Perception Over Performance: Why High School Basketball Officiating Must Let Go of ‘Popularity’ and Embrace Real Skill

For too long, high school basketball officiating has been governed not by performance, competence, or character — but by perception. When administrative decisions are driven by how officials are seen rather than how they perform, it corrodes morale, hurts association members, and shuts the door on valuable contributors — especially military veterans seeking to serve their communities after civilian life.

This isn’t merely an opinion. It’s the truth lived, discussed, and lamented by officials who have spent years on the court, in training rooms, and in classrooms earning respect and mastery — only to find that leadership decisions hinge less on expertise and more on popularity, stereotype, and preconceived perception.

---

The Problem With Perception‑Based Policies

In many officiating associations, decisions — such as assignments, advancement opportunities, evaluations, and even basic inclusion — are driven by how leaders perceive an official, rather than what that official delivers.

This turns associations into something resembling a high school popularity contest.

• Officials aren’t judged on their consistency with rules.

• They aren’t recognized for the countless hours spent studying mechanics, game situations, and video review

.• They are judged on personality traits that have nothing to do with performance.

An official who is quiet and focused is labeled “unfriendly.” Someone who asserts themselves with confidence is branded “arrogant.” And if that official just happens to be a veteran — well, the assumptions multiply.

This dynamic doesn’t just hurt morale. It creates a feedback loop where the association rewards conformity over competence.

Veterans: Trained to Lead, Misunderstood in the Civilian Domain

High school officiating should be a natural fit for veterans. Veterans bring a unique combination of discipline, accountability, situational awareness, and commitment to continuous improvement. Yet, many find themselves misunderstood — even marginalized — by civilian leadership that hasn’t learned how to engage with or value veteran skill sets.

Here’s what several veteran basketball officials — all with military backgrounds — shared in interviews (names withheld):

Voices From the Court

“In the service, you’re trained to execute under pressure, to communicate clearly, and to finish what you start. On the court, that translates into confidence in my calls — but some leaders see confidence as arrogance, not preparation.”

“One administrator once told me I ‘didn’t take feedback well.’ What they meant was I challenged assumptions with data — game reports, rule language, and game video. Instead of seeing that as dedication, they saw it as pushback.”

“Too many decisions in our association are based on who you know, not what you know. And when you’ve spent decades in uniform with structured leadership, you think performance matters. Here, it sometimes doesn’t.”

---

Perception Bias: More Than Injustice — It’s Discrimination

What happens when leaders base opportunities on perception rather than merit?

It becomes discrimination.

Not the loud, headline‑making kind — but the subtle, insidious type that makes people doubt themselves, question their worth, and eventually walk away.

Psychologists and sociologists describe this as stereotype threat and identity invalidation:

• Stereotype Threat: People begin to underperform because they sense they are being judged for who they are, not what they do.

• Identity Invalidation: When repeated messages imply that your professional identity is not truly valued, it causes emotional distress, disengagement, and burnout.

  
  

Dr. Ana Herrera, a psychologist who specializes in performance identity, explains:

“When associations prioritize perception — especially informal, subjective perception — over documented performance, it signals to members that their contributions are invisible. Veterans, in particular, are highly trained to perform competently; when that is misread as ‘too assertive’ or ‘too detailed,’ it triggers a defensive reaction that is unfair and demoralizing.”

This isn’t about being ‘touchy’ or ‘too sensitive.’ It’s about cognitive and social recognition — and how its absence harms associations.

“He Does Too Much.” The Real Meaning Behind the Words

One phrase you hear repeatedly in associations that subtly discriminate against veterans or serious students of the game is:

“He does too much.”

But let’s decode that:

• Doing too much is often doing the work that others aren’t willing to do.

• Studying rulebooks, reviewing film, attending extra workshops, mentoring younger officials — that’s effort, initiative, professionalism.

• Labeling that as “too much” is a shorthand for threat — a threat to the status quo, to ego, and to informal power structures.

This isn’t accidental. It’s defensive.

And it sends an unmistakable message: “Don’t outwork us. Don’t outprepare us. Don’t show up better than we expected.”

That’s toxic — especially in a profession that exists to model fairness and integrity.

Why This Matters — Beyond One Person

This isn’t about any one official — it’s about the culture of officiating.

Associations that cling to perception‑based hierarchies risk:

✔ Losing skilled officials who could serve more games

✔ Undermining the credibility of evaluations and assignments

✔ Driving away veterans who bring invaluable skills

✔ Creating an environment where mediocrity is rewarded over mastery

And the ultimate losers? The student‑athletes.

When officiating staffs are chosen based on familiarity and perception, not competence, the quality of the game suffers. Fairness suffers. Confidence in the officiating community suffers.

A Call to Action for Leadership

To all boards and decision‑makers:

You are entrusted with safeguarding the integrity of the game. That trust requires:

🔹 Transparent evaluation criteria

🔹 Objective measures of performance

🔹 Recognition of preparation and study

🔹 Respect for diverse professional backgrounds — including military service

You must ask yourselves:

Do we lead by popularity, or do we lead by principle?

Do we reward perception, or do we reward performance?

---

Conclusion: Serve With Purpose, Not With Perception

Veterans aren’t asking for special treatment. They’re asking for what every official deserves:

➡ A fair shake➡ A system that values skill and preparation➡ Leadership that understands context before casting judgment

As one veteran official said:

“After serving on the front line, you learn what discipline really means. When I walk onto the court, I bring that discipline with me — not to intimidate, but to contribute. When people judge me before they know me, the association loses out. Our games lose out. And most importantly, the kids lose out.”

It’s time to shift from perception policing to performance empowerment — for the good of officials, associations, and the sport we all love.