Effective Refereeing

Jack Prescott
(Internet Published) Nov 2000

Reading the rules about Tippler contesting in the UK and America, I find that a great deal is left to the discretion of the referees concern. Such a referee becomes a judge and has a lot of scope for individual methods - for example, freedom to move to a different vantage point or to remain static. These referees can decide what is or what is not a disturbance and likely to have an effect on the kit. At one extreme I know about a referee who objected to any one going anywhere near the loft during the contest time. I know of other who saw no objection. Attitudes are vastly different. I well recall disqualification when two previously lost Tipplers returned to the loft during a contest. The reason being that the disruption of getting the two returned Tipplers into the loft would cause the contesting kit to be affected. Another test case was when one previously lost Tippler returned during a contest and the referee said "Right, go and get it inside as quickly as you can, and then come back here". One referee thought that the infringement was a disturbance, and the other did not.

Some referees object to kids being in the yard at all. Others say, "Well the kids are usually in the yard during training, so what's the problem?" There is a wide diversity of opinion, even with experienced judges. To mind there are varied degrees of judging;

• Hostile judging. Impartial judging without fear or favour. 
• An extremely chummy and comprehensively lenient attitude.
• A completely incompetent attitude under the dictatorship and guidance of an equally incompetent contestant - The blind leading the blind so to speak!
• A secondary spectatory observation where visitors arrive to see how a kit is doing. 

It is on record that such visitors will report any kind of rule transgression - Therefore the judge gets judged. In some areas such spectators take up such observation without actually visiting the loft. This is espionage and can be expected in certain areas, but certainly not all.

[Internet Published Nov 2000 at http://www.tipplers.com/jack/]