comments or the credentials of where those comments came from.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Don't roll your eyes, look in your mirror. I look in mine and what I see is always a long way from perfection looking back, and no matter how much I yell at the image to change it won't improve until I do.

I will roll my eyes, because the hypocracy in your statements are in many ways stunning.

Peace

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I will roll my eyes, because the hypocracy in your statements are in many ways stunning.

Peace

I didn't realize, Mr. Rutledge, you were authorized to speak for everyone, or determine what has, or doesn't have any merit. I must have been absent the day you were crowned.

I didn't tell anybody what they could, or couldn't say. I suggested that the immediate reaction and what was said, by some, about a 50 year official, who doubtfully anyone knows personally, was disgraceful, and it was. Yes, you are overbearing and pompous, not always, but frequently you seem to relish climbing up on a high horse if someone dares disagree with you or offers a different perspective. For the record, it's not becoming and doesn't add to the level of credibility you seem so concerned with. Don't assume silence means agreement, more likely it's a sign of simply ignoring you, and rolling eyes.

I'd love to see you confine your remarks to the subject, and drop all this ancillary, imaginary BS you keep trying to inject into the discussion to accomplish nothing but blow smoke and defend previously excessive comments that added nothing to the discussion.

The "things you'de done" don't provide you with a license to slander anyone because you don't happen to agree with, or like, what they think is a good idea. You keep trying to twist this interaction into someting it's not. All I've suggested is that you, and others, went too far in trying to bully and intimidate someone you disagree with by attacking his character and motivation which at best you are only guessing at. If you had any sense of manners or civility, you'd have understood what I was saying and responded accordingly, rather than pump up all your bluster and try and defend being stupid by being more stupid.

All this agita about who I am, what I've done, where I'm from and how long I've been doing what we do, doesn't mean squat. If I offer something worthwhile that has value, that's good, you're welcome to consider it. If what I offer is stupid, irrelevant or you just don't agree with it, your absolutely free to disregard it. I have already told you I've been doing, this thing we do, a lot longer than you. That doesn't guarantee I'm right, but it also doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Someone referenced the "opinion" of a 50 year official, which like any opinion we're all free to accept or reject. Just who do you think you are that you can demand that somehow this man, who simply rendered an opinion, must justify his very existence, his career, his accomplishments to satisfy the mighty Mr. Rutledge. If you don't think his opinion is valid, then ignore it, but demanding someone meet with your approval, sounds awfully like a pompous a$$. You're not some judge, nobody owes you squat.

There are significant differences between you and me. I understand that my perception is not always the best perspective and am willing to consider a different approach to consider if it might just be better. You don't seem capable to even consider that you may not be absolutely correct, and seem iadverse to even suggesting a possibility you might be wrong. Personal perfection is a heavy cross to bear.

I'm not arguing the merits of the A-11 offense with you, I'm suggesting you sometimes you have a real big mouth and trying to bluster your way through mistakes isn't working for you. You can either take that with a grain of salt, or just dismiss it out of hand. Either way, that's your decision and how you decide is entirely on you.