Which Sport's Officials Have the Toughest Job? - jmik58's Blog

Arena Blog Dynasty Scores Sign Up ☰

jmik58's Blog

Which Sport's Officials Have the Toughest Job? Stuck

Posted on June 11, 2012 at 11:05 AM.

(8)

Referees, umpires, officials, and judges -- whatever name they go by -- all strive to stay hidden in their respective sports. Their goal: to assure the game is played fairly within the rules. That is, of course, unless you're a boxing judge.

Most everyone has proclaimed their superior competence to that of said officials at various points in their sports-viewing lives. While the reactions vary, the reality is that few of us would want to be in the shoes of the umpires, officials or referees. In short -- we know it's really not that easy.

But which sport's officials have the toughest job?

The difficulty, in my opinion, comes down to a few aspects. We must consider how many judgment calls are made versus clear-cut decisions. Also, which sport supports their officials with replay the best? And finally, which sport actually enforces the rules to the extent they are written?

The game of football presents several yes/no moments for referees. The point of the game is to advance the ball to a spot on the field. The field itself is as much a part of the game as the players and the ball. The vast majority of calls for football officials revolve around marking progress or determining whether someone stepped on a line, before the line, or made it past the line.

Many of the penalties are judgment calls like any sport, but not all of them are so in football. Offsides, illegal substitution, face-masking, and clipping (most times) to name a few -- all are fairly easy calls. Not only this, but the NFL has the best replay support for officials of the big three. All of the crucial moments of the game of football are subject to replay.

In regard to consistency, offensive holding is a call that is overlooked on almost every play. But it's difficult to think of other moments � ignoring the process of a catch -- where rules are overlooked or inconsistently enforced to the point where it negatively impacts the game.

Major League Baseball also presents a game that sticks to the book relatively well. The variability of the strike call is an accepted part of the game, but umpires often develop tendencies and a questionable call becomes more acceptable due to high levels of consistency in those calls.

Baseball also benefits from the reliance on boundaries. The chalk line makes it relatively easy to see if a ball is fair or foul. A home run is usually easily understood and defined. And if not, replay is available to assist.

Where the MLB misses a few points though is in the lack of expanded replay. It's not that the league hasn't approved replay for fair/foul and trapped-ball calls -- they have. It's in the collective bargaining agreement and it's supposed to be in play already. MLB just hasn't implemented the expansion yet.

Also, if baseball was to be a target of inconsistent enforcement of rules, there are a few that could be addressed. When throwing to a base for a force-out, players don't necessarily have to be on the bag to get the out -- especially at second base when turning a double-play. The same is true for tag situations. If the ball beats the runner, most times the runner will be called out. While these may not go by the "book" they are accepted parts of the game and are rarely the cause of much uproar.

Finally, we have the game of basketball -- more specifically the NBA. Where things get tough right away for NBA officials is in the lack of black-and-white calls. The object of the game is for the ball to go through the hoop -- not something we need an official to confirm. The brunt of the officiating in the NBA is focused on judgment and officials allow the players to play. Considering the size and explosiveness of professional basketball players, the small size of the court compared to other sports, and the frenetic pace; it's no wonder the zebras on the basketball court get accused of blowing the most calls. Their every moment is consumed with judgment calls.

Blocking, charging, traveling, carrying, illegal screens, complaining -- NBA officials deal with it all.

Another positive is the ability to review a non-judgment call via instant replay. The NBA has done a nice job of instituting replay in a way that doesn't immediately impact the game-flow and allows officials to go back and correct a call like adjusting a two-pointer to a three.

If you had any doubt about which sport is the toughest to work, NBA officials really show the difficulty of their job by what they don't call.

Calls such as traveling, carrying, and three-seconds-in-the-lane are rarely called. The confusing part is that each is such a unique part of the game of basketball -- the only one that has a clear focus on bouncing the ball while taking a limited number of steps -- or at least we thought.

To be human is to have permission to err. To be human is to receive forgiveness. To be a sports official is to get neither.

Which sport do you think is the toughest to officiate?

Justin Mikels is a staff writer for Operation Sports. You can follow him on Twitter @long_snapper.

Comments

# 1 PackerBacker123 @ Jun 11

1.baseball
2.football
3.hockey
4.soccer

# 2 AiDub @ Jun 11

First of all, I think "tradition of the game" (I'm lookin at you MLB) shouldn't sway a professional league in today's world away from the vast amounts of technology that could remove the gray area calls and implement more clear cut rulings when it comes to "subjective" assessments such as strikes, goal tending, and completions. It's naive to think that human error is just "part of the game." Too much money rides on professional sports nowadays to let that be an answer to why refs screw up calls.

To answer the main question, I do think that basketball has it tough as one thing technology wouldn't be able to determine are fouls and such. That, I agree, is a subjective matter that unfortunately is left up to an individual's "opinion." I have seen a lot of great calls but even more bad calls when it comes to fouls. It is pretty ridiculous to even fathom making a foul call being a 6 foot nothing guy trying to see over a bunch of 7 footers in real time. Do you really see what's going on or is there just a lot of assuming from that vantage point? My guess is assuming which is why I hate the NBA officiating. Too much left to opinion and not clear cut rulings.

# 3 PackerBacker123 @ Jun 11

I am firmly against "computer" calls, I think it would take the history and tradition out of the game. And plus, you can always blame it on the ump.

# 4 chrisphil1724 @ Jun 11

Baseball, hockey, basketball, soccer.

I would say football isn't as hard becase all the scoring plays are under review. So even if it's called wrong on the feild, the booth will get it right.

# 5 jWILL253 @ Jun 11

LMAO! It's funny because boxing wasn't even considered...

# 6 jmik58 @ Jun 11

@jWILL10

The mystery of judging the sport of boxing already established itself with a wild weekend

# 7 jhendricks316 @ Jun 11

Umpires, no doubt. They have to be consistent. They have very little technological backup. They are always getting lip (bats and beer apparently) from managers, players, and fans. They are stuck with multiple split-second decisions daily.

On that note, why not have LF and RF umpires in the regular season, too?

# 8 TheDudeAbides45 @ Jun 11

I don't see how anybody could say baseball. Balls and strikes are clearly defined, and either a guy gets to the base before the ball or not. It's nothing like trying to determine what is and isn't a hold in football or what exactly is a foul in basketball when there's contact on just about every play. I understand there are going to be close calls, but there's no judgment, unlike other sports.