Umpire Rating Systems

[topper]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Our HS association does have a board who conducts evals based on a set of certain criteria. They do not effect post season play, however, as TASO has a set guideline on what constitutes an eligible official for post season play. Their guidelines are that an official must attend a certain percentage of the local chapter's meetings, must attend a state or regional clinic. the passing of the state exam, and a certain level of proficiency points. There are three grades; Certified, Registered, and Approved. Anyone who falls in the last category cannot work post season play. (This includes all first year officials).

I feel the system in place here is reasonably fair, though as with any system, it has its faults as well.

There is really no instrument in place to allow an official to challenge their evaluations or their state ratings, though with the evaluations you can at least discuss it at length with the evaluator. As to the state rating system, you can ask for leniency to be granted for failing to get the required points where "extenuating circumstances" exist.

And yes, people get lower ratings than the previous year if they fail to meet expectations. That's the nature of the beast.

Wow! Taso does all that up there in N TX? Down here, even if there were evaluations taking place, there are far too many playoff games to be covered. If only good umpires were qualified to call in the postseason, they would have to drastically cut back on the number of teams making the playoffs.

You also failed to mention TASO's puppet master, UIL, and how their mandates determine much about postseason assignments. Allowing HS coaches to pick their officials is absurd. UIL determines the make-up of the state tournament based more on race, gender, and geographical diversity than umpiring ability. I have seen some really bad things happen at state from an umpiring standpoint
.