SHOULD REFEREE RATINGS BE PUBLIC?

SHOULD REFEREE RATINGS BE PUBLIC? The National Basketball Association is now faced with the nightmare of a referee (Tim Donaghy) being accused of betting on games he officiated. Did his bets influence his refereeing? Sports officials today are subject to regular review by means of tape. Box scores record the performance of players. Why shouldn’t the grading of the performance of officials be made public? (I recognize that union collective bargaining agreements may prevent this). It is not well publicized, but apparently major league baseball was pleased that it reduced the error rate on balls and strikes to 7% recently (about one missed call every half inning). It’s interesting to know that statistic. There is a model for what could be done. The Sun Belt Conference made public a review of the performance of their referees in the 2006 Alamo Bowl. The game announcers had criticized those referees and the report vindicated them. I recommend the report, which analyzes every disputed call in the game (and includes the important statement about one play: “This was one of those plays that could go either way and would make half the people happy and the other half upset.”) I think that Commissioner Stern of the National Basketball Association would be a lot happier right now if he could point to contemporary evaluations of the disgraced referee’s calls.