Enforcing the rules and unsportsmanlike conduct

[shamu]

one more thing

One thing I forgot to mention - sanctioning refs:

I agree with Wadidiz that teams reffing for series points should be held accountable for the quality of their reffing. For examples of good reffing, see Bob Long's Ironmen in AC or Aftershock in Chicago. For examples of bad reffing, see Dynasty in Vegas (sitting on the sidelines to call a game? I won't even get into the Strange/Avalanche debacle), or OBR in AC. I'm not trying to denegrate any of these teams, just some examples that came to mind.

Teams reffing for points should get penalized for safety violations (refs not wearing goggles, chrono'ing without goggles, etc) and poor quality reffing (inactive reffing, slow calls, incorrect calls, biased reffing, etc) by losing some or all of the series points they're supposed to be earning.

Professional refs should be held to the same standards as other professional organizations - consistent complaints or errors results in a review or suspension of the ref in question. Repeated suspensions for cause would result in the termination of the ref. It's the same as any job - if you can't or won't do the job, you're going to get fired.

 

[raehl]

You're going to penalize the refs for bad reffing?

That's laughable.

What are you going to do, have refs to ref the refs? Why not just have teh ref reffers ref the players to begin with?

Sound confusing? That's because it's silly.


Teams should not be reffing series they play in to begin with.


- Chris

 

[shamu]

You're going to penalize the refs for bad reffing?

Originally posted by raehl
That's laughable.

What are you going to do, have refs to ref the refs? Why not just have teh ref reffers ref the players to begin with?

Sound confusing? That's because it's silly.


Teams should not be reffing series they play in to begin with.


- Chris

Hmmm, perhaps I didn't explain it clearly. In any profession, including professional judging, there has to be accountability. One way to improve the quality of reffing is to provide feedback to the individual refs through post-game/tournament review - reviewing questionable or controversial calls in a post-game ref meeting, for example.

A ref to ref the refs? it's called a field judge.
A ref to ref the ref reffing the refs? It's called a head judge (or bill cookston).

And I agree that teams participating in a series should not be reffing it. However, creating some quidelines or (god help us) accountability for teams reffing might improve the quality of some efforts.

 

[Wadidiz]

Where to start

Originally posted by shamu
First, I think this is a great discussion. Better then the similar one on Smacktalk (Wadidz - I replied on that one too). PS - Wadidiz: If you remember the Smacktalk discussion, I'm Nobody Special

Good posts, shamu. I remember Nobody Special. Good that there are some reasonable voices there occasionally.

Concerning Chris's responses:

I'll stick with some kind of accountability system for judges working for series points. Don't know what is best. I think some penalty points in relation to the rules that are already there would be good, e.g. masks off, unsportsmanlike conduct, fighting, swearing, etc.

Maybe fines for paid judges is too much. Don't know.

Notice in my suggestions that I put a lot in there about training, having pre-tournament briefings, making sure everyone has a reasonable command of the rules, push for consistency, etc.

Maybe that's enough.

The main things I'm concerned with here are:

1. Getting a handle on blatant cheating, especially playing on in a push.

2. Improving the overall quality and consistency of judging.

3. Putting a damper on unsportsmanlike conduct such as arguing and shoving matches, not that it is such a gigantic problem.

4. Getting even more serious about safety. I'm not saying this is such a gigantic problem either. But the big tournaments set examples for the others. Those examples ought to be impeccable.

Concerning tournament safety, I have suggested to some of the Millennium people that a rule (another rule!) should be made about minimum safety standards at tournaments. For example if netting is inadequate (holes, not high enough) or if the fields are unduly hazardous, etc., a league representative (ultimate judge, for example) could demand that the situation be rectified at the risk of the organizer losing that venue in the future. Something like that. I know a couple of small examples where such enforcement was needed.

To get back to raehl's last post (as of this writing), I think we must continue to have playing-team refs until the PRO thing gets big enough. We just need them to have a boss with a bite as big as his/her bark to ensure the judging teams don't use their turn to ref as an opportunity to party, sit on the sidelines and return favors.

 

[Wadidiz]

Three things...

Originally posted by raehl
Traning.

Money.

Promoters and rules with a spine.


You need a training program to train the refs. You need the money to pay trained refs more to make them taking the training worthwhile. And you need promoters and rules which allow the trained refs to be unreproachable gods on the field.


You can't pay refs the same you pay 13 year olds who ref peewee soccer and expect to get professional level reffing.



As we are able to attract more out-of-industry money to the sport, we'll be able to pay for better reffing. As our reffing gets better, we'll attract more out of industry support. The crux of the issue, really, is given the choice between better reffing and cheaper tournaments, players choose cheaper tournaments. Players COMPLAIN that they want better reffing, but players do not want to PAY for better reffing, and better reffing is not free.


Fortunately, WDP wants to pay for better reffing, so that's why we have PRO.



- Chris

Chris is right here and so is shamu:

I'm gonna put in my $0.02 anyway - which is about what refs get paid per game

From my experience NPPL refs get paid a lot more than Millennium refs (maybe it was just me) and that ain't right. Last time I heard or worked as a ref, NPPL paid $100 per day plus food and drink. Millennium, around €50 (+/- $50). Don't know if that is consistent throughout the Millenniums.

Millenniums have high registration fees and I doubt the operating costs are more than for NPPL. I do know the cost of living here in Europe is generally higher than in the US so we who judge should get paid at least as much, if not more. Or are we supposed to see our work as a calling, only for the love of the sport?

So since you guys think refs should get paid more, how much should we get paid?

 

[raehl]

Ultimately...

For the Pro league, refs should be reffing as their full time job with a reasonable salary - $50k per year plus. That doesn't just cover games though, LOTS of training.

For something like NPPL, it's probably never going to get higher than it is now, but that's ok, because NPPL isn't going to be what the specators are watching anyway. (By NPPL, I mean a tournament which is paid for by the players.)

Basically what it comes down to is that when you have spectators and advertisers footing the bill, you're going to have the money the money to pay professional reffing, and you're going to have to do it to get a professional product.

When you don't have spectators/advertisers footing the bill, the players arn't going to want to either, and then you're going to have amateur reffing (i.e., reffs who will travel to work for $100/day, or have to because their sponsor says so.)


As for the difference between NPPL and Millenium, I think it mainly comes down to distance. Distances in Europe are a LOT smaller, so it's a lot easier to get the refs you need because they don't have to fly or drive 15 hours to get to an event. 15 hours in Europe will get you from Spain to Poland. 15 hours in the States won't even get you from one end of California to the other.


Plus, with the way you guys tax everything, $100 under the table in the US is about the same as $50 under the table in Europe, heh.


- Chris

 

[Wadidiz]

I'm down for that...

Originally posted by raehl
For the Pro league, refs should be reffing as their full time job with a reasonable salary - $50k per year plus. That doesn't just cover games though, LOTS of training.
- Chris

If I could get $50,000 per year for reffing I would go for it. Just one big thing that blows pole: the fact that PRO strictly forbids hanging with players. And that would be the main reason I would want to put up with the job anyway, the social aspect, keeping up with my friends.

As for the difference between NPPL and Millenium, I think it mainly comes down to distance. Distances in Europe are a LOT smaller, so it's a lot easier to get the refs you need because they don't have to fly or drive 15 hours to get to an event. 15 hours in Europe will get you from Spain to Poland. 15 hours in the States won't even get you from one end of California to the other.

I know this isn't your main point but this is way off. I drove from Stockholm to Amsterdam this spring in my Subaru and it took about 18 hours (doing over 200 kph for long stretches on das Autobahn). Round trip cost me over $400 just in fuel costs. The bottom line is, a lot of people fly to the tournaments here just like in America and I doubt the costs are that different. $ 200-500 per trip for airfare. And $100 in the US is more than twice the value compared with Europe because I can buy, eat, sleep and drink (alcohol) a whole lot cheaper in America, because of what you named: no VAT. So no, I'd much rather ref an NPPL, even if the airfare is a little higher.

But $50k (all business-related expenses paid) sounds much, much better!

PS: On afterthought I could imagine people who live in Central Europe, say Paris, driving to London or perhaps Amsterdam. Not many other places though.

 

[raehl]

My point wasn't that some peope were far...

It was that lots of people are close.


In Europe, big cities are basically right on top of each other. In the US, aside from the northeast, they're at LEAST 2 hours apart, usually a lot more. If you draw a 2-hr circle around anyplace in Europe, you're going to find a LOT more people there than doing the same thing in the US in pretty much all but a very few areas (again, like the northeast).


Thus when you're paying $50/day for reffing, you're going to have a lot more people willing to do so than you would in the states, thus necessitating the states paying more.


- Chris

 

[Wadidiz]

Yes, it is more densely populated here. I shouldn't have started splitting hairs.

I'm sure all the Millennium tournaments are like the NPPLs, there's a host team reffing, maybe another team or two from the region and then there are always other teams who fly in for their reffing points.

So the basic situation isn't really that much different compared with the US of A, therefore $50 is just being cheap.

Main thing, the system brings in teams who ref for points. Your point: that needs to be changed to PRO refs. My point: it ain't happening anytime soon, let's work towards that goal. Until then, we need to come up with some system/structure that is much better than what we have today vis-a-vis quality reffing.

 

[Wadidiz]

OK, good people, getting tired of rule suggestions? Sorry 'bout that! Inspired by reports from short-staffed fields at the World Cup I hereby add some new suggestions plus a couple of more to boot:

12. Pay refs a minimum of €150/$150 per judging day plus supply them with lunch and drinks (even dinner if they are required to work past 6.00 PM). Pay head field-judges a minimum of €200/$200 per day.

13. Require a minimum number of judges according to the following schedule:

one judge for every two players plus 3

e.g. for 5-player: 8 judges

for 7-player: 10 judges

for 10-player: 13 judges

14. Require that minimum safety requirements are enforced for any venue that has a league-sanctioned tournament. Any breeches of these requirements must be rectified before the start of the tournament at risk of losing any future sanctioning. The requirements should include, but not be limited to:

* a minimum netting standard vis-a-vis quality, height, etc.
* the presence of an ambulance and/or trained paramedics
* all fields must be free of undue safety hazards
* definite inspection of every high-pressure tank used
* strict enforcement of barrel-bag and goggle-on rules

15. Change chronographing rule to require exit chronographing which will be expedited by allowing convenient chronographing on the way to the elimination box. Chronographing of non-eliminated players can be expedited by use of hand chronos.

16. Get rid of the don't-look rule in NPPL. Of course players have a strong, natural desire to see the outcome of the game. They just have to shut up and not point. With more refs, enforcing the gag rule should not be a problem.

Whadda y'all think?

Steve