[Husker] dumb officiating

[Steve Reichenbach]

Perhaps the better word for evaluation is "effectiveness".  The
real issue is not of responsibility --- we all would acknowledge
that the coaches are responsible to instruct players in avoiding
turnovers and penalties.  The real issue is not of fault ---
having been so instructred, as I'm sure they've been, players
make mistakes.  The real issue is of effectiveness.  There are
many different ways to coach (or instruct or mentor or parent),
but for major college coaches the ultimate gauge is effectiveness.
In the end, responsibility or fault don't really matter that much.
Isn't this the real issue (for the most part):  Does the team win?

> > I copied and pasted your comment Jerry, And to me  " fault" and 
> > "responsibility"  is the same thing. By definition fault is a synonym for 
> > responsibility.
> 
> Being a former English teacher, I feel more qualified to comment
> here than on the football (which doesn't stop me from commentin
> on the football).
> 
> There are several differences between "fault" and "responsibility".
> The first is that one can be responsible for a process whether or
> not things go wrong.  Thus, we can credit a person for their
> responsible actions, even if there is no event for which one looks
> to find fault.  A second is that one can be responsible, but
> not at fault, even if things go wrong.  If one has done everything
> reasonably possible to design and execute a process, then they are
> responsible but not at fault --- because their actions were proper.
> In matters of responsibility, many things can wrong without the
> responsible party being at fault.  For example, there are so-called
> acts of nature or chance/freak events that cannot be reasonbly
> expected or accounted for.  Similarly, there are independent actors.
> For example, even when a responsible employer or coach or parent
> does everything reasonably possible, those in the employment,
> charge, or care, may fail to do or choose not to do what they
> were instructed and/or trained to do.  In other words, responsible
> parties cannot be expected to anticpate and preempt all possible
> failures.
> 
> Of course, incidents of faillure can be indicators of problems
> with the responsible party and frequent incidents could even be
> evidence of problems with process and of dereliction to take
> responsive actions.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>