MOA OFFICIALS

[falconcat]

After attending the recent State C Boys Basketball tournament, and watching lots of District and Divisional tournaments over the years, I find it troubling that the MOA and the MHSA can find decent referees to officate these games. I think one of the problems with the MOA is that they don't seem to have evaluation process, poor officiating has no consequences. You hear "they do their best". May they do, or they just aren't qualified to handle it in the first place. I just think when to get to the tournament level you need professional people doing a professional job. I understand the pay isn't that great, but get rid of the third official and pay two good ones more. Some will say could you do better? I know that I couldn't so you won't see me out there, but these are not volunteer, they sign up and get paid to a job. Like to hear what others say.

[wbtfg]

There is a huge shortage in officials, which is compounded by boys and girls now sharing the same season. Plus the pay is terrible.

That said, there isn't anything more frustrating than watching a poorly officiated game.

[wbtfg]

One other thought....id love to see more female officials in montana.

[catamaran]

we always hear pie in the sky arguments about officials here and there. The plain and simple truth is, who is going to do these games if not MOA's? Are Big Sky officials going to work it since you don't find the state officials credible. The officials you get at tournament level have been voted by the schools as the best in the state. The reason why there is a shortage of officials is because its easier to cry about how 'poor' other people are than to do the job yourself and those to do put themselves out there for the 60 bucks get tired of being dictated the rules by people who've never read them......




rant over

[catamaran]

One other thought....id love to see more female officials in montana.

other officials would also like to see more women out there, especially in the women's sports but you can't make someone care about the games or make them sign up to officiate

[LTown Cat]

we always hear pie in the sky arguments about officials here and there. The plain and simple truth is, who is going to do these games if not MOA's? Are Big Sky officials going to work it since you don't find the state officials credible. The officials you get at tournament level have been voted by the schools as the best in the state. The reason why there is a shortage of officials is because its easier to cry about how 'poor' other people are than to do the job yourself and those to do put themselves out there for the 60 bucks get tired of being dictated the rules by people who've never read them......




rant over

They aren't voted by the schools they are voted by the coaches and just because they are voted doesn't mean they are "best in the state". It might mean they give that particular coach the most calls--thats the truth.

I agree with the rest of your post and the posts above about shortage of officials. I do wish, however, that there was some sort of grading system in place. It might make good officials better and bad ones might become good...it would be nice if coaches had a way to rate them to the MOA at the end of each season.

[catamaran]

the coaches do have a way to rate them........through the vote system. If what you say is true, then the coaches are partly to blame for making it a popularity contest rather than a true merit system. As far as a grading system, that has to be up to the pools because the sheer number of officials is just too much for the state to handle......i think there are about 5 people working in the state office. As an aside, its my opinion that if pools were to get strict with evaluations, the shortage of officials for 'everyday' games would only be more stark. As sad as it is to say, there are some people who do it for the money and not for the benefit of the 'profession' and pools are worried if they lose those guys there is a very real chance varsity level games would be hard to cover.

[LTown Cat]

the coaches do have a way to rate them........through the vote system. If what you say is true, then the coaches are partly to blame for making it a popularity contest rather than a true merit system. As far as a grading system, that has to be up to the pools because the sheer number of officials is just too much for the state to handle......i think there are about 5 people working in the state office. As an aside, its my opinion that if pools were to get strict with evaluations, the shortage of officials for 'everyday' games would only be more stark. As sad as it is to say, there are some people who do it for the money and not for the benefit of the 'profession' and pools are worried if they lose those guys there is a very real chance varsity level games would be hard to cover.

I agree. Most of it goes back to shortage of officials and not wanting the officials that they do have to quit.

In regards to the voting for tournaments...can you really blame a coach for voting for a ref that "appears" to favor his/her team a bit vs. voting for a ref that he knows in the end is a better overall official? Keep in mind that any legal competitive advantage you can get, especially at tourney's is a big deal.

2 seconds left in the divisional semi-final game. One of my players takes a questionable charge with us having a one point lead. Shot goes in. Do I want the ref that gives us the charge call 9 out of 10 times or do I want the ref that makes what he deems the correct call and leave it to chance that we lose by 1 or 2. Right, wrong, indifferent, I go with the ref that gives me that call.

[catamaran]

guess then nobody in the state is worried about whether they get the best officials

[LTown Cat]

guess then nobody in the state is worried about whether they get the best officials

Fans are...at least until that call goes against them!

[catamaran]

guess then nobody in the state is worried about whether they get the best officials

Fans are...at least until that call goes against them!

we both know that an official is only the best for 50% of the crowd

[cat-o-nine]

If we are going to discuss the quality of officiating, we should discuss what calls are missed most frequently. For me, as a fan and a coach, I see the most incorrectly called infraction as being the offensive vs. defensive foul. In my estimation, the biggest failure is when an offensive player drives into the key with wreckless abandon and runs into or over a defensive player, where that defender is clearly in the path to begin with. The common theory is that the defender has to 1) have position and 2) be planted. My issue is with 2. If a defensive player is clearly in the pathway of the offensive dribbler, planted or not, and that dribbler drives into the defensive player creating the contact, 9 times out of 10 the foul is called on the defensive player, even in the absence of swatting or other action of the defender. Why? It seems many - almost all - officials think the defender is supposed to just 'disappear' and allow the offensive dribbler free access to the hoop. This issue needs to be addressed and more offensive fouls or non-calls would appear to be the proper thing.

[LTown Cat]

If we are going to discuss the quality of officiating, we should discuss what calls are missed most frequently. For me, as a fan and a coach, I see the most incorrectly called infraction as being the offensive vs. defensive foul. In my estimation, the biggest failure is when an offensive player drives into the key with wreckless abandon and runs into or over a defensive player, where that defender is clearly in the path to begin with. The common theory is that the defender has to 1) have position and 2) be planted. My issue is with 2. If a defensive player is clearly in the pathway of the offensive dribbler, planted or not, and that dribbler drives into the defensive player creating the contact, 9 times out of 10 the foul is called on the defensive player, even in the absence of swatting or other action of the defender. Why? It seems many - almost all - officials think the defender is supposed to just 'disappear' and allow the offensive dribbler free access to the hoop. This issue needs to be addressed and more offensive fouls or non-calls would appear to be the proper thing.

I believe the rule states that the defender only need to have 2 feet on the floor. No specific length of time, etc. This call bothers the hell out of me as well. One official who I believe is truly among the best in the state told me he calls it based off of advantage. He doesn't really look at whether the defender is "planted" or "set". If he is in good defensive position and the offense creates an advantage by initiating contact then he calls it offensive. If the defender gains an advangtage by "riding" the ball handler, he calls it defensive.

I also hate that so many players are rewarded for flopping with very little contact...

[cat-o-nine]

Hey L-Town, whoever this official friend of yours is, I want him to run a clinic on how it should be called. Sounds like someone who really knows the game and understands proper officiating.
I also know personally know several officials - some good and some horrible. The ones who actually take the time to think about what their role is in making the game better are the better officials. Unfortunately, I also know and see several who blow a whistle and call a foul because they assume a foul occurred - didn't actually see it happen, but just assume it did because a defender was close to the offensive player. Simple rule on fouls - only call them if you see them, and you better be in position to see it.

[LTown Cat]

Hey L-Town, whoever this official friend of yours is, I want him to run a clinic on how it should be called. Sounds like someone who really knows the game and understands proper officiating.
I also know personally know several officials - some good and some horrible. The ones who actually take the time to think about what their role is in making the game better are the better officials. Unfortunately, I also know and see several who blow a whistle and call a foul because they assume a foul occurred - didn't actually see it happen, but just assume it did because a defender was close to the offensive player. Simple rule on fouls - only call them if you see them, and you better be in position to see it.

Exactly--see a foul, call a foul. One of my biggest pet peaves is when an official says it wasn't in my zone. To me it doesn't matter if you see it and think there is a foul, call it. Conversely, if you don't see it--don't call it.

My other pet peave, and we have at least one here in town, is the official who always makes the dramatic call to get the attention on himself. I swear some of them don't know the signal for a block because all they ever call is offensive...of course, offensive is a more dramatic call...

[catamaran]

Hey L-Town, whoever this official friend of yours is, I want him to run a clinic on how it should be called. Sounds like someone who really knows the game and understands proper officiating.
I also know personally know several officials - some good and some horrible. The ones who actually take the time to think about what their role is in making the game better are the better officials. Unfortunately, I also know and see several who blow a whistle and call a foul because they assume a foul occurred - didn't actually see it happen, but just assume it did because a defender was close to the offensive player. Simple rule on fouls - only call them if you see them, and you better be in position to see it.

Exactly--see a foul, call a foul. One of my biggest pet peaves is when an official says it wasn't in my zone. To me it doesn't matter if you see it and think there is a foul, call it. Conversely, if you don't see it--don't call it.

My other pet peave, and we have at least one here in town, is the official who always makes the dramatic call to get the attention on himself. I swear some of them don't know the signal for a block because all they ever call is offensive...of course, offensive is a more dramatic call...

So you'd be happy if you ran across an official that was calling a foul from the other end of the court even if there was an official standing in perfect position and didn't have a foul.......

The reason they say 'it isn't in my zone' is because they aren't watching that area (obviously). If they are calling fouls from that far away, they aren't doing their job and are probably missing things they should be catching. Not knowing exactly how basketball mechanics work, I can't refer to specific zones of coverage but I can bet no official watches the entire court

[LTown Cat]

In some instances, yes. But when they basically agree there was a foul but say it wasn't their zone, that is a cop out. See a foul, call a foul...

Edit:
Catamaran--as an official yourself you know the importance of perspective and how seeing a play from a different angle can give a different result. With 3 officials on a bball court I don't have a problem one with calling a foul from a ways away from the play.

[ilovethecats]

the charge/block call has got to be the most difficult call in basketball. i rarely get angry at these unless they are just blatantly obvious that the wrong call was made. this doesn't happen a lot. more times than not, it's a "bang bang" kind of play, and the refs just use their best judgement.

in regards to what catamaran just said about refs and their zones....i'm reminded of a call that DOES usually get me fired up. that is when the official that is nearest the play in question doesn't blow his whistle, but the official on the other side of the court or sometimes not even across half court decides to blow his. drives me crazy. either the guy nearest the action dropped the ball.....or the guy not in the area is calling fouls he shouldn't be.

hate that.

[catamaran]

In some instances, yes. But when they basically agree there was a foul but say it wasn't their zone, that is a cop out. See a foul, call a foul...

Edit:
Catamaran--as an official yourself you know the importance of perspective and how seeing a play from a different angle can give a different result. With 3 officials on a bball court I don't have a problem one with calling a foul from a ways away from the play.

I'm out of my element discussing bball mechanics but perspective is definitely an official's best tool. Maybe in a 3 man crew their coverages overlap......in that case they should be calling fouls they see (it would also alleviate the 'not my zone' argument). Its why we work to get the best angles in our zone. I know in my sport(s) if you're making calls from a ways away and someone else is there, you aren't doing your job.

[Billings Cat]

One of my biggest pet peaves is when an official says it wasn't in my zone. To me it doesn't matter if you see it and think there is a foul, call it. Conversely, if you don't see it--don't call it.

My other pet peave, and we have at least one here in town, is the official who always makes the dramatic call to get the attention on himself. I swear some of them don't know the signal for a block because all they ever call is offensive...of course, offensive is a more dramatic call...

I'm probably in the minority, but I truly think officiating was better when it was just a two-person crew rather than the three-person Bermuda Triange where everything seems to get lost in the middle.

My biggest frustrations with officiating in high school comes down to two things: 1) how much contact they seem to allow right at the rim, but will then call a handcheck 40-feet from the basket; 2) when officials make the statement that they're going to let the players decide the game and subsequently don't blow their whistles. This is the biggest copout since the officials' decision to let things go and, yes, ignore some violations, is clearly influencing the game and can be to the advantage of certain teams. Sorry, but by not blowing their whistles their impacting the game just as much as if they were.