Re Reading referee Jeff Hinds.

[peter1948]

Reading referee Jeff Hinds has apparently been turned down yet again to being made up to a Class A referee, absolutely no reasons why have given by The Board of Control.

[Boxerbeetle]

Totally ridiculous, especially when looking at some of the fvcking awful Class A referees currently active.

[Old bones Ian]

This has got to be a joke, can't see what he's done wrong to be turned down.
Perhaps he's not a yes man

[Glass Joe]

probably speaks his mind at meetings. probably purely down to politics.

[jamesmcdonnell]

What happened to all the other comments on this thread - were they deleted, and if so, why?

[expe]

What happened to all the other comments on this thread - were they deleted, and if so, why?

Different thread to the one over in CS.

[Slim Cockney]

Whilst I am a supporter of Jeff, I can on merit say that he is ready to be a Star Referee.

I also understand that the Board cannot provide any written reasons as to why he cannot be promoted.

Let the Court of Public Opinion decide.

[bripez]

I also understand that the Board cannot provide any written reasons as to why he cannot be promoted.

.

I was going to ask this question.

The Board can promote (or not) any referee, but I would expect that they would be judged against a clear set of criteria.

If a ref does not meet that criteria then I would expect them to be given reasons why and also possibly an action plan to help them to achieve that criteria.

I wonder what the anti-MBC / blindly pro-Board posters make of this?

[expe]

I also understand that the Board cannot provide any written reasons as to why he cannot be promoted.

.

I was going to ask this question.

The Board can promote (or not) any referee, but I would expect that they would be judged against a clear set of criteria.

If a ref does not meet that criteria then I would expect them to be given reasons why and also possibly an action plan to help them to achieve that criteria.

I wonder what the anti-MBC / blindly pro-Board posters make of this?

I believe it's down to some sort of committee, which is mostly made up of the current star referees. Unsurprisingly it isn't often that a referee gets promoted as it would mean less work for the current referees, especially when that referee is clearly far better than some of them. The decision needs to be taken out of their hands and made independently by people without vested interests.

[The Insider]

The decision needs to be taken out of their hands and made independently by people without vested interests.

Who are these people exactly?

I wholeheartedly agree with your comment I quoted BTW.

[expe]

The decision needs to be taken out of their hands and made independently by people without vested interests.

Who are these people exactly?

I wholeheartedly agree with your comment I quoted BTW.

Either give every license holder a vote annually on each referee, including the current referees, that puts themselves forward as to whether they should be a star referee. Decide beforehand how many star referees are going to be required then go down the list of who's got the most votes until all the positions are filled. However that could lead to bias, with referees giving preferential treatment to get votes and managers/promoters could influence their stables to vote the same way, creating powerful blocks of voters that have to be won over. The other option would be to keep the area council representatives on the committee, but remove the referees and replace them with former fighters/journalists/current fighters/trainers/managers/promoters, any of them really.

Whichever one you prefer I think both would be a better way of doing things than they are now.

[bripez]

I also understand that the Board cannot provide any written reasons as to why he cannot be promoted.

.

I was going to ask this question.

The Board can promote (or not) any referee, but I would expect that they would be judged against a clear set of criteria.

If a ref does not meet that criteria then I would expect them to be given reasons why and also possibly an action plan to help them to achieve that criteria.

I wonder what the anti-MBC / blindly pro-Board posters make of this?

I believe it's down to some sort of committee, which is mostly made up of the current star referees. Unsurprisingly it isn't often that a referee gets promoted as it would mean less work for the current referees, especially when that referee is clearly far better than some of them. The decision needs to be taken out of their hands and made independently by people without vested interests.

So, basically it is a closed shop within a closed shop?

Clearly a star referee wants to maintain their own self interest by denying any other ref the opportunity in the same way that the Board want to maintain their monopoly by blocking other sanctioning bodies by effectively blackmailing the boxers.

The more I learn about the Board the more I think that there needs to be more openness and transparency for the good of the sport, but the "committee" (whoever they are) are not going to wake up one day and decide to be open and transparent are they - so what will precipitate this change ?

[expe]

I was going to ask this question.

The Board can promote (or not) any referee, but I would expect that they would be judged against a clear set of criteria.

If a ref does not meet that criteria then I would expect them to be given reasons why and also possibly an action plan to help them to achieve that criteria.

I wonder what the anti-MBC / blindly pro-Board posters make of this?

I believe it's down to some sort of committee, which is mostly made up of the current star referees. Unsurprisingly it isn't often that a referee gets promoted as it would mean less work for the current referees, especially when that referee is clearly far better than some of them. The decision needs to be taken out of their hands and made independently by people without vested interests.

So, basically it is a closed shop within a closed shop?

Clearly a star referee wants to maintain their own self interest by denying any other ref the opportunity in the same way that the Board want to maintain their monopoly by blocking other sanctioning bodies by effectively blackmailing the boxers.

The more I learn about the Board the more I think that there needs to be more openness and transparency for the good of the sport, but the "committee" (whoever they are) are not going to wake up one day and decide to be open and transparent are they - so what will precipitate this change ?

More or less, there's 19 people on the committee, Charles Giles and Robert Smith from the board, a representative from each of the 7 area councils, the 9 current star referees and Dave Parris as a former star referee and current judge. Parris would presumably side with the referees, giving them over half the vote, I don't know how many votes are needed to make a change but I would presume it's at least 50%, which is impossible without the votes of at least one referee and that's on the assumption that every other member of the committee votes in favour.

[Callowland]

The question of openness and transparency for Jeff is key.

How can he get promoted if he doesn't know what exactly is expected.

Things won't change but they need to.

[stujones]

He is a fine referee. Very sad situation.

[spudder56]

It's the referees committee who decide on promotions etc full list of members of the committee are on the board website I beleive they meet twice a year and discuss and vote on referees promotions etc which are proposed by the area councils

[ppb]

It's the referees committee who decide on promotions etc full list of members of the committee are on the board website I beleive they meet twice a year and discuss and vote on referees promotions etc which are proposed by the area councils

Hence the reason that no one gets demoted!! No matter how many howlers that they make!!

[jamesmcdonnell]

It's the referees committee who decide on promotions etc full list of members of the committee are on the board website I beleive they meet twice a year and discuss and vote on referees promotions etc which are proposed by the area councils

Hence the reason that no one gets demoted!! No matter how many howlers that they make!!

Turkeys. Christmas.

[jonny]

Personally I don't think he's a very good referee. I think there are better refs to be made up.