Spring Break
Referees are examined, even in Division III
by Mike Prada
Editor in Chief
Sports | 8/28/07
Posted online at 11:40 PM EST on 8/27/07
/ Last updated at 12:34 PM EST on 8/27/07
Bamford's main method for preventing gambling scandals is eradicating all potential conflicts of interests among officials. ECAC referees are required to sign an affiliation statement detailing relationships they have with any ECAC school. They aren't allowed to officiate one team's games more than three times in the same season, and Rasmussen has requested a provision prohibiting UAA officials from being sent to the same location two years in a row.
"[The Donaghy situation] shows why you absolutely have to eliminate all those possible conflicts of interest," Rasmussen said. "If you're the visiting coach and I'm the official, and you see me in the home coach's office before the game with my feet up, you're going to say to yourself, 'Oh my god, they've got the game in the bag tonight.'"
Once they are hired, ECAC officials undergo evaluations by supervisors, coaches and even fellow officials. The ECAC also employs trained auditors who regularly observe and meet with officials after games to discuss their performance. Officials whose accuracy is identified as being in the bottom 20 percent of the group occasionally receive visits from supervisors that report directly to Bamford.
Bamford also distributes an online coach evaluation form to coaches, encourages them to send him game tapes and allows fellow referees to rate each other. He then uses all these measures to rank his officials. Those who are highly ranked are assigned to games more frequently and receive higher-profile assignments, while the bottom ones are often demoted and replaced by new recruits, Bamford said.
Even with this review process, Rasmussen and Bamford both admit the system isn't perfect. Like most sports, basketball falls prey to human judgment in officiating. Contact naturally occurs on every possession, and the crowd can affect the officials' performance as much as it does the players'.
In a 68-64 loss at Washington University in St. Louis last season, the men's basketball team attempted 27 fewer free throws than the opposition. When the teams played again in Waltham, the Judges had a 21-18 edge in free throw attempts in an 81-75 triple-overtime victory.
Those inherent flaws in basketball officiating were amplified by the Donaghy scandal, which has made the public more suspicious of corruption in the sport.
Rasmussen, however, said he isn't worried about such problems in the UAA next season.
"At our level, I don't think [Donaghy] is going to affect much, other than some yahoo in the stands that gets upset and yells something," he said.
"[The Donaghy situation] shows why you absolutely have to eliminate all those possible conflicts of interest," Rasmussen said. "If you're the visiting coach and I'm the official, and you see me in the home coach's office before the game with my feet up, you're going to say to yourself, 'Oh my god, they've got the game in the bag tonight.'"
Once they are hired, ECAC officials undergo evaluations by supervisors, coaches and even fellow officials. The ECAC also employs trained auditors who regularly observe and meet with officials after games to discuss their performance. Officials whose accuracy is identified as being in the bottom 20 percent of the group occasionally receive visits from supervisors that report directly to Bamford.
Bamford also distributes an online coach evaluation form to coaches, encourages them to send him game tapes and allows fellow referees to rate each other. He then uses all these measures to rank his officials. Those who are highly ranked are assigned to games more frequently and receive higher-profile assignments, while the bottom ones are often demoted and replaced by new recruits, Bamford said.
Even with this review process, Rasmussen and Bamford both admit the system isn't perfect. Like most sports, basketball falls prey to human judgment in officiating. Contact naturally occurs on every possession, and the crowd can affect the officials' performance as much as it does the players'.
In a 68-64 loss at Washington University in St. Louis last season, the men's basketball team attempted 27 fewer free throws than the opposition. When the teams played again in Waltham, the Judges had a 21-18 edge in free throw attempts in an 81-75 triple-overtime victory.
Those inherent flaws in basketball officiating were amplified by the Donaghy scandal, which has made the public more suspicious of corruption in the sport.
Rasmussen, however, said he isn't worried about such problems in the UAA next season.
"At our level, I don't think [Donaghy] is going to affect much, other than some yahoo in the stands that gets upset and yells something," he said.
Be the first to comment on this story