With the myriad of new rules and regulations for officials we are faced with a criticial decision--are we or are we not going to enforce the rules?
Two very specific regulations for officials are:
1. If you do not submit your work record on Nucula, you will be considered as a provisional official for the next year.
2. If you do not pass or submit your background check application, then you will not be certified as a USTA official.
It is fairly common knowledge (at least here in Texas) that these rules are being ignored or circumvented. The basic question of integrity still remains--are we going to enforce the rules or not???
Check the poll to the right to register your opinion.
21 comments:
I thought this was going to be a question like "Do we call a foot-fault on Serena in the semis of the US Open?"
DIVERSITY RULES!!!
From my long time observation, the rules have always been there for selective enforcement only.
When is someone going to enforce the 'Officials Code of Conduct' on those officials who have been cancelling their college assignments right after they recently received their pro assignments for the first half of 2011?
Maybe it's just a 'Code of Conduct' suggestion; but No Penalty. It's been happening in the DFW area for years.
Wouldn't the answer to Anonymous above be: YES.
The foot-fault was called, wasn't it!!
Don't worry my friend. Those who are canceling matches will no longer be working collegiate tennis in the DFW area.
You can take my word on that. The local coordinators have had enough and are actively comparing notes and crossing off names.
Hooray for Juan Valdez. I know exactly which officials you are talking about and I've been waiting for years for someone to cut bait. Let's see if it really happens. I really really really hope so.
There are certain officials that believe it is their God-given right to work collegiate matches. I also believe some of these officials don't even attend an ITA training class (as required by the USTA) because they are the chosen few working at the professional level. From what I've read, I don't think that is the case.
My question is, as coordinators, how do you know which officials are "CERTIFIED" to work collegiate matches? Do you just take the officails' word for it, or is there somewhere you can go to verify their certifications?
As a coordinator, I check Nucula to see what level of certification a person has and then I check the approvals for the background check before I use people as ITA officials. There are no exceptions to the rule.
As far as I know, the vast majority of coordinators in Texas have the same policy.
I do however know there are people being used as referees who are not certified as such and people working ITA matches that have not passed the background check.
Go figure that one out...
I have received several comments about a specific official in Texas who is working ITA matches and has not passed the background check nor is listed in Nucula.
At this time, I think it best not to publish this official's name. Hopefully the university will deal with this problem before it becomes very public.
I looked on Nucula and noticed the "significant other" of the A&M coordinator has been working A&M home matches. Is this the person you are alluding to?
If this is the case, then the coordinator and significant other should be promptly dismissed from their respective assignments. What message does it send to the rest of us law abiding officials?
Here we go again - THIS BLOG WOULD SUX if you did not have A&M to pick on!
I've been telling you folks down in Texas for years that my most favorite official in the whole wide world needs to ride off into the sunset. Maybe now someone in power will listen.
But if she goes away, then I'm afraid your blog will suffer the consequences.
I wasn't aware that we were picking on A&M but then, if the shoe fits then you need to wear it.
In the case of officials working without passing the background check that is a lot more than picking on someone...
This issue has NOTHING to do about Texas A&M, but rather the self-proclaimed godess of collegiate officiating and opportunistic self-professed coordinator whom happens to reside in the same great city as A&M.
AMEN Brother!!!!!
News Flash! This isn't a new problem that has just arisen with the advent of new regulations. When the rules that apply to the players are selectively enforced, by default the ones that apply to the offficials will also be selectively enforced. It's the proverbial "slippery slope."
Part of the problem is that those "seasoned" officials who are already on the slope attempt to teach the "newbies" that they must also be on the slope. It's the mentality to make the whole building crooked so that the crooked column doesn't appear out of plumb.
I know that I'm a unrealistic visionary, but it always seemed to me that rules are intended to be followed. The idea that selective enforcement is "fair" as long as long as the selectivity is applied "equally" to all players in a match is ludicrous. If one player has learned to play by the rules and doesn't violate the rule you select to not enforce, but the other player habitually violated that particular rule, you ARE showing the second player preference and giving him/her an advantage. (Not to mention the inconsistancy between various officials' selective application during other matches in the same tournament.) Thus, in attempting to "not affect the outcome of the match," you are absolutely committing the very evil that you claim to be avoiding.
The same principle applies when the rules regarding officials are not enforced.
I'm confess my weakness. I couldn't take it.
K.S., just wondering, will you be using a bullet or taking pills?
Neither. I simply took my leave.
An old prover regarding public commentary. "Throw a rock into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one that was hit."
Don't mistake my sarcasm for self-pity. If I were that much of a self-pittying looser (as you comment seems to suggest), I'd have probably signed my comment "Anonymous."
Awesome post. Do you mind if I ask what your source is for this information?
What were the results of the poll?
Post a Comment