Washington officials finally disciplined for charity pink whistles

[asdf]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

I will try to explain this again. And I know that some of you are basing your reactions to the WOA based only on what you have read or seen in the media. The problem with that is that the PNFOA has a board member who is married to one of the Seattle area newscast people, and so the original story was slanted to their side - oh, the big bad WOA won't let us wear pink whistles and donate our money. Not true at all...the WOA has specific procedures in place to apply for exemptions to certain rules - the uniform rule being one of them. My basketball association applied for, and was granted, an exemption two seasons ago. It's not hard to do...but the PNFOA guys did not follow the proper procedure and so were told not to wear the pink whistles. No one ever told them they could not donate their money. They told the WOA that the WOA had no jurisdiction over them and they would do whatever they wanted. It is NOT the first time they have acted this way...so the WOA Executive Board - not Todd Stordahl - decided to administer the consequence that the PNFOA was warned could be applied prior to the game in question.

So you guys in Texas and the East Shire and wherever else - you keep on reading your internet news stories and jumping all over the wrong people. The WOA did nothing wrong...they did not stop anyone from supporting any cause - they simply followed the by-laws and procedures that EVERY local Association, including the PNFOA, agreed to follow.

The BS meter just got pegged....

How did this Seattle area newscast person persuade Napoleon to announce to the whole world...

"There's one person who has the authority to make that decision, and it's not PNFOA."

Seems to me that Napoleon frogot about the Executive Board.


Make no mistake, this is all about Napoleon not getting his little photo op and the credit for the officials supporting a cause.

[stratref]

As a member of the WOA (but not the PNFOA) I know that the WOA has had problems with the PNFOA doing their own thing in the past. The WOA has told them on multiple occasions to do it the same way everyone else in the state does it or there will be consequences.

They didn't properly apply for the exception, the WOA told them don't do it (actually they told the entire WOA their ruling) and the PNFOA said we don't care what you say. This was not their first time breaking a WOA rule/policy/procedure on purpose so the WOA felt that the PNFOA needed to be punished. The reason for the punishment was only partially related to the pink whistles.

As a member of the WOA I am glad that the WOA finally told an association that has thumbed their nose at the WOA and the rest of the associations in the state to sit down and shut up. Heck, had they done this quietly and not been so public and rubbed Todd Stordahal's nose in it and brought the media in, no one would have known and there wouldn't have been a punishment, but the appearance of being generous and supporting charity was apparently more important then actually doing so.

Jasper

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by stratref

They didn't properly apply for the exception, the WOA told them don't do it (actually they told the entire WOA their ruling)

This is the whole problem. Instead of complaining that the paperwork didn't get filed correctly so denying the request, WOA should have worked with PNFOA to get it approved. Instead, WOA took an opportunity to grind an axe against PNFOA.

Again, what kind of person says no when someone asks to support breast cancer awareness?

It really doesn't matter how many different ways you try to explain it. The bottom line still comes out that WOA is more concerned about paperwork than women.

[jfurdell]

Originally Posted by stratref

They didn't properly apply for the exception, the WOA told them don't do it (actually they told the entire WOA their ruling) and the PNFOA said we don't care what you say. This was not their first time breaking a WOA rule/policy/procedure on purpose so the WOA felt that the PNFOA needed to be punished. The reason for the punishment was only partially related to the pink whistles.

Again, I'd love to hear specifics. In the five years I've been here it seemed like we were generally sticklers for sticking to the WOA uniform/mechanics (well, except for this one time). If this really is for other stuff besides the pink whistles, I wish that could be made public as part of our punishment so we know what we need to change/look for.

I don't want to get us in further trouble talking about this here, but I will say that in the meeting where we decided to go ahead with wearing the whistles, we were told that a specific whistle color was not mentioned in the WOA uniform code. Personally, that gave me the impression that we might be in the clear if this eventually came to a head. In fact, in the e-mail sent to us last week, the bulk of the punishment (2 years probation and a reduction in playoff assignments for 2011 and 2012) is stated to be for our board "intentionally [ignoring] a direct policy interpretation given them by the WOA Commissioner". The actual "association-wide violation of the uniform code" only earned us a letter of reprimand. I don't have a copy of the WOA uniform code and I can't find it online, so I can't say for sure whether whistle color is actually specified. (As far as I know it's not called out in the NFHS rules or officials manual.)

We did go to a non-zero amount of effort to purchase and distribute the pink whistles to 100+ members. Hearing of this ruling and/or interpretation on essentially the eve of our benefit was probably a factor in our (admittedly emotional) decision to just go ahead with it anyway.

As a member of the WOA I am glad that the WOA finally told an association that has thumbed their nose at the WOA and the rest of the associations in the state to sit down and shut up. Heck, had they done this quietly and not been so public and rubbed Todd Stordahal's nose in it and brought the media in, no one would have known and there wouldn't have been a punishment, but the appearance of being generous and supporting charity was apparently more important then actually doing so.

We're in the Seattle metro area, where there's a lot of media; we've got officials who are members of the media. There's not going to be any way to keep a lid on this story. If the story breaking was one of the reasons we were punished, that wasn't explicitly stated.

-JLF

[JugglingReferee]

Blue flags. LMAO

[Rich]

We can?t make this up: Refs punished for wearing pink whistles - Chicago Sun-Times

[JRutledge]

Someone must have a spouse at the Chicago Sun Times.

Peace

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

We can?t make this up: Refs punished for wearing pink whistles - Chicago Sun-Times

WOA loses in the court of public perception. Even if they are technically right, they are also completely wrong at the same time.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Welpe

WOA loses in the court of public perception. Even if they are technically right, they are also completely wrong at the same time.

This is the quote from Stordahl I do not understand.

“It sends the wrong message to kids that are playing the game,” he said then. “’If they broke the rules, why can’t I do the same.’”

What rules does the average public even know what we follow or do not follow? And I think they would get over it the minute they found out you were doing it to raise money and everyone on the field is representing the very same message. I guess common sense does not rule the day.

Peace