it the book

Think like a referee, act like a referee

It's more than just the test

Want a sad commentary on refereeing in Canada? The first measurable thing we ask officials to do in a season matters very little when it comes to being a good on-ice official.

That thing, of course, is the damn test.

Often poorly written, with often ambiguous questions, the rules test that levels 1, 2 and 3 officials take proves very little about the relative abilities of the person taking the test.

Lest anyone think this is sour grapes, let me point out I scored 93 cent on the level 3 exam last year, missing two questions. That doesn't necessarily make me a good official. Nor, for that matter, should someone who scores 81 necessarily be considered a bad official. The results of the test show only how well a person performs when writing tests.

I'm not suggesting for a minute that we do away with testing altogether. Combined with other factors, it may be part of a good indicator of whether someone has the goods to be an official. A lot of good hockey referees are anal about details, and the testing does show whether someone cares about the finer points.

Continued...