- May 29, 2015
- 3,849
- 113
This thread is jumping all over the place ...
What do we mean by "rating" the umpires?
I'll tell you something that you don't often here, but it needs to be said more often ... umpires NEED to be evaluated and NEED to be given tools to self-evaluate. We don't get this and it is what leads to "poor" officiating.
In my roughly 15 years of doing this for dozens of different organizations and countless tournament directors, assignors, and UICs, I have been "formally" evaluated ONE time. It was at a USA state tournament and I had to remind the UIC multiple times that I wanted her to give me feedback.
In Illinois, the Illinois High School Association uses coach rankings as part of the selection process for post-season. After every varsity contest, the coach is supposed to log in to a portal and provide feedback on the official (all sports). Do you know what that feedback looks like? Rate the official on a scale of 1-5. That is all. There is no breakdown, no components, no space for feedback. Oh ... and officials do not get to see the results. That is NO help in making your officials better.
I know the video isn't great, but nearly every game I call is on video these days. And by "nearly" I mean "all." I do not have access to a single one of those. That is NO help in making officials better. I likely would not be able to see the strike zone or a banger of a play, but I can see my movements. I can see my focus. Did I miss a rotation? Should I work on getting another step or two to get a better angle on that play? What the heck actually happened on that goofy play in the 4th inning? Those are all things that could help us.
So YES ... I would be in favor of providing some way for coaches and even fans to rate us. I have kicked around the idea of setting up my own website and asking people to provide feedback. We would have to sort through lots of incorrect or useless information. Maybe even have to deal with some harrassment ... but some good data is better than no data.
PS -- @marriard 's early post on the levels was spot on. Even college games are relegated to who can get there for goofy game times rather than who is best qualified.
What do we mean by "rating" the umpires?
I'll tell you something that you don't often here, but it needs to be said more often ... umpires NEED to be evaluated and NEED to be given tools to self-evaluate. We don't get this and it is what leads to "poor" officiating.
In my roughly 15 years of doing this for dozens of different organizations and countless tournament directors, assignors, and UICs, I have been "formally" evaluated ONE time. It was at a USA state tournament and I had to remind the UIC multiple times that I wanted her to give me feedback.
In Illinois, the Illinois High School Association uses coach rankings as part of the selection process for post-season. After every varsity contest, the coach is supposed to log in to a portal and provide feedback on the official (all sports). Do you know what that feedback looks like? Rate the official on a scale of 1-5. That is all. There is no breakdown, no components, no space for feedback. Oh ... and officials do not get to see the results. That is NO help in making your officials better.
I know the video isn't great, but nearly every game I call is on video these days. And by "nearly" I mean "all." I do not have access to a single one of those. That is NO help in making officials better. I likely would not be able to see the strike zone or a banger of a play, but I can see my movements. I can see my focus. Did I miss a rotation? Should I work on getting another step or two to get a better angle on that play? What the heck actually happened on that goofy play in the 4th inning? Those are all things that could help us.
So YES ... I would be in favor of providing some way for coaches and even fans to rate us. I have kicked around the idea of setting up my own website and asking people to provide feedback. We would have to sort through lots of incorrect or useless information. Maybe even have to deal with some harrassment ... but some good data is better than no data.
PS -- @marriard 's early post on the levels was spot on. Even college games are relegated to who can get there for goofy game times rather than who is best qualified.