To set this up properly I'll begin by saying I've criticized various aspects of the reffing consistently. Not the effort or the NPPL's legit interest in getting it right--but the results on the field that haven't always matched up with the intent. Various and sundry folks have suggested I should have my head examined as the reffing has, from the first, in their estimation, been worlds better than we were used to before. Be that as it may, my response has also always been, hey, if we've people in power who are actually intent on getting it right why stop halfway? If nobody articulates areas for continued improvement are they likely to improve?
With that background in mind I decided to make an effort to interview refs in Chicago and see what was happening behind the scenes. Due to space constraints I wasn't able to report fully on the subject for PGI so I've decided to post a mini-report. (Before some of you who have been either steamed, annoyed, angry, perturbed, etc. with prior comments go crazy; RELAX. It's all good. And not to worry anyway. Nobody pays any mind either way.)
I asked refs a variety of questions. Everything from how the NPPL treats them, to whether or not they wear glasses or contacts [it was a joke, ok?] to more serious things like pre-event prep, changes from event to event, and procedural changes across the board.
The answers were consistent and positive. For Chicago the NPPL continued making changes designed to improve the results on the field. Training before event for new refs. More organized and professional pre-event refs meeting. Printed pocket sized ref cards for immediate clarification of calls if rule is in dispute. Refs walking the fields prior to event to prep their teamwork and coordination. More refs assigned per field. Uniformity of procedures on field was improved and potential problem areas in making certain subjective calls was addressed in advance so that calls on the field might be more consistent. Those are the highlights.
And all those ongoing changes made a difference. I reported as much (see issue 172). It doesn't mean that there will never be another disputed call but it does mean there should be fewer of them and fewer mistakes overall whether individual players or teams are aware of it or not. That's the short version.
The NPPL should be congratulated for taking the time and putting in the effort to see to it the standard of reffing is the best they can possibly make it. So too, the refs should be thanked, especially those who have worked at multiple events, for doing a thankless job with some real dedication and desire to get it right. This is the sort of leadership and commitment that will improve the game for everyone. Thanks, guys.
With that background in mind I decided to make an effort to interview refs in Chicago and see what was happening behind the scenes. Due to space constraints I wasn't able to report fully on the subject for PGI so I've decided to post a mini-report. (Before some of you who have been either steamed, annoyed, angry, perturbed, etc. with prior comments go crazy; RELAX. It's all good. And not to worry anyway. Nobody pays any mind either way.)
I asked refs a variety of questions. Everything from how the NPPL treats them, to whether or not they wear glasses or contacts [it was a joke, ok?] to more serious things like pre-event prep, changes from event to event, and procedural changes across the board.
The answers were consistent and positive. For Chicago the NPPL continued making changes designed to improve the results on the field. Training before event for new refs. More organized and professional pre-event refs meeting. Printed pocket sized ref cards for immediate clarification of calls if rule is in dispute. Refs walking the fields prior to event to prep their teamwork and coordination. More refs assigned per field. Uniformity of procedures on field was improved and potential problem areas in making certain subjective calls was addressed in advance so that calls on the field might be more consistent. Those are the highlights.
And all those ongoing changes made a difference. I reported as much (see issue 172). It doesn't mean that there will never be another disputed call but it does mean there should be fewer of them and fewer mistakes overall whether individual players or teams are aware of it or not. That's the short version.
The NPPL should be congratulated for taking the time and putting in the effort to see to it the standard of reffing is the best they can possibly make it. So too, the refs should be thanked, especially those who have worked at multiple events, for doing a thankless job with some real dedication and desire to get it right. This is the sort of leadership and commitment that will improve the game for everyone. Thanks, guys.