When the Game Isn’t Just a Game: Leadership, Control, and the Rogue Ref

There’s a type of official every experienced crew chief will meet in their career — the one who doesn’t play as part of the team, doesn’t value pregame or halftime adjustments, and who responds to structure with defiance instead of cooperation.

You’ve heard them before — “I’m going to ref the game the way I want,” or “I’ve been reffing longer than you’ve been alive.”But it’s more than just a phrase. It’s a defensive shield. A psychological statement of identity and entitlement. And when emotion overrides judgment, it’s the official who can quietly — or not so quietly — derail an otherwise good night.

I’ve dealt with that type of referee. Not many, thankfully — maybe one or two. But the experience stings, because it pulls at the very fabric of what officiating crews depend on: trust, order, communication, and shared mission focus.

And I want to share how real combat experience taught me not only to navigate those moments, but to lead through them with emotional discipline counterintuitive to most civilian conflict styles.

1. What Makes a “Rogue Ref” Tick: Psychological Insight

Identity & Ego as Defensive Mechanisms

When someone says, “I’ve been doing this longer than you’ve been alive,” it’s not really about tenure. It’s a defense.

Humans are wired to equate experience with competence and value, especially in domains where hierarchy and tradition are strong. Most officials enter the profession because they love the game, not because they crave dominance. But for some, officiating becomes a stage for proving their worth, rather than serving a shared mission.

Psychologically, this behavior often stems from:

• Threat to self-concept: If someone’s identity is rooted in being “the veteran,” any challenge — even a benign suggestion — can feel like a personal threat.

• Confirmation bias: They interpret every suggestion through a lens that confirms their belief they are right and others are wrong.

• Overcompensation: Flaunting accomplishments is, at its core, a bid for validation — even if it looks arrogant.

These traits aren’t inherently malicious. They’re common in environments where rank, experience, and tradition are deeply valued.

But in a team environment — like our officiating crews — this mindset is toxic if it overrides cooperation.

2. Social Engagement Science: Why This Happens in Group Dynamics

In social psychology, teams develop norms — expectations about how members behave, communicate, and solve conflict. When one member prioritizes self over group process, several things typically occur:

a. Social Loafing vs. Social Facilitation

• Social loafing happens when individuals put in less effort believing others will compensate.

• Social facilitation happens when individuals perform better in a group due to shared accountability.

A rogue ref often rejects social facilitation. They detach from the shared effort and, paradoxically, rely on others to maintain standards they refuse to uphold. That dissonance breeds frustration amongst the rest of the crew.

b. Status vs. Structure

Groups often obey formal structures (rules, roles) and informal status hierarchies (perceived prestige, personality dominance). A ref who continually reminds everyone of their tenure is appealing to informal status — and trying to override formal structure.

The rest of the crew resists this because cohesion and shared strategy are more predictive of success than individual status displays.

3. What Military Combat Taught Me About Emotional Control

Before I ever stepped onto a court as a crew chief, I lived with a different kind of unpredictability.

In combat, emotional control is not an option — it’s survival.

Combat doesn’t tolerate:

• Ego-driven decision-making

• Emotional reactivity

• Fragmented team communication

• Personal agendas

It demands:

• Clear intent

• Mission focus

• Trust

• Rapid but calm execution

  
  

a. Emotional Control Under Extreme Stress

In a firefight, you learn that:

• Fear doesn’t predict outcomes — discipline does.

• Emotional reactions must be processed, not expressed.

• Leadership isn’t loud; leadership is effective.

This is the essence of what we call tactical composure — the ability to stay internally calm while processing high-level complexity.

Officiating isn’t life-or-death. But the same emotional systems fire in stressful moments. And a crew chief who has trained their mind under pressure can stay centered when others escalate.

4. Applying Military Principles to Officiating Crews

Here’s how those combat lessons translate into practical leadership when dealing with a partner who operates from ego rather than mission:

a. Start with Mission Clarity

In the military, before every patrol, brief, or mission, we establish commander’s intent. The mission is:

• Clear

• Concise

• Shared

In officiating it’s not different:

The mission: Fair, consistent, safe, and efficient game management. Everyone has a role — and that role supports that mission.

When a partner pushes personal style over the mission, remind them — not with argument — but with clarity of purpose. You’re not challenging them; you’re re-centering on shared goals.

b. Manage Discord with Inquiry, Not Argument

A mistake many civilian leaders make is matching emotion with emotion — arguing, defending, correcting.

Combat training teaches controlled inquiry:

“Tell me how you see this working so we’re aligned.”

It shifts defense into explanation. It engages the brain in a higher-order cognitive task instead of a defensive reaction.

c. Contain Emotional Triggers

Rogue refs often escalate because they feed off emotional response. The moment you react emotionally, you validate their behavior.

Military emotional control teaches you to:

• Recognize your internal trigger responses

• Slow down your response intentionally

• Speak from observation, not interpretation

For example, instead of:

“You’re being disruptive.”

Try:

“When crew decisions aren’t discussed as planned, we risk inconsistency. Let’s stick to our communication process.”

It’s neutral, grounded, and tactical.

d. Use Presence, Not Volume

The instinct with difficult people is to escalate volume and force. The military trains the opposite: presence over volume.

Presence means:

• Clear body language

• Calm voice

• Intentional pacing

Presence communicates confidence without intimidation.

e. Remove Personalization

Veterans learn early: You are not your actions — and actions are not you.

Translate that into crew leadership:

• Don’t take it personally when someone undermines structure.

• Respond to behavior, not perceived intent.

• Maintain respect without surrendering the process.

A rogue ref’s behavior is a pattern, not a personal attack on you.

5. Emotional Control: What It Is — and What It Is Not

People often confuse emotional control with suppression. It’s not about burying feelings. It’s about regulating expression so that actions align with values and mission.

In high-stress combat, you still feel fear, frustration, anger — but you control how those feelings influence decisions.

Officiating is no different: feelings will arise — but they shouldn’t drive decisions.

6. Why Military Veterans Often Handle These Situations Better

Veterans have repeatedly trained and tested their:

• Cognitive control — managing thoughts under pressure

• Situational awareness — interpreting behavior without bias

• Behavioral regulation — acting in alignment with mission, not emotion

• Communication discipline — prioritizing clarity over defensiveness

These are universal leadership skills.

Most people default to social defense mechanisms when challenged. Veterans have practiced not defaulting.

That’s not to say veterans don’t ever lose their cool — they do. But they recover faster and strategically because:

• They know the cost of uncontrolled escalation.

• They’ve witnessed real consequences of emotional breakdown.

Even in a game, that perspective reframes what matters.

7. Practical Steps for Crew Chiefs Facing a “Longer Than You’ve Been Alive” Partner

Here are actionable strategies that incorporate psychological and social principles:

Step 1 — Pre-Game Alignment

Before the game, clearly state:

• Communication plan

• Signals and timing

• Roles and responsibilities

Document it verbally. You don’t argue — you align.

This sets expectations and reduces ambiguity.

Step 2 — Neutral Language

Avoid judgmental words (“You always…,” “You never…”). Focus on:

• Outcomes

• Team process

• Consistency

Example:

“We agreed on this approach. Let’s maintain consistency for the crews and teams.”

Step 3 — Redirect When Ego Emerges

If a ref starts listing accomplishments:

Pause.

Acknowledge (“Your experience is impressive.”)

Pivot back to mission (“For this crew to operate best, here’s what we agreed…”)

It’s not a dismissal — it’s refocusing.

Step 4 — Post-Game Reflection, Not Confrontation

After the game, when emotions are lower:

Ask:“What worked well today? What could we improve for the next game?”

This invites investment rather than defensiveness.

Step 5 — Lead by Example

Your behavior sets the tone:

• Calm in adversity

• Consistent in message

• Respectful in disagreement

People match behavior more than words.

8. Closing Perspective: The Bigger Mission

At the heart of officiating — just like in a unit — is service:

• Serving the game

• Serving athletes

• Serving fairness

A rogue ref who loses sight of that is not just difficult — they’re off mission.

But as a crew chief, you don’t fight that behavior. You lead around it — with steady focus, emotional control, and mission clarity.

Your calm isn’t weakness. Your discipline isn’t compliance. Your leadership is what stabilizes chaos.

If you’d like, I can turn this into a training document, crew chief workshop lesson, or preseason presentation version.