Washington officials finally disciplined for charity pink whistles

[parepat]

It seems to me that if there is a rogue association who disregards the state, then you punish them. What you do not do is punish them for wearing breast cancer whistles. What you do not do is then change your tune when the whole world is watching. And you definitely don't then flip flop again six months later when you think the whole world is no longer watching. If this pink whistle loving bunch of revolutionaries are as out of control as you say, then they will most certainly fall off the reservation again; and, when they do you can feel free to smash them into little pieces.

What you don't do is make a fool of yourself and your organization by punishing refs for wearing stinkin breast cancer whistles!

[APG]

Originally Posted by parepat

It seems to me that if there is a rogue association who disregards the state, then you punish them. What you do not do is punish them for wearing breast cancer whistles. What you do not do is then change your tune when the whole world is watching. And you definitely don't then flip flop again six months later when you think the whole world is no longer watching. If this pink whistle loving bunch of revolutionaries are as out of control as you say, then they will most certainly fall off the reservation again; and, when they do you can feel free to smash them into little pieces.

What you don't do is make a fool of yourself and your organization by punishing refs for wearing stinkin breast cancer whistles!

I think this sums up the situation perfectly...

[MD Longhorn]

Maybe WOA was wrong in telling PC not to use the pink whistles over bureaucratic nonsense... So shame on them.

Maybe WOA should have told them that in THIS case, because the cause was noble, they would allow it despite their lack of following protocol. So again, shame on them.

But they didn't. They told PC not to do it - IN ADVANCE of them doing it. How could they NOT penalize them when they blatantly did it anyway? If they don't penalize such blatant disregard for authority, future "Don't do that's" have no teeth.

Imagine your a baseball umpire and you (right or wrong) tell a coach, "One more word and you're gone." He then turns to you and says "Breast cancer." If you don't toss him, you're warnings have no further purpose and you have no credibility.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Maybe WOA was wrong in telling PC not to use the pink whistles over bureaucratic nonsense... So shame on them.

Maybe WOA should have told them that in THIS case, because the cause was noble, they would allow it despite their lack of following protocol. So again, shame on them.

But they didn't. They told PC not to do it - IN ADVANCE of them doing it. How could they NOT penalize them when they blatantly did it anyway? If they don't penalize such blatant disregard for authority, future "Don't do that's" have no teeth.

Imagine your a baseball umpire and you (right or wrong) tell a coach, "One more word and you're gone." He then turns to you and says "Breast cancer." If you don't toss him, you're warnings have no further purpose and you have no credibility.

So you're saying you always have to double down on stupidity?

I can't say you're wrong about this; in fact you're probably right that having already taken the stupid action of denying the request in the first place, the WOA was committed to having to punish PNFOA in some way. However, the level of punishment given here is way out of line with the act committed and it doesn't give WOA immunity for being called out on the stupidity and general jerkiness of having forbidden it in the first place.

Yes, when the authorities are jerks you sometimes get punished for doing the right thing. That doesn't change the fact that the authorities are jerks or mean you shouldn't do the right thing.

Oh, and the WOA lost its credibility when they denied the use of the pink whistles, so this is really closing the barn door after the horse has left.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

So you're saying you always have to double down on stupidity?

I can't say you're wrong about this; in fact you're probably right that having already taken the stupid action of denying the request in the first place, the WOA was committed to having to punish PNFOA in some way. However, the level of punishment given here is way out of line with the act committed and it doesn't give WOA immunity for being called out on the stupidity and general jerkiness of having forbidden it in the first place.

Yes, when the authorities are jerks you sometimes get punished for doing the right thing. That doesn't change the fact that the authorities are jerks or mean you shouldn't do the right thing.

Oh, and the WOA lost its credibility when they denied the use of the pink whistles, so this is really closing the barn door after the horse has left.

I dunno about you, but I took his post kind of tongue in cheek...on a side note, that's why we should never tell coach anything close to "One more word and..."

Ref: "Coach, one more word and you get a T!"
Coach: "Yes sir"
Ref: *Whack?!*

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I dunno about you, but I took his post kind of tongue in cheek...on a side note, that's why we should never tell coach anything close to "One more word and..."

Ref: "Coach, one more word and you get a T!"
Coach: "Yes sir"
Ref: *Whack?!*

Could be, I didn't take it that way. It's so darn easy to miss that stuff on the internet.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Maybe WOA was wrong in telling PC not to use the pink whistles over bureaucratic nonsense... So shame on them.

Maybe WOA should have told them that in THIS case, because the cause was noble, they would allow it despite their lack of following protocol. So again, shame on them.

But they didn't. They told PC not to do it - IN ADVANCE of them doing it. How could they NOT penalize them when they blatantly did it anyway? If they don't penalize such blatant disregard for authority, future "Don't do that's" have no teeth.

Imagine your a baseball umpire and you (right or wrong) tell a coach, "One more word and you're gone." He then turns to you and says "Breast cancer." If you don't toss him, you're warnings have no further purpose and you have no credibility.

Then why in the world didn't Napoleon tell the world that they applied, were told no and did it anyway?

Instead he said they didn't ask it was a dress code violation.

He's flipped stories on this so many times, it's comical.

Maybe he should check with the WOA "staff" before he shoots all his toes off on camera.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

So you're saying you always have to double down on stupidity?

Don't you mean "double up"? If they were doubling down they'd at least be promising not to pile on any further stupidity beyond that.

[Redneck Ref]

The following is from an article written by the Tri-City Herald in Kennewick, WA. This happened at the 3A Regional meet in Spokane. This is the same group (WOA/WIAA) that suspended football officals for using pink whistles.


The Kamiakin Braves won the sprint relay in 42.77 seconds, which is the fastest time in the state for Class 3A schools this season. They were then given their first-place medals, when an opposing coach noticed the team was wearing different color uniforms.

The rules state that if two or more members of a relay are wearing tights under the uniform, then all relay members must wear the same colors. Three of the Braves were wearing black tights and one white tights.

The meet's games committee convened and initally voted 3-1 to deny the protest and let Kamiakin move on. Another protest was then filed because not all members of the games committee were present for the vote. After much talk, the second vote went against Kamiakin, allowing Eastmont's relay team to earn the final state-qualifying spot.

"Coach (Cheryl) Schauble came over to me and told me," Johnston said. "I didn't think she was being serious until I saw her face. I didn't know how we got disqualified."

Kamiakin took the protest to the WIAA, but the appeal was denied.



Read more: Kamiakin's Johnston sprints to state - Sports: Track | Tri-City Herald : Mid-Columbia news

[HLin NC]

Actually the track uniform rule is an NF rule. They weren't the first team to get caught up in it. I seem to recall a Muslim girl who ran track made headlines for being in violation of it.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Redneck Ref

The following is from an article written by the Tri-City Herald in Kennewick, WA. This happened at the 3A Regional meet in Spokane. This is the same group (WOA/WIAA) that suspended football officals for using pink whistles.


The Kamiakin Braves won the sprint relay in 42.77 seconds, which is the fastest time in the state for Class 3A schools this season. They were then given their first-place medals, when an opposing coach noticed the team was wearing different color uniforms.

The rules state that if two or more members of a relay are wearing tights under the uniform, then all relay members must wear the same colors. Three of the Braves were wearing black tights and one white tights.

The meet's games committee convened and initally voted 3-1 to deny the protest and let Kamiakin move on. Another protest was then filed because not all members of the games committee were present for the vote. After much talk, the second vote went against Kamiakin, allowing Eastmont's relay team to earn the final state-qualifying spot.

"Coach (Cheryl) Schauble came over to me and told me," Johnston said. "I didn't think she was being serious until I saw her face. I didn't know how we got disqualified."

Kamiakin took the protest to the WIAA, but the appeal was denied.



Read more: Kamiakin's Johnston sprints to state - Sports: Track | Tri-City Herald : Mid-Columbia news

There was an Illinios (IIRC)) track team that suffered the same fate for the same violation several years ago. It's a stupid rule, and it is stupid to allow such protests AFTER the contest is over, but you can't lay this one on WOA. They were merely enforcing the NF rule.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Dakota

There was an Illinios (IIRC)) track team that suffered the same fate for the same violation several years ago. It's a stupid rule, and it is stupid to allow such protests AFTER the contest is over, but you can't lay this one on WOA. They were merely enforcing the NF rule.

I too would have a hard time finding fault with this decision.

[TXMike]

Looks like the issue is far from over in Washington.
=======================

Refs punished for pink whistles take state association to court
by CHRIS DANIELS / KING 5 News
SEATTLE -- The “Pink Whistle” officials are throwing the flag at the organizations which govern state high school sports.

KING 5 News has learned the Pacific Northwest Football Officials Association filed suit in King County Superior Court against the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association (WIAA) and the Washington Officials Association (WOA). It asks a judge to overturn punishment the WOA handed down to the organization, after the officials used pink whistles in a game last October.

The PNFOA was using the whistles as part of a fundraiser for the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, and had donated their game checks to the cause. The group says the effort raised $4,734.

“We thought it was important to raise funds for Komen for the Cure, and that’s we wore the pink whistles,” says referee Gavin Anderson.

“There was no rule we couldn’t use a pink whistle,” says PNFOA President, and fellow referee, Jeff Mattson.

However, the WOA said the group violated uniform code, and a direct order given to them by the WOA commissioner Todd Stordahl. In May, the WOA issued a two-year probation for the referees, and docked them several game assignments for the 2011 and 2012 football playoffs. The WOA Board wrote in a newsletter that the referees showed a “blatant disregard of WOA policy” and “although some may not like the position taken by the WOA there has to be a line drawn and the WOA feels comfortable with the rationales used to reach this decision.”

The suit also alleges the PNFOA was punished for speaking to the media, and posting on blogs, about the controversy. The suit alleges the “content based restraint on speech and expressive conduct” is unconstitutional. It not only seeks to have the punishment rescinded, but also allow the PNFOA to break off as a separate organization with full authority to referee games. The PNFOA says the WIAA has a monopoly over interscholastic competition, and that WOA Membership is required to officiate at WIAA games.

“That is the ultimate goal, to break from the WOA and to allow the PNFOA to contract directly with the WIAA and the schools,” said PNFOA attorney Tyler Firkins.

“We’re setting a good example, taking a leadership role, what we think is right for all officials in the state of Washington,” adds Mattson.

“We wore pink whistles,” says Anderson, “It’s not that big a deal.”

A WIAA spokesperson said Executive Director Mike Colbrese was unavailable for comment. Stordahl was out of the office, and did not return our multiple calls for reaction.

[ODJ]

I need a refresher on the authority of WOA and the relationship with WIAA.

If WOA is the gatekeeper for WIAA post-season assignments ....

[parepat]

This is fantastic. Simply do nothing and wait for another oppurtunity to punish the pinkies. Instead, now you are in a federal lawsuit.