The Don was quoted saying they can have all charters for everyone, but they'd lose any increase in salary cap and bunch of other increases.
Billionaires gonna billionaire.
The Don was quoted saying they can have all charters for everyone, but they'd lose any increase in salary cap and bunch of other increases.
I never understand what is meant by this or how exactly it is supposed to improve anything. Does it mean suspending referees who make mistakes so less experienced and worse rated referees are promoted to take their place? Does it mean you fine the referees, making it less attractive to be a professional referee and easing the promotion of less experience and worse rated referees? Does it mean publicly shaming the referees, thus making it less attractive to be a professional referee?
How would any of these amount to anything more than punishment for punishment's sake? How would they contribute to an improvement in refereeing?
I also do not see why this would be a collective bargaining issue for players.
Does it mean publicly shaming the referees, thus making it less attractive to be a professional referee?
Refs today already get punished for poor performances, center refs will get moved to assistant ref duty for some time.
I think its fair to ask PRO to be more transparent and accountable for their refs' performances. Players are held fully accountable for their mistakes on the field and a ref's decision can have just as great of an impact, why shouldn't they be held to the same standard? I don't think it needs to be a matter of public shaming though. Evenly privately sharing more detailed information on why calls were made, whether PRO agrees, and whether it will impact future training would likely go a very long way with easing relationships between refs, coaches, and players.
The Don was quoted saying they can have all charters ..., but they'd lose any ... other increases.
We are good enough to beat the best teams, and bad enough to lose to the worst teams.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users