Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam
1. You're reading way too much into what I wrote. If there had been excessive contact, I would have gone with an intentional foul on the second player and ignored the first contact. As it was, both fouls would have been called alone, but neither would have likely knocked the player to the floor without the other.
2. Your use of "cowardly" is BS, frankly. I'm following the desire of those who hire me to do a job. I don't work for "the game." I don't work for the NFHS. I work for a local association that does all of the assigning here. If I don't do the job they way they want, I won't get the next job. It's that simple. If and when I get to be an assigner, I'll consider calling it in a situation like I had yesterday.
3. I don't think the rule is there for a situation like mine, but I think you're picturing it differently than it happened. I'll take ownership of that, since you're going off of my description. I think the rule is there for the time when the contact is truly excessive. But what I think is really irrelevant. Making this call as regularly as it happens (two players fouling a shooter) would land me permanently in YMCA ball.
4. How many multiple fouls did you call last season?
|
1. Perhaps, but I still don't agree with the basic concept which you are espousing--to deliberately ignore one of the fouls and only penalize one of them when when you clearly observe both and know that by rule they both should be penalized.
2. Let me get this straight. You are purposely not doing what you know is proper because you don't wish to ruffle the feathers of the powers that be as you believe that they won't assign you games and that will cost you money. Hmmmm... I think that our departed friend JR would say that you sold out or are compromising your integrity. I wrote that it was cowardly. I'll stick by that appraisal. How is this any different from officials not whacking the home coach in an area where the school ADs directly hire the officials because they fear not getting asked to come back? Sorry, but if I go down, I'll do so doing it the way that I believe to be right. If someone doesn't hire me because I'm not afraid to make the unpopular calls, then so be it, but it won't be because any coach, assignor, or other official intimidates me into calling or not calling something that it believe in.
3. Again perhaps my visualization is different, but you wrote that a player was fouled on the way up (I'm assuming that we have a whistle at this point) and then B2 comes flying in and knocks the shooter to the floor on the way down. You even added that both players deserved a foul. So why not charge them both? That second one certainly sounds excessive to me.
Now I'm picturing a drive to the hoop here by a guard or a wing player, not a post player powering up through a double or triple team like Dwight Howard and taking contact from multiple defenders. If the former, then this situation is exactly why the multiple foul rule is in the book. It prevents that second defender from coming in late and punishing the guy taking it to the rim. Those are the kind of actions which everyone in the gym can see , and unless dealt with strongly and appropriately, will cause retaliation, further rough play, and even possibly a fight. Calling multiple fouls on post play situations will get you a steady diet of rec ball, but failing to punish a cheap shot will also prevent you from reaching where you wish. I don't normally disagree with much that you post and feel that I am being harsh with you about this, but I really feel that letting what you described go unpenalized is a serious error. What if the shooter had broken his wrist as a result of being knocked down by the second fouler? How are you going to defend a no call when asked why the crew didn't penalize B2 for anything when he caused a severe injury? If that kid had been seriously injured, could you permit B2 to continue to participate with a clear conscience?
4. None, but it wasn't because I passed on any situations that warranted it.
I guess that I've worked my share of State and Regional games and really don't care if an assignor doesn't agree with what I decide to call. I know the rules extremely well and that leads to great confidence in what I call on the court. So I already know that I have rules backing. In my opinion, any assignor who doesn't support an official in that situation is worth the heartache that I'm sure to encounter. I recall rocky road posting about a college assignor, perhaps D1, who didn't back a pregame tech that he called. That's garbage and I certainly don't wish to officiate fearful that my assignor isn't going to have my back. I'll pass on the money, if it comes to that. Fortunately, I've found that coaches like knowing that I won't hesitate to penalize them or their players because they know that I will do the same with the guys wearing the other jerseys and sitting on the other bench, plus their players are going to feel protected.