|
Originally Posted by drinkeii
But when the rules say a specific kind of contact is illegal, and the officials are told to ignore that kind of contact after a "good" play (which the rules don't define, nor do they ever say "...unless a crowd-pleasing play took place, in which case, ignore the foul..."), they are being told to officiate a game in a way in which the rules never intended.
We have entire committees that write and approve the rules. I'm not saying I agree with every rule out there, but I use them as they are written, and as the cases say we should interpret them, in officiating my games. Just because an official, an assignor, etc, decides they don't like a rule doesn't mean they have the right to just decide to change the game in favor of their opinion, and rewrite the rules for that game in the way they would like to see them written.
I didn't sign up to officiate "me-sketball", or "assignor-sketball" - I signed up to officiate basketball. Basketball, like any game, has rules, and I would think that as officials for a sport, we have an obligation to these rules. I have always said my heirarchy for officiating is "1. Player Safety, 2. Rules, 3. Game flow". If the players play safely for their level, and play within the rules, they will have more game flow than they can handle. If they choose not to stay within the first two areas, they don't get very far into the third.
I have to say, in officiating several sports, I believe Basketball varies the most from game to game. In many sports, the players come in with a pretty good idea of what is legal and what is not, and what they can and cannot do. In basketball, the players have to adapt their entire game strategy to what the refs are calling and not calling that day. This happens to a lesser extent in other sports, but I believe is a major hurdle to the progress of this game. Coaches teach players things to break rules that they know are unlikely to be called, and tell the players to stop doing it if they get called for it - Hand Checking is a good example. It is NEVER legal, according to the rules, to touch the dribbler. Many officials allow players to "tag up" (again, defined in the rules as illegal), or even leave a hand on the dribbler as they are running (again, defined in the rules as illegal). Some officials are picky on this one, many are not. Another example would be the girls in girls games who set up with their heels over the lines or neutral zone blocks - many officials won't warn or call the violation. Some will warn. Very few will call this violation, even though it is well defined in the rules. Another example is the T for going out of bounds that existed for a few years. Very few officials called it, so the rules people changed it to a violation. Who are we to say the group who defined the rules was wrong? But we did - most people refused to call this technical foul.
I think that official use the terms "judgement" and "game management", among others, as excuses for not applying rules they don't think should be applied as they are written and intended. Good game management is not rewriting the rules to match what you would like to see the game be or become - it is officiating a game fairly, keeping everyone safe, and going home at the end feeling that you gave your best. If this includes making calls that are unpopular, so be it - the game is not written for a popularity contest for the officials.
How can you play a game without rules, or with rules that change day to day, game to game, by the person enforcing them?
|