[EricH]

Originally Posted by Mr V

Also in general for things like Refs they do want an adult and not someone who is currently on a team who is attending the event.

Fixed that for you. The key things here are "apparent conflict of interest" and "perceived maturity". (OP, this following part is for you.)

See, the refs (and other similar types, but I'll focus on the refs) need to be as bias-free as possible, or at the very least look like it. If a ref is attending an event, their team should not be, and if the team is at the event, the ref should not be reffing. This is not always possible--if it were strictly enforced, there are quite a few cases where there wouldn't be enough refs at an event--but as much as possible, it's what the VC would be striving for. OTOH, team mentors can make great refs--they know the rules better than an "outside" party. There are mitigation strategies in place for conflict of interest, often as simple as having a ref sit out for their team's matches.

But the other part of this is the maturity factor. For "some reason", younger refs tend to be seen as "not experienced enough". That may be true, and often is. OTOH, you could also have a very experienced ref who is in fact younger. But, to the spectator, the ref just doesn't know what he's doing, and is an easy target for questioning the head ref about his calls. (Whether that's actually the case...)

Now insert some other key volunteer with impact on the score for "ref". Same arguments apply.