| February
10, 2005
STATE OF THE GAMEThe Good and Bad of Refereeing
By Lyle Phair | From 
Many, many years ago – before MTV, computers,
X-boxes, reality television, hip-hop and rap – you had a pretty
good idea what was what.
Good was good. Bad was bad. Then at some point
(and I think Michael Jackson is to blame if I remember correctly)
bad actually became good. And I never really understood what that
did to good, but I don’t think that he made it bad.
In today’s world, I am still not sure exactly
what is good and what is bad. It’s hard to keep up with the
lingo. But one thing that I constantly hear is that the refereeing
in hockey games is bad. In fact, this year, probably more than ever,
I have had people comment to me that they thought the officiating
was exceptionally bad. They’re complaining at every level
of play (at least the levels that are playing). Not knowing exactly
what they meant (whether it was bad, or in fact very good), I never
really knew how to respond to them.
So how bad is bad (if in fact, bad is not good)?
Has officiating actually gotten worse? And if so, just how bad is
it? What level of expectation do we have for referees? Do they need
to be perfect? And should the expectation be the same for every
official?
First of all, I should mention that I have great
respect for anyone who attempts to officiate any sport, especially
hockey – which I believe is the most difficult sport to referee.
Not only does the puck move faster than the ball does in football
or basketball, but so do the players. Nothing even compares. Making
split-second decisions on plays that are happening at high speed
is not an easy task.
Secondly, because referees get paid, I think that
some people expect perfection. But they are only human. They are
bound to make mistakes. And they are bound to make people angry,
even when they don’t make mistakes because everyone has a
set of eyes and an opinion of how things should have been called.
In most cases, however, that opinion is distorted by a bias toward
one of the teams. So what they actually see and what they would
like to see might be two different things. But that doesn’t
matter to them. They want to see the outcome they desire, and anybody
who sees it any differently must be wrong.
Don’t think for a second that I believe
that referees walk on water and should never be held accountable
for their mistakes. They make mistakes – quite often in fact
– and when they do, they should face the consequences.
Every situation is different. At the younger levels
of play, the referees are typically younger kids, just learning
the ropes, no different than the players and coaches. At this level,
you’d expect to see some mistakes in positioning, application
of rules and decision-making. It’s a game of mistakes. Players
make them every shift and so do coaches. Referees are no different,
and they don’t get any practice time to work on their skills.
For the most part, they learn on the job. Younger officials are
the ones who should get the most leeway.
But as they gain experience and knowledge, they
should be getting better. If they are not, then they should not
be assigned games. When bad referees continue to get the opportunity
to officiate, long after they have proven that aren’t capable,
that’s when trouble starts.
But schedulers continue to schedule them for games
because they are their friends, or because they feel they are their
most experienced officials and are better than someone else who
does not yet have that experience. So which is worse, a bad experienced
referee or a bad inexperienced referee?
While there are many excellent referees of all
ages officiating games and doing a great job, there are also some
who aren’t. Some referees are just plain lazy. They are constantly
out of position and don’t show any hustle or enthusiasm that
would give you any indication that they want to improve. Others
give you the impression that they are doing you a favor just by
being out there. Given a choice, I would be happy with the mistakes
of an inexperienced, hungry official any day over someone who clearly
doesn’t want to be there and is just collecting the paycheck.
Then there are the egomaniacs and control freaks
that have the misguided impression the game is about them. They
are in charge, their word is the law and they don’t make mistakes.
Others just have absolutely no feel for the game. They might have
minimal or no playing experience and often they’re not able
to think fast enough to keep up with the game. And while they should
be given an opportunity to develop, if they clearly aren’t
showing improvement, it is probably time to try something else.
In my opinion, if the officiating is truly as
bad as everyone says it is, it’s not necessarily the fault
of the referees. The blame lies with the referee schedulers, league
administrators and coaches who continue to allow bad referees to
officiate games. So if it is that bad, how do we fix it?
Not by coaches yelling and screaming from the
bench and parents yelling and screaming from the stands. Although
it might feel good at the time, it solves nothing. Actually, as
much as parents might be correct in their assessment of the officials,
with all due respect, their opinion means absolutely nothing and
is best kept to themselves.
To improve the level of officiating, the onus
is clearly on the referee schedulers, league administrators and
coaches. First of all, referee schedulers need to be receptive to
receiving constructive feedback – good and bad – from
the coaches and league administrators and use that information in
training and scheduling their officials. League administrators need
to be the conduit to ensure that meaningful evaluations are received
from their coaches and forwarded to the referee schedulers. Finally,
and maybe most importantly, coaches need to provide honest assessments
of the referees’ work, without whining and complaining, not
only when their team loses, but when they win as well. If we can’t
do that, then that really is bad.
Lyle Phair can be reached at feedback@hockeyjournal.com.
This article appears in the January issue
of New England Hockey Journal. Click
here to subscribe to the magazine.
|
