Opinion: It's OK to apply to a tournament you aren't sure you can go to

I’m currently a THR for a tournament in April. We put out our application in December and left it open for a month and then closed it Jan 1 and went about staffing and the like.

Then I had a couple excellent officials who are also friends who had worked this tournament in the past express sadness that they missed the deadline. One was ill, one forgot. Another third person didn’t apply because they just weren’t ready to think about 2025 in December, which, valid.

For a second tournament, for which I will be a CHR, I knew of another person who didn’t apply because they wanted to know about the first application, because they could only do one tournament. But the second tournament’s staffing process moved faster so that official lost their backup. (They got into one of them though but that’s somewhat lucky.)

…meanwhile…

For the first tournament, out of our applications, we sent invites. Two officials declined because they “couldn’t swing it” with their work schedule, another person declined because they had overapplied and got in everywhere and needed to limit their derby. Which, also valid.

…so, it seems like different people are treating tournament applications a bit differently, in a way that could lead to decreased opportunity for some.

Some people treat an application as a commitment. They do not apply unless they have thought it through and are committing in their hearts to attend. Other people treat an application as an expression of interest. My opinion is sort of with the second group – officials should apply to any tournament they would potentially attend, even if they are uncertain whether they can actually attend.

This would go with another expectation which is that, when you are invited, that’s when you need to make your decision and commit on-paper as well as in your heart of hearts. That extra month or two is, at least sometimes, probably enough for the first group to commit.

So the barrier to apply should be low, and the commitment should be made upon invitation. THOs should understand that until someone has been invited and committed, nothing is certain – in my experience, THOs all already expect that! (Because the “second group” of officials has always existed.)

Why bring this up? Because I feel bad about the first group of officials who missed out because they waited to apply. I feel like this might be a cultural difference similar to the “askers vs guessers” conversational style? But I feel that those who wait to apply until they are certain, which definitely comes from a place of caring and kindness, might end up at a disadvantage for it. So I was thinking that if we set the culture for this more explicitly, that might help folks not to miss out.

What do you think?

5 Likes

I think the North American pipeline of multi-day events → Regionals/Globals still suffers due to a bunch of inherent flaws in the system.

As to the systemic flaw you bring up, I suggest people apply where they want and if they’re are not committed at the time of application, then they should mention that in their application.

1 Like

I do think tournaments then need to do their due diligence in accepting people with plenty of notice.
If I need to book leave from work, pay for flights, book accommodation, go interstate or to another country etc, I’m going to need 2 months to prepare. Because I don’t want to pay for flights and the time off if I’m not going to be offered a role.

8 Likes

Notifications of selection typically ask the applicants to confirm their participation, that means that up until that point (included) it’s ok to cancel, otherwise why even ask? In other words: it’s always ok to decline selection.

Asking to commit without knowing about a selection decision is unfair. I don’t think we should do that. I don’t think anyone does that either, so I don’t think it needs to even be a topic.

That being said I have been a part of the first group that Muffin describes, as I have missed deadlines because I did not have the mental space to plan my coming season early enough and I postponed it for a little bit too long. That’s on me though.

3 Likes

I appreciate this discussion. When I was first dipping my toes into officiating (circa 2019?), I received advice from a well-respected and well-traveled official who cautioned me not to apply to tournaments that I wasn’t confident I would subsequently accept an invitation to. The rationale offered at that time was that “the powers that be” could form some sort of opinion of me as being unreliable, etc., and that I may not be selected for a future event for that reason. This seemed even more risky given my relative inexperience, as that would likely be the only opinion of me that those folks would have. I can’t imagine I’m the only novice official who’s been given this advice in the past, whether there was (or still is) any truth to it.

Over the past couple of years, I personally have avoided applying to tournaments to which I wasn’t sure I could fully commit to attending at the time of application deadlines.

Transparent cultural norms around tournament applications not being firm commitments and it “being ok” to decline an invitation would have value to me, and I suspect many others in similar shoes.

It may seem obvious to folks who have been selected for many tournaments and who know the decision-makers personally, but for someone working to “break in” to tournament officiating for the first time, it can be wildly intimidating to simply apply.

6 Likes

I agree with this sentiment.

What I think would be extremely useful if organisers made this clear when advertising for officials and in application forms. Even if we agree a norm or general expectation that an application is a firm commitment, there will still be many left unaware they can do so or getting anxious about whether they can. This will particularly affect newer officials, or ones who don’t get to do large tournaments often. I believe having it spelt out by the organisers that this is an okay thing to do would raise accessibility to a wider range of officials.

4 Likes

That was absolutely an opinion of some (at least at the time). The underlying logic was that THOing is a lot of work, and by the time invitations are being sent out, a lot of that work has already gone into formulating crews and staffing strategy. By declining, you’re causing the THO more work to go back and make changes, and by extension therefore showing some sort of lack of respect for that THO’s time.

:ox: :poop:

THOing is a lot of work. And working through declines is just a part of that job. Holding a grudge against someone that declines is petty and unprofessional. If a THO is going to black-ball an official for declining an invitation, I’m not sure that’s a THO I’d ever want to work with again (or who should be THOing in the first place).

I appreciate @dangermuffin posting this opinion (and @hammer.605 for articulating a prevalent perception) because without putting these assumptions and perceptions out there, we can’t change them.

8 Likes

Wong muffin :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes: I’m the less dangerous one.

Though I wholeheartedly agree. And if I had followed that mindset there’s no way I would have challenged myself and officiated at some of the tournaments I have. My first one I even told the THOs I was overwhelmed and they helped me figure out all out.
Most (if not all) applications have a notes field so you can put in your concerns or say I’m newer but really want to try XYZ or I want to apply, but won’t know if my PTO will get approved until [date] (also a thing I’ve had to do).
That being said, I do have at least one THO I refuse to work with. They prioritize numbers and promises over behavior and bullying and 100% will not apply if I see their name. I do this for fun, being treated like :poop: and bullied is not fun.

3 Likes

Now I wish people would ask for announcers at the same time - we need planning time too. Tired of being asked a month out to travel and not offered a stipend or food or anything.

1 Like