Read the debate intro and Sports Geek’s argument that the NCAA should publicly acknowledge when a referee makes a bad call during a game.
It is time for another dose of some good ‘ol fashioned, folksy wisdom from Bleacher Fan.
Today, we will be considering a lesson which is drawn from Saint Francis of Assisi – Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”
A much more folksy way to interpret this is with the adage – There is no use crying over spilled milk!
Those phrases exist to highlight the fact that nothing positive is gained by dwelling on events that cannot be changed. Once the milk has been spilled, for example, crying will not help to put the milk back in the glass, nor will it help clean up the mess. Instead, what you SHOULD do is take measures to either correct the situation, or to try and prevent it from occurring in the future.
With regard to officiating in college sports (or any sport in general), the reality is that referees are going to make bad calls occasionally. Sometimes it will work out in favor of your team, and other times it goes against your team. In the case of the incident during the Georgia/LSU game that was highlighted by Loyal Homer during the introduction to this debate, it seems to be very clear that wide receiver A.J. Green should not have been penalized for excessive celebration. Nobody is disputing that fact.
What I am disputing, however, is the fact that Rogers Redding, the SEC’s coordinator of officials, felt the need to publicly acknowledge and admit to the blown call. The only thing accomplished by Redding was to bring additional controversy to the game, bring increased scrutiny onto the SEC official who made the bad call, and get a lot of people upset for no reason. They cannot overturn the call, and it is not going to change the outcome of the game, so what is the point?!
As I said before, bad calls happen often in sports. Some are more prominent than others, and some may have a more direct impact on the outcome of the game, but it is foolish to assume that bad calls are unavoidable. What USUALLY happens with blown calls (even those that seem egregious) is that fans on the “losing” side will gripe and complain, then will move on (which is what they will STILL have to do in this situation, because the outcome of the game will NOT be changed). Instead of allowing that process to take place, Redding fueled the fire of those complaining with a statement that justified their concerns. While his intention may have been to appease the upset Bulldog fans, what he ACTUALLY did was further undermine the authority of the officiating crew.
In the interest of following that very important message of focusing only on things that CAN be changed, the NCAA should promote PRO-activity, rather than RE-action. Since they will not correct the situation by changing the outcome of the game, the NCAA’s only PROACTIVE option is to take measures that will help prevent these controversies from happening in the future. In doing so, the NCAA could actually promote a positive resolution to a negative situation.
Life as an official is not easy. I once served as an umpire for a charity softball game, and was assaulted by a barrage of criticism as if I had blown a call at the plate in the seventh game of the World Series. And, this was a CHARITY event! I can only imagine the pressure and scrutiny that a referee in a high-profile college football game endures.
The problem in sports today is that technology creates the opportunity to employ hindsight in scrutiny of every aspect of the game. Officials used to be perceived as infallible, and their interpretation of the facts became law. Now that we have the technology (and literally thousands of machines) dedicated to capturing every event of every game, the officiating becomes subject to increased pressure. What the NCAA SHOULD strive to do, in light of that enhanced technology, is focus solely on answering the following question – Should the officials continue to be perceived as infallible?
If the determination is made that the officials can be fallible, then the NCAA must expand Instant Replay usage to support the acknowledgement that the officials will sometimes make a mistake. In doing so, the organization would put measures in place to help further analyze situations, and rectify any bad calls that are made. If, however, the NCAA deems that the referees are infallible (which was once the assumption), then the NCAA, its conferences, programs, AND fans will have to accept that mistakes will be made, and are a natural part of the game. What they CANNOT do is continue to support a self-destructive process of allowing mistakes to take place without ANY means to correct it DURING the game… then publicly criticize the mistake AFTER the fact under the guise of a “heartfelt” mea culpa.
By taking on the practice of post-game admissions of guilt, the NCAA is essentially talking out of both sides of their mouth. On one hand, it establishes a policy that grants absolute authority to make a call that is CLEARLY subjective on the shoulders of one person. On the other hand, it then publicly criticizes a person’s subjective interpretation without giving them ANY support to actually make an educated decision in “the heat of the moment.”
It is time to start looking forward… not behind!
