Washington officials finally disciplined for charity pink whistles

[TXMike]

I just want one of you apologists to explain why other sports were allowed to wear pink whistles and why football guys were allowed to wear blue flags but these guys were not allowed to wear pink whistles. Seems like an arbitrary and unsupportable decision to me. If the PNFOA perceived they were being forced to play under different rules (as it seems they were) then kudos to them for doing the right thing.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by TXMike

I just want one of you apologists to explain why other sports were allowed to wear pink whistles and why football guys were allowed to wear blue flags but these guys were not allowed to wear pink whistles. Seems like an arbitrary and unsupportable decision to me. If the PNFOA perceived they were being forced to play under different rules (as it seems they were) then kudos to them for doing the right thing.

I'm definitely not an apologist, but what I read was that WOA assigned charities and you were only allowed to support the charity you were assigned. I agree that it was completely arbitrary and indicative of WOA being power-hungry.

[JRutledge]

Again, one more reason these processes are silly to me. The best crews and individuals should work the post season, not based on what organization you belong to. Even if they did not follow a policy as an organization, is this the reason to flex your muscles? And one of the reasons this is a PR nightmare for this state. Penalize the individuals that participated, I am sure there are people that did not participate. Oh well, just thanking God that we are not judged by an entire association action, especially when it comes to assignments.

Peace

[jfurdell]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

This post just goes to show that you really don't have a clue about this whole situation. There is so much more to the situation than what is in the article posted...the PNFOA has consistently disregarded the WOA rules and policies, and has basically told the WOA that they would do whatever they wanted...to me, this discipline is not enough.

I'm in the PNFOA and would like to hear the details on what rules & policies we've disregarded. (I'm not on the board, and I really don't know the details surrounding this situation outside of what's been released by the WOA.)
-JLF

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jfurdell

I'm in the PNFOA and would like to hear the details on what rules & policies we've disregarded. (I'm not on the board, and I really don't know the details surrounding this situation outside of what's been released by the WOA.)
-JLF

And that is part of the problem. It seems or sounds like this was the big issue. If it was not, then tell the entire story. Just saying there are other violations seems a little silly if you are not being more specific.

Peace

[chseagle]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The penalty has nothing whatever to do with supporting causes, worthwhile or otherwise. It has everything to do with incremental punishment for a group of habitual offenders.

So what about those in the association that did not participate in wearing of the pink whistles? Why should they be punished? (there had to be some that didn't participate)

How come College Football & No Fun League are allowed to support Breast Cancer Awareness yet HS Football cannot?

I came to my conclusions, not by reading just one article, but by searching for all the different articles about this situation & reading each one.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by TXMike

I just want one of you apologists to explain why other sports were allowed to wear pink whistles and why football guys were allowed to wear blue flags but these guys were not allowed to wear pink whistles. Seems like an arbitrary and unsupportable decision to me. If the PNFOA perceived they were being forced to play under different rules (as it seems they were) then kudos to them for doing the right thing.

I don't know any apologists but I'll see if I can break down so you can understand it, even though I know you still won't agree.

In order to show support for two different causes, the WOA voted to allow basketball and volleyball officials to use pink whistles to show that officials' support breast cancer research and to allow football officials to use blue flags to show support for prostate cancer research. It's symbolic. Any official can donate a game check or any amount they choose to for with cause or any other cause.

I venture to say that if basketball or volleyball officials had chosen to use blue whistles, they would have similiar problems with the WOA for violating the directive.

I really don't see why that's so difficult to understand.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by chseagle

So what about those in the association that did not participate in wearing of the pink whistles? Why should they be punished? (there had to be some that didn't participate)

I don't no whether there are those that didn't participate or not. But I know the decision to go against the WOA was made by the PNFOA. The assoication made the decision for all of it's members, therefore are members are subject to any disciplie.

How come College Football & No Fun League are allowed to support Breast Cancer Awareness yet HS Football cannot?

That's a really stupid question. HS football officials can support Breast Cancer Awareness if they choose. No one has ever said they couldn't. So why publicly violate what the WOA has said would be allowed? Why couldn't they just publicly made a contribution to a local charity association with BCA? The answer is simple. They weren't interested in Breast Cancer Awareness. They wanted to rebel against the WOA.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I don't know any apologists but I'll see if I can break down so you can understand it, even though I know you still won't agree.

In order to show support for two different causes, the WOA voted to allow basketball and volleyball officials to use pink whistles to show that officials' support breast cancer research and to allow football officials to use blue flags to show support for prostate cancer research. It's symbolic. Any official can donate a game check or any amount they choose to for with cause or any other cause.

I venture to say that if basketball or volleyball officials had chosen to use blue whistles, they would have similiar problems with the WOA for violating the directive.

I really don't see why that's so difficult to understand.

It's not symbolic; it's asinine. What possible purpose did it serve to deny the request the local association made other than to inflate egos at WOA by exercising arbitrary power?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Which, from what I can tell is exactly what WOA has done here.

The problem with your argument is that the WOA is the statewide organization recognized by the WIAA that all local associations join and agree to abide by their rules and regulations. They chose not to and knew they faced possible sanctions. The PNFOA has to abide by what the WOA decides, not the other way around.

[TXMike]

What's stupid is some bunch of yahoos who can perceive one iota of logic in declaring officials of a certain sport can only publicly support one charity.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

The problem with your argument is that the WOA is the statewide organization recognized by the WIAA that all local associations join and agree to abide by their rules and regulations. They chose not to and knew they faced possible sanctions. The PNFOA has to abide by what the WOA decides, not the other way around.

It's clear to me that it's time the WOA was disbanded. It's clearly more interested in exercising arbitrary power than serving the interest of the officials it purportedly represents.

Seriously, what kind of person prohibits a display in support of breast cancer awareness?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

It's not symbolic; it's asinine.

Wearing a pink whistle or using a blue flag is asinine???

I'm beginning to think you're either asinine or that you can't read and comprehend a simple statement.

[quote]What possible purpose did it serve to deny the request the local association made other than to inflate egos at WOA by exercising arbitrary power? [/qoute]

How about because a decision had already been read by the executive board, which is comprised of members from local associations from across the state, on how such situations would be handled so that there would be statewide consistency?

Originally Posted by Eastshire

It's clear to me that it's time the WOA was disbanded. It's clearly more interested in exercising arbitrary power than serving the interest of the officials it purportedly represents.

Seriously, what kind of person prohibits a display in support of breast cancer awareness?

You don't even know what the WOA is comprised of, do you? You should like some of the fans I read, complaining about their state association.

Originally Posted by TXMike

What's stupid is some bunch of yahoos who can perceive one iota of logic in declaring officials of a certain sport can only publicly support one charity.

Support all the charities you want, just do it within the guidelines that representatives from all local associations have previously agreed to. How difficult is that to do?

I swear you guys sound like fans, whining and complaining about officials. I'm done.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Wearing a pink whistle or using a blue flag is asinine???

I'm beginning to think you're either asinine or that you can't read and comprehend a simple statement.

You're the one not comprehending simple statements. It's asinine to ban the pink whistle. The only purpose I can see to not allowing football to use the pink whistle when other sports were allowed its use is the exercise of arbitrary power. Statewide consistency would also have been achieved if it had been allowed.

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

You don't even know what the WOA is comprised of, do you? You spould like some of the fans I read, complaining about their state association.

The only real thing I know about them is they think they have the moral authority to dictate who can support what charity. But from their name I assume they are supposed to be an association of officials in Washington. Despite this, they seem very antagonistic and unresponsive to officials in Washington.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Support all the charities you want, just do it within the guidelines that representatives from all local associations have previously agreed to. How difficult is that to do?

I swear you guys sound like fans, whining and complaining about officials. I'm done.

Except they can't because they don't work soccer or volleyball. The WOA acted like jerks and we're calling them on it. You can try to spin it as much as you want, but at the end of the day the WOA dictates to its member what charities they can support, despite what you say above.