I would imagine the 2 competitions are seperate and I owuld certainly wonder how that could happen.

I would suggest no communication between the SEABL commissioner and the CBL commissioner. If they had discussed the opportunity of a class i also suggest there wouldnt have had to be a withdrawal. The joys of cohabitation with refs. At least it will give an opportunity to the referee next in line on the order of merit to get a chance at a final and the experience that brings

What SEABL game has Benn McDonald got?

I bet there is no stupid 50game rule for refs in the SEABL

I bet there is

there is definitely the 50 game NBL rule invoked in SEABL and Big V.

must be the same brain surgeon who put that rule in both comps then

It was a rule created by BA to maintain the development theme of the then ABA. It's a rule that gives second tier referees the opportunity to gain more experience. Otherwise if you give the same people the finals for the next 20 years and then they retire you have a whole group who A) have never refereed a finals game and B) probably didnt stick around due to the lack of opportunities to advance. There is already a log jam confronting referees trying to get to the elite level (WNBL/NBL). If you take away finals from the next tier what is the point in them refereeing if they are never going to get an opportunity.

It would be like the sixers bench never playing any court time and then the starting 5 all retire and now become the starting 5 and have never played at this level before. It's why NBL bench players go back to the lower leagues to get court time and experience. In the referee fraternity the NBL refs take the ABA season off, they must referee 5 games during the season to fulfil their state commitments (This is written into the WNBL/NBL referee manual). These 5 games are used as coaching opportunities by league commissioners and the NBL refs are generally put with inexperienced referees to show them how to conduct a proper pre-game, in game coaching etc. It has been a valuable tool in Victoria.

People who think this is a bad policy are short sighted and live in the now. If you dont develop 2nd tier referees then they will never put selection pressure on the referees above them and refereeing will never develop at anywhere near the same rate as the level of play in this country. BA and all state controlling bodies already put minimal resources into referee development as it is.

People might hate referees but without them there is no game and until we develop the referees in this country by applying resources and increasing the education delivered it will remain stagnant and in real terms that in comparison to the development of the level of coaching and development players get is going backwards.

Benn has the South Men 3 v 4 final Frankston v Sandringham with Daniel Banik (3 NBL games) and Ron Clarke (ex-NBL 8 games)

And its also a rule that gives teams the chance to get boned in a one off Final by inexperienced refs.

Good call BA.

Very rarely at the CBL level, SEABL or BIG V do teams get BONED and lose a game. What a cop out.

A wonderful intelligent response to the discussion.

We lost so it's the ref's fault! If the team loses it wasnt because they shot say 35% from the field, because they missed 9 of 15 free throws, turned the ball over 20 times, only had 6 assists, didnt block out and got out rebounded 2 to 1 etc

Nah that team lost this weekend because Haines, Filmer and McDonald werent on the game.

And those inexperienced referees you cry about are the future of refereeing in your state. Maybe develop and encourage them rather than blaming them for every loss a team has. Referees make mistakes, but not as many mistakes as players make each and every game.

The purpose of the policy is lost on you due to your narrow-minded view of the game. The game IS about the players but the game is not JUST the players.

Spoken like a true knob with a whistle

how articulate of you.

refs get flogged too from coaces, plyers and spectators each week

Why do you think at the elite level they get evaluated, critiqued and given a rating which dictates where they score in the end of season order of merit. Hence if they mess up as you say and have a shit season they dont rank high enough to get selected for finals.

Referees who perform poorly on a regular basis generally get dropped to women's games or get rostered with a more experienced senior official to help educate them. At the elite level there is a performance management system that activates once a referee is evaluated and scores below their band. 3 strikes and they drop a level and not only does this get them appointed to lower level games it hits them in the hip pocket as they get paid less.

Referees for the most part try and apply the rules to each and every game fairly, with the attitude of what is best for the game. Some do it better than other there is no denying that. I have seen very few games that have been decided by a refs decision, especially at the elite level. I occasionally happens but rarely. Have I seen terrible calls and bad mistakes absolutely. But for the most part the teams decide who wins or loses.

And unfortunately its the nature of humans officiating sport, mistakes happen. No one tries to make a mistake but you cant rule them out completely. Every sport from cricket and tennis which has hawkeye, the NBA and NFL that have video technology to help out, mistakes are still made and will always be made.

But again until in Australia we put more resources into officiating it will always be below the level that it should be.

The elite players get paid good money to be the best players they can, i dont see the same investment in the people held accountable for officiating it.

Consistency
he did that because that's his job. The player decided the game by fouling.

"How much time a week does an ABL referee spend getting better? And you can't count actual refereeing games because they aren't evaluated every game you do like players are?"

I disagree with the idea that a referee cant count refereeing a game because theyre not evaluated. A good referee will always find bits to work on for every game regardless of evaluator or not. Many referees use underpinning leagues to work on areas of their game so that when they referee at higher levels their game is more polished.

And many players simply go through the motions at training sessions or at individuals rather then actually working on their game.

In both cases it comes down to what each individual personally invests into their own development.

Air Jordan its a valid question.

There are some that do more than others and there are some who get by on the bare minimum. Sounds like some players really doesn't it.

Due to the nature of refereeing (for arguments sake and individual pursuit) most states don't have "group" training activities/sessions just due to the simple geographical location of referees. I'm not sure about Adelaide but in other states the sprawl of referees makes it difficult to get everyone together to train. So most do individual training sessions coming together for action days and 2 fitness tests yearly. ( before you or others say that isn't enough if they become unfit it will show up in their evaluation and be marked according and it would be an area to work on in future etc).

Also not sure about Adelaide but in other states its very easy to get copies of game DVD's to watch back your own performance and self evaluate. Some will watch with rose coloured glasses, others will be more critical than the evaluator and hence those officials will improve greater than others.

So in putting some form of answer to your question some would do far less than 6 hours a week, but others would do way more than 6 hours a week. It's no different to players, referees will get out of it what they are willing to put in. And the best trait a referee can have is critical self evaluation. Those who have that will get to the next level. Those who don't and who continually insist that they are always right are the ones who will sit in the lower leagues and be the basis for criticism as per this thread.

They really should block the internet from going down the Le Fevre peninsula.......

This is really sad. Not surprising for Adelaide. Small Town!

SEABL Rostering this season has been a bit of a joke, jobs for the boys etc.
Some officials have been able to get great games yet havent had to pass fitness testing or theory testing.
Others have been banished for 1 average performance.
No consistancy.
Then look at some of the travel and weekends away on the roster for "mates"...
Hopefully there will be a change in leadership next season otherwise there will be more officials quit.

Ineedmore I dont subscribe to that theory. If anything ref's have to concentrate more at the end of the game so that in the last 3 minutes they DONT make an error that has the possibility to decide the outcome. Doing his or her job and calling a foul that is there isnt deciding the game but making an error late in the game that influences the result in an unacceptable situation for all involved. It doesnt matter that a team missed 5 lay ups or 6 free throws the game is on the line at the death and referees must insure that they are physically and mentally "FIT" so that at the end of the game when the game is on the line they are in the best position to make the best call for the game. We dont deal in "what-if's" the game at that moment is wont needs to be taken into account not hat a team shot poorly throughout! If it's a close game that is the moment the ref's must be in.

I see the new roster is out and Mr McDonald is on the road again.

ineedmore........can you point out anywhere in my post where i stated ref's cruise?? I said no such thing. I was merely stating errors are more critical at the end of the game where there is less time left for a team to try and win the game after an error. No referee wants to make a mistake. Mistakes are mistakes whenever they occur in the game but they are more critical in the last 3 minutes of a close game.