Evaluation criteria

[LaxRef]

Just in case anyone is interested, these are the criteria on which COC officials are supposed to evaluate each other for MDIA games (I'm not sure if they use the same ones for NCAA games, but I suspect they do):

RULES KNOWLEDGE AND APPLICATION - No rules errors are expected. But if an umpire or field judge boots a rule, the referee must get it right. Keep in mind that the standard is not the rules that you like as a player or coach, but the current rules published by the NCAA. This is not a forum on rules opinions. Don't confuse rules knowledge with judgement (e.g. you disagree with a push or a slash call that you feel should or should not have been called).

JUDGMENT - Officials should call all clear personal fouls and apply appropriate penalties. Personal fouls relate to player safety or to serious conduct or serious fairness issues. For example, officials must have correct judgment as to whether there was merely contact to a player's helmet or a strike (a slash). In addition, not all technical fouls will result in calls by officials. The key element is to have the correct judgment as to whether the technical violation resulted in an advantage gained (by the fouling team, or lost by the fouled team). It is poor judgment to shut down a game if every technical violation were to be called. There is an essential balance that a good official must try to maintain between keeping a game safe, fair, and allowing a flow so that players have fun and fans enjoy the game.

CONSISTENCY - Have the officials called the game the same from the beginning of the game to the end of the game? Have they been consistent with respect to the calls made of the players from each team? This in no way is to imply that there should be parity in the number of fouls/penalties called on each team. If one team is committing more fouls, consistent officials should be calling more fouls on that team, as the fouls occur.

DEMEANOR - Officials should set examples as to how people can and should get along with others under stress while still getting the job done. Mutual respect is the standard. Officials should treat coaches and players in a dignified and respectful manner. There may be times when firmness is the best element of demeanor.

HUSTLE AND POSITIONING - Lead officials should always cover their goal on a fast break. Single side officials should stop momentarily at the mid-line cone to check for off-sides, then follow the ball into the goal attack area providing the "ten count" in the attacking half of the field. The trail official must follow the ball out of the defensive clearing area, and should stop at the substitution area on a transition, checking for on-sides and to monitor substitutions and personnel in the table and penalty areas, then take position in the half field scrimmage situation five yards above the clearing line.

SIGNALS AND COMMUNICATION - Every time serving penalty should be repeated clearly, two times; once to the field and once to the table area. Penalty information should be relayed as: color, number, foul, and penalty time. All calls should be clear and coaches/players should always be aware of what's going on. Signals should accompany all calls. Sideline out of bounds, where a horn is allowed, should be signaled with both arms raised prior to signaling direction of play.

CONTROL OF GAME - This is a matter of having the right touch. An under-controlled game is as bad as an over controled game. The players and coaches have as much, if not more to do with the control of the game as officials.

TIME MANAGEMENT - The game should start on time. All dead ball situations should be properly timed. There should be no inordinate delays which the officials could have avoided. Home team coaches will help the game move along at a good pace by having a qualified staff at the table so that officials do not have to take extra time to sort out problems with untrained table personnel. Ball retrievers at each end can save time.

PRE-GAME MANAGEMENT - Officials should conduct the equipment certification with each head coach before the game and inform them of any issues and observed conditions. Table staff should be briefed. A coin toss should be conducted with the captains five minutes prior to game time. Officials should be proactive in sorting out equipment and field issues before the game, and to leave the field reasonably promptly after the game.

UNIFORM, EQUIPMENT, AND APPEARANCE - The uniform is a black baseball style hat with white piping. black and white striped shirt (1" stripes) with black collar and patches (American Flag above breast pocket and a sleeve patch), white shorts with a black belt, approximately knee length socks, white on the bottom with about four inches of black at the top. A 20 second timing "box" should be worn on the belt. Shoes are to be all black. Gold signal flags, black whistle, score card, and tape measure complete the required equipment. Officials are to be neat, clean, and well turned out in a uniform that fits.

[Sonny]

Wonder how well this will work (and/or if the NAA's will actually use this data). I fear more politics....

[LaxRef]

Wonder how well this will work (and/or if the NAA's will actually use this data). I fear more politics....

The idea is for the NAA and LAAs to not use this information. It is intended solely to assist officials in getting better. One of the keys to this working is that everyone needs to be honest and not worry about reprisals. If it degenerates into "I'll give you all 5's if you give me all 5's" then it's worthless.

[Kyle Berggren]

You're right, and if offiicials are not improving, what's the reprocussion? I'm still unsure of how these rules or guidelines help to hold officials accountable. It's a choice, and quite frankly, we can't chose the character of our players or officials. Some strive to improve and this becomes a valuable tool, other's do not, and do to shortages or other issues, are allowed to continue to perform at sub-standard levels.

[Jolly Roger]

The idea is for the NAA and LAAs to not use this information. It is intended solely to assist officials in getting better.

I belive they are suppossed to use the info to identify specific areas in which specific officials need to improve through instruction or practice. The CAAs are not supposed to use the evaluations as a tool for awarding postseason assignments or officials' exchanges.

One of the keys to this working is that everyone needs to be honest and not worry about reprisals. If it degenerates into "I'll give you all 5's if you give me all 5's" then it's worthless.

Remember that, in parallel, coaches are completing evaluations as well. If there are consistent discrepencies, a good CAA will ask questions.

[shrekjr]

The officials working with me so far this year obviously haven't had time to watch me and do their job at the same time because my evaluations are not all 5's!

[Sonny]

IMHO -- If the CAA's aren't using the data, what's the point? There is such a lack of officials in most areas, that it won't really matter anyway.

[shrekjr]

IMHO -- If the CAA's aren't using the data, what's the point? There is such a lack of officials in most areas, that it won't really matter anyway.

I have to agree with that. Because of the lack of officials during the season in most of the country, I think the only place this could be used would be to determine post-season assignments. However, we are fortunate right now (at least in North Texas) that we do have a good number of qualified officials, as well as some COC members that probably shouldn't be working. So maybe it could be used to determine COC status from year to year.

[LaxRef]

IMHO -- If the CAA's aren't using the data, what's the point? There is such a lack of officials in most areas, that it won't really matter anyway.

I have to agree with that. Because of the lack of officials during the season in most of the country, I think the only place this could be used would be to determine post-season assignments. However, we are fortunate right now (at least in North Texas) that we do have a good number of qualified officials, as well as some COC members that probably shouldn't be working. So maybe it could be used to determine COC status from year to year.

Again, it is not intended to be used in deciding playoff assignments. It is designed to help officials realize where they need to improve. Almost all of us could be better officials if we focused on improving the right area; many of us are not good judges of where we need improvement. For example, there are officials who are weak on the rules, or out of shape, or weak on mechanics that won't admit it to themselves, but if fellow officials consistently tell them they need to improve a certain area, it might have an effect.

Of course, there are some officials who don't care, and this system won't help them at all.

[Sonny]

I never claimed it should be used for post-season assignments. Perhaps better (more equitable) assignments during the regular season.

[LaxRef]

I never claimed it should be used for post-season assignments. Perhaps better (more equitable) assignments during the regular season.

I didn't say you did; ShrekJr did.

I don't think the official-to-official evaluations should be used for anything but helping the officials to get better. If the official-to-official evaluations are used for anything else, you start to get everyone giving everyone else high scores and the system is worthless.

Ultimately, independent observations should be used as well; these can help the officials get better as well, but are probably more appropriate for playoff assignments. There is a pilot program this year where certified clinicians trained as observers will observe some officials in MDIA games. The program is not large--each league will get about 5 games evaluated on average--but it's a start. This program is not being used for determining playoff assignments, although I would guess that it could become a possibility in the future.

IIRC, the USILA has an observer program which has gotten a large number of officials observed and seems to be fairly successful.