[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

great judges and administration

Jason Russell correctly states that that problem "i have with judges at
nationals and that is the number of great judges that do not participate in
judging as much as they can at nationals."  I also have some difficulty
with the behavior of not volunteering at regular season tournaments as
well.

On one hand, I guess I was trained in the old Nebraska school of helping a
tournament out whenever necessary, if for no other reason than to promote a
school's image.

On the other, I realize that I may have been part of the problem, myself,
in that a lot of great judges have been asked to work in tabrooms at our
tournaments here.  I'm wondering what people think of trying to train lay
people or speech and theatre teacher trainees to do tabrooms, and getting
the great minds back into the rounds? (With maybe one "great mind" at least
in the tabroom to keep the tabbies away)

I am open to response on this as I am uncertain of the elitist, "great
mind" mindset underlying this post.  I remember that at one time, I was
much more dreaded as a judge than I am now (still am, so strike away! :-),
but so were some that have worked hard to gain the reputation of being
excellent judges.

In our area, the high school coaches rarely judge--but they value the use
of "lay" judges and thus rarely question a decision, either.  I'm not
offering this as a "solution" for any minor problems in CEDA, but it is
consistent with "if you don't judge, don't gripe."

The inherent difficulty I throw open for discussion is the notion that it
is impractical to have a debate tournament with hired, neutral referees who
are not coaches a la basketball.  I see the need for a coach available
fulltime, but I also see the need for a good referee.  I don't even begin
to have THE solution to this (especially when lots of programs are
single-coach directed), but might more ideas like the "NY Cartel" work?
(having 3-4 small programs band together, field maybe 6 teams at a
tournament with 4-5 coaches present, rotating 3 for judging purposes and
still having coaching?  I doubt this is why the "cartel"--a great idea I
might add--was formed, but it seems this might work rather than many small
programs with great judges "buying out" or bringing with a less competent
critic.)

As far as my oral critiques went, I would like to thank all for their
responses, most of which led to good, if brief, discussions after rounds.
I found all who debated well but to my mind lost in decisions I felt might
go otherwise with other critics to be the best of sports, even when they
had a good argument for the decision being to the contrary.  Although open
to discussing with coaches (in fact, I prefer it rather than talking
directly to students, as I rarely know the context of what the other
coaches are trying to teach these particular students), I did not encounter
a single instance of a coach berating me after a round (although I might
have gotten some choice words in the hotel room later.  Hell, it's
debate--we'd be sol if we always agreed on everything).

Best of luck to all of the graduating CEDA seniors this year.  I both
enjoyed and learned something from each of you I had the privelege of
judging over your competitive years.  I will also look forward to seeing
all CEDA colleagues once again next year.



Tom
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page