Why don't refs face the media after a game?

[Cosmonaut]

Players and coaches must face the media whether they win or lose to discuss their performance in the game they just played or coached. Often discussing things they did right or wrong during the game.

Why aren't refs subjected to the same process? Refs play just as a big a part in the game as the players, and when they make bad calls their part in the game is highlighted even more.

Everyone on this board supports a team or player that has been rightfully and wrongfully done by the refs, so shouldn't everyone agree refs should be subjected by the media as it might clean up the bad calls that currently effect the outcome of games.

Also the nba is now releasing end of game logs of referee calls, but what is the point of this if the nba isn't using the results of these results to deter bad refereeing?
Do refs need to be paid more so that their performance and accuracy increases? Thus when mistakes are made they are subjected to stricter guidelines such as suspensions, retraining, fines and even being fired when a refs performance slips after a certain amount of bad calls.

*Discuss*

P.S this is not a specific team or player based discussion as referees affect every team and player.

[lilteapot]

They're paid to officiate basketball games as objectively as they can. If the media were to ask them about every questionable call then they'd need hour long press conferences

[Real Men Wear Green]

Refs are only noticed when they screw up. So the only questions they would be asked would be about bad calls. The refs have a collective bargaining agreement and if the NBA wants them to sit down after each game and explain why they screwed up to angry hometown reporters every time they get a call wrong they'd have to give the refs something in return and it would come down to more money. Seeing as no one watches the game or supports the NBA in any way because they want to know what the refs are thinking it's not worth it to the owners to pay out more money to get the refs to answer tough questions. Especially when the answers to those questions potentially make the league look bad (refs generally have no experience with PR and many of them would say things that would sound foolish, explaining mistakes isn't easy).

[Im Still Ballin]

Refs are only noticed when they screw up. So the only questions they would be asked would be about bad calls. The refs have a collective bargaining agreement and if the NBA wants them to sit down after each game and explain why they screwed up to angry hometown reporters every time they get a call wrong they'd have to give the refs something in return and it would come down to more money. Seeing as no one watches the game or supports the NBA in any way because they want to know what the refs are thinking it's not worth it to the owners to pay out more money to get the refs to answer tough questions. Especially when the answers to those questions potentially make the league look bad (refs generally have no experience with PR and many of them would say things that would sound foolish, explaining mistakes isn't easy).
Repped, brother.

[Cosmonaut]

Refs are only noticed when they screw up. So the only questions they would be asked would be about bad calls. The refs have a collective bargaining agreement and if the NBA wants them to sit down after each game and explain why they screwed up to angry hometown reporters every time they get a call wrong they'd have to give the refs something in return and it would come down to more money. Seeing as no one watches the game or supports the NBA in any way because they want to know what the refs are thinking it's not worth it to the owners to pay out more money to get the refs to answer tough questions. Especially when the answers to those questions potentially make the league look bad (refs generally have no experience with PR and many of them would say things that would sound foolish, explaining mistakes isn't easy).


Good answer.

It is true they are more in the spotlight after screwing up, but that doesn't mean people don't notice when refs make a good call.
If more money helps solve the issue of the quality of refereeing in the nba, shouldn't it be done? and surely people want to know what the refs are thinking when referees make a bad call at certain points of the game.
The league looks bad every bad decision that is made. Is it not in the NBA's best interest to find ways to improve the quality of refereeing in the game so its reputation can remain high?
Players go through PR and media training. I am sure referees can be taught how to deal with the media as well. I would imagine they could deal with the media better than a lot of players can

[Real Men Wear Green]

Good answer.

It is true they are more in the spotlight after screwing up, but that doesn't mean people don't notice when refs make a good call.
If more money helps solve the issue of the quality of refereeing in the nba, shouldn't it be done? and surely people want to know what the refs are thinking when referees make a bad call at certain points of the game.
The league looks bad every bad decision that is made. Is it not in the NBA's best interest to find ways to improve the quality of refereeing in the game so its reputation can remain high?
Players go through PR and media training. I am sure referees can be taught how to deal with the media as well. I would imagine they could deal with the media better than a lot of players can
Making the refs answer questions won't improve the quality of their officiating it just adds a little more pressure. Unless they aren't currently doing their best and we assume answering questions improves effort the issues aren't related.

PR training could improve the refs at press conferences but there will still be some struggles as they get used to it and as there's no real benefit to putting them in front of the media it's not worth doing.