![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
Officiating’s High Calling
October 28, 2016
One of the sports world’s better wordsmiths is Referee Magazine publisher Barry Mano. He’s also a fine thinker, as these artful lines demonstrated at the 2016 Officiating Industry Luncheon in San Antonio:
“Let me provide, in all subjectivity, some observations about our environment, about our fellow citizens. We are:
-
“More generous but less forgiving.
-
More open but less discriminating with that openness.
-
More informed but less knowledgeable.
-
More litigious but less willing to abide by the rules.
-
Quick to seek an expert opinion, then just as quick to get a second opinion, one that agrees with ours.”
Barry is president of the National Association of Sports Officials (NASO) which helps contest officials at all levels aspire to be discriminating and knowledgeable adjudicators of fair and healthy competitive athletics.
At a time when the number of registered officials with the Michigan High School Athletic Association has sunk to a 30-year low, Barry’s words are a clarion call to young men and women of character to consider sports officiating as an avocation, or even vocation, that will enrich their lives immensely.
![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
No. 1 Worries
December 27, 2017
Editor's Note: This blog originally was posted Sept. 21, 2012, and the theme rings true today.
Fueled by the “No. 1” syndrome, people often worry about and value the wrong things when it comes to interscholastic athletics.
For example, they worry about the eligibility of athletes more than the education of students. They worry about athletic scholarships to college more than genuine scholarship in high school. Faced with financial shortfalls, they use middle school athletics as the whipping boy because the No. 1 syndrome causes people to value varsity programs more than junior varsity, and high school programs more than middle school.
It is possible in the subvarsity programs of our high schools (far more than in varsity programs where crowds and media bring pressure to win) and it should be and usually is pervasive in our middle school programs, that participation is more important than specialization, trying more important than winning, teamwork more important than individual honors, and teaching more important than titles and trophies.
At the middle school level, coaches have an opportunity to look down the bench for substitutes without first looking up at the scoreboard. The scorebook should be kept to see how many students played in the game, not how many points any one player scored.
Here is where education prevails over entertainment in interscholastic athletics. Here is where philosophy of athletics is more in tune with the mission of the school. Here is where the taxpayer’s dollar is spent best.
To the degree we introduce large tournaments and trophies into middle level programs, we damage the purity of educational athletics and the purpose of middle school programs. To the degree we cut middle level programs in the face of budget crises, we succumb to the No. 1 syndrome.
We must expose the No. 1 syndrome for the sickness it is: a cancerous growth that must be cut out of educational athletics before it leads to cutting out what is arguably the most educational parts of interscholastic athletics: middle school programs.