Opinions on this........

[Reffing Rev.]

Originally Posted by parepat

If you don't think physicians review reference material when in doubt, you are kidding yourself.

I am not willing to let a correctible error go for the sake of my credibility. The players and coaches deserve better.

I fully expect that my physician uses regularly those books on his shelf, but I don't really want him referencing them while my spleen is sliced open. I might choose a new doctor, and if he suddenly forgets to stich up my spleen, I'll probably find a new doctor too.

So using your analogy...an official who demonstrates a lack of proficiency with the rule book is probably not going to get hired again, and for that matter an official who consults the reference manual on the field, looks like he doesn't know the rule book, and as we all know appearance is reality. So he's probably not getting hired again either.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

I fully expect that my physician uses regularly those books on his shelf, but I don't really want him referencing them while my spleen is sliced open. I might choose a new doctor, and if he suddenly forgets to stich up my spleen, I'll probably find a new doctor too.

Unless, of course, your spleen has a rare genetic anomoly only documented in one study. Now I ask you, as you lie there with the spleen exposed to the world. Would you want your doc to the go the book or "wing it".

So using your analogy...an official who demonstrates a lack of proficiency with the rule book is probably not going to get hired again, and for that matter an official who consults the reference manual on the field, looks like he doesn't know the rule book, and as we all know appearance is reality. So he's probably not getting hired again either.

You propose that rules proficiency and having the rule book available are mutually exclusive. They are not. However, I've never met an official who has never kicked a rule or its application. Faced with a situation where a mistake is made, I am comfortable using any allowable resource to fix my mistake despite the effect it may have on others' opinions of me.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by parepat

You propose that rules proficiency and having the rule book available are mutually exclusive. They are not. However, I've never met an official who has never kicked a rule or its application. Faced with a situation where a mistake is made, I am comfortable using any allowable resource to fix my mistake despite the effect it may have on others' opinions of me.

It's not that rules proficiency, and having a rules book are mutually exclisive, it's that they each apply to a certain, completely different, setting. Rule books are wondeful for an open book test, unfortunately working an actual game is the ultimate "closed book test" setting.

The "allowable resources" you have to work with during a contest, are limited to your preparation, your common sense and judgment and each of the other officials on your crew. When you step on the game field, the rule book is NOT part of your tool kit.

Whether you like it, or not, your credibility, as perceived by the coaches and players, is a vital part of your performance and probability of success. If their view, of your credibility is weakened, their confidence in you is weakened which starts a downward spiral, often impossible to reverse.

As close as I can come to guaranteeing anything, pulling out a rule book on the field during a game, is not going to build confidence or enhance your credibility or do you, your crew, or either team any good and it sets a horrible presedence that might take a much bigger bite out of your backside than any rule mistake you, and your crew, might ever make.

[mikesears]

If I were to hire an electrician, I hope he is capable of doing the job without the need to consult the electrical code. If I find him consulting the code frequently, my opinion of his knowledge is going to suffer. However, if he consults it for some obscure isolated thing which very few electricians encounter, I'd be more understanding.