Call The T

Adam

M&M Guy wrote
Uh, oh...I'm thinking like you? 😮

😃

I'd offer some of Padgett's meds, but he seems to be doing well and I wouldn't want to take any away from him.

Bad Zebra

JRutledge wrote
We have had this discussion before, but this is the difference between a HS official and an official that works a lot of college. The HS official is trying to prove they need to call something, while the college official is usually trained to be a little more restraint and use a little bit of common sense. That is why you see officials spending a lot of time trying to justify this as a foul.

Peace

Yeah. That's it. All us HS guys without any common sense 🙄

M&M Guy

JRutledge wrote
We have had this discussion before, but this is the difference between a HS official and an official that works a lot of college. The HS official is trying to prove they need to call something, while the college official is usually trained to be a little more restraint and use a little bit of common sense. That is why you see officials spending a lot of time trying to justify this as a foul.

Peace

Jeff, while I wholeheartedly agree with your general principle, I might disagree a little with your wording. I don't think it's strictly a difference between HS and college officials, I think it's a difference between an average official and a great official, no matter the level. There are great HS officials that understand this principle that do not work any college ball. Of course, if you work at the college level, it is probable you already understand these subtle differences.

Mark Padgett

Snaqwells wrote
I'd offer some of Padgett's meds, but he seems to be doing well and I wouldn't want to take any away from him.

I'm always receptive to a cash offer. 😉

Adam

Mark Padgett wrote
I'm always receptive to a cash offer. 😉

capitalist 😀

JRutledge

Bad Zebra wrote
Yeah. That's it. All us HS guys without any common sense :rolleyes:

I did not say all. But your justification for this is based on a HS principle which you admitted that "In a HS game, I am calling a T." And the funny thing there is not "HS principle. When I read material about officiating, I almost never see, "At the HS level we do this...... and at the college level we do this......."

I know I officiate the same way at the college level as I do at the HS level when the rules and interpretations are exactly the same. The major difference is the players are bigger and faster. But the way I deal with coaches, conduct, and situations is exactly the same.

Peace

canuckref

JRutledge wrote
I hate to break it to you, expectations change as the levels move up. Sorry, but that is the reality here
snip

Peace

Jr: I have come to respect your opinion on many topics here in my reading, but I have to say i could not disagree more with you and others who do not support calling a technical foul for slamming the ball. In this case he (CDR) was clearly angry and out of control and committed an unsporting act, then looked directly at the official like he was waiting for the "t" signal. I think calling a technical in this situation would have been a huge help to the game. it would preserve the integrity of the officials involved and the rules. Instead they gave a star player a break in special circumstances (nc game). I lost much respect for the crew of that game and their judgment. I think I'll have to give your replies here a second look if I follow your rationale posted here for not calling a technical foul. Sure it would have been a madhouse if he called the t, but instead the opposing team was cheated out of a legitimate free throw opportunity.

By not calling the t we create these "spoiled" players and special rules for special times which ultimately erode the integrity, spirit and purpose of the game. It's a technical every time I see it at the varsity level. the only exception would be a player making a hard dribble and catching it, not what we saw in the cdr example.

JRutledge

M&M Guy wrote
Jeff, while I wholeheartedly agree with your general principle, I might disagree a little with your wording. I don't think it's strictly a difference between HS and college officials, I think it's a difference between an average official and a great official, no matter the level. There are great HS officials that understand this principle that do not work any college ball. Of course, if you work at the college level, it is probable you already understand these subtle differences.

I agree with the great part of your point of view. But in all the sports I work, college officials go to more camps, attend more training sessions and do more to get better because they have to. I am also talking about all the sports I work where HS officials can quote that rulebook, quote the mechanics book and if you tell them something that is outside of both they cannot function. I would agree that is very simplistic, but I can tell a mile away when someone is surprised by a common philosophy that is used at the college level.

Peace

JRutledge

canuckref wrote
Jr: I have come to respect your opinion on many topics here in my reading, but I have to say i could not disagree more with you and others who do not support calling a technical foul for slamming the ball. In this case he (CDR) was clearly angry and out of control and committed an unsporting act, then looked directly at the official like he was waiting for the "t" signal. I think calling a technical in this situation would have been a huge help to the game. it would preserve the integrity of the officials involved and the rules. Instead they gave a star player a break in special circumstances (nc game). I lost much respect for the crew of that game and their judgment. I think I'll have to give your replies here a second look if I follow your rationale posted here for not calling a technical foul. Sure it would have been a madhouse if he called the t, but instead the opposing team was cheated out of a legitimate free throw opportunity.

This is not whether you like what I have to say. You do not need to qualify your statement to disagree. But if that is the case, why did officials that have more experience than you and I combined (which would only take one of those officials BTW) not call a foul? Now you might be a good official, but if the reaction at the time was "that should not be a T" by many that were in the chat room, why did the officials that have more experience than most of us here think differently? Everything I am telling you now is the same thing we said when it was happening live.

canuckref wrote
By not calling the t we create these "spoiled" players and special rules for special times which ultimately erode the integrity, spirit and purpose of the game. It's a technical every time I see it at the varsity level. the only exception would be a player making a hard dribble and catching it, not what we saw in the cdr example.

First of all you do not see a lot of Ts in college because those players at that level know better. Coaches have total control over those players. You hardly ever see a reaction to any foul that you see in even a HS game. And if this was so bad, then there better be Ts in every HS game I have seen. I do not see Ts in every HS game when I see an even bigger reaction.

BTW, you are not just disagreeing with me. There are a lot of officials here that you are disagreeing with you on this.

Peace

Brad

If the officials had called a T in this situation it would have been all that the sportscasters, sportswriters, fans, coaches, and anyone else talked about all this week. And it would not have been talk *praising* the officials for making a tough call!

Instead, using sound judgment and common-sense, by NOT calling the tech in a situation that did NOT clearly warrant it, we ended up with arguably the best national championship game in the last ten years -- one of the best of all time.

Sometimes we have to take a step back from being 2 inches from the rule book to understand the game and the context in which things happen. No play happens in a vacuum.

Camron Rust

canuckref wrote
In this case he (CDR) was clearly angry

Perhaps, but for what....and there is no rule about being angry.

canuckref wrote
and out of control and

Again, no rule against it.

canuckref wrote
committed an unsporting act,

debateable to be sure, but was it really.

canuckref wrote
then looked directly at the official like he was waiting for the "t" signal.

Are your sure...or did the ref get his attention to say something to him.

canuckref wrote
I think calling a technical in this situation would have been a huge help to the game. it would preserve the integrity of the officials involved and the rules.

If they had called it, it would have detracted from the game. Instead of everyone talking about how Memphis threw the game away through turnovers and missed FTs, they'd be talking only about the T and the KU championship would have an asterisk by it for being decided by a marginal T.

canuckref wrote
Instead they gave a star player a break in special circumstances (nc game). I lost much respect for the crew of that game and their judgment. I think I'll have to give your replies here a second look if I follow your rationale posted here for not calling a technical foul. Sure it would have been a madhouse if he called the t, but instead the opposing team was cheated out of a legitimate free throw opportunity.

canuckref wrote
By not calling the t we create these "spoiled" players and special rules for special times which ultimately erode the integrity, spirit and purpose of the game.

No, I wouldn't call it on any player under the same game situation....even at Varsity by a non-star player.

canuckref wrote
It's a technical every time I see it at the varsity level. the only exception would be a player making a hard dribble and catching it, not what we saw in the cdr example.

That is always "accepted" if that is the only action.

fullor30

Brad wrote
If the officials had called a T in this situation it would have been all that the sportscasters, sportswriters, fans, coaches, and anyone else talked about all this week. And it would not have been talk *praising* the officials for making a tough call!

Instead, using sound judgment and common-sense, by NOT calling the tech in a situation that did NOT clearly warrant it, we ended up with arguably the best national championship game in the last ten years -- one of the best of all time.

Sometimes we have to take a step back from being 2 inches from the rule book to understand the game and the context in which things happen. No play happens in a vacuum.

With all the dissertations in this thread.........it boils down to your two words,
common sense, which by the way can be used for just about anything.

I don't have to be a final four official to know that a T wasn't warranted in that sitch.

just another ref

JRutledge wrote
I hate to break it to you, expectations change as the levels move up. Sorry, but that is the reality here.

JRutledge wrote
I know I officiate the same way at the college level as I do at the HS level when the rules and interpretations are exactly the same. The major difference is the players are bigger and faster. But the way I deal with coaches, conduct, and situations is exactly the same.

Does this mean that you fail to meet someone's expectations at one level or the other?

JRutledge

just another ref wrote
Does this mean that you fail to meet someone's expectations at one level or the other?

I work college basketball, so the answer is no. 😉

Peace

Rock Chalk

I don't know if this has been talked about in this thread, but if you want a T for Roberts slamming the ball down, why aren't you calling for a T for Kansas having their whole team on the floor with 2 seconds left in OT? watch the replay...they are all 5-8 feet onto the court celebrating.

If you want CDR to get a T for doing what he did, shouldn't you also be calling for a T for too many players on the court? I mean isn't Kansas making a mockery of the game by playing 13 on 5? That doesn't seem fair to me.

By the way

ROCK CHALK JAYHAWK

« Previous Page