Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Actually, the L will make the majority of calls. The SEC did a study in pre-rotation era (late 1970's) that showed that on average the L will make 60% of the calls, the C will make 30% of the calls, and the T will make 10% of the calls. I would bet dollars to donuts that if one were to do a study today, that those percentages will still be valid.
The result of the study does not mean that one should not stop officiating when in the T, but that most of the action is in the L's PCA because what is in the the L's PCA? The Basket.
MTD, Sr.
|
I've seen more recent studies both from the college level and the NBA. Both have the Lead making around 65% of the calls. With the new emphasis on handchecking, I could understand if the Trail's percentage is up for the past few years. Overall, I can tell you that your understanding is correct and the reason that the NCAAM went back to opposite table switching on fouls. The C was getting left out of the game for long periods of time while the other two officials made most of the calls. I don't know where deecee got his info, but it's not accurate.
I believe that Rich explained the 3-person philosophy very well. The Lead has primary coverage near the basket and most secondary defenders on drives. That is going to result in the most foul calls. The C has off-ball and rebounding, which are both areas to clean up rough play and get what is necessary. That requires focus and diligence to officiate generally away from the center of action. Likely fewer calls will be made here though. The T has most ball handlers on the perimeter and post traveling.
I think that the mindset to "be aggressive" when officiating is a mistake. Officials should always be patient and let the action occur. Our job is to position ourselves (and our crew) such that we get good looks at plays, but don't anticipate illegal activity. I was taught by one of the current NCAAM tourney guys to think that a clean block is coming or a good screen is about to occur instead of looking for a foul or a crash. You still anticipate the action, you just shift your mindset from thinking that something illegal is about to happen to thinking that a defender or offensive player is going to make a positive play. When that doesn't occur, the illegal action stands out much clearer to you. Also thinking in this manner prevents you from penalizing what is borderline or not there. This is the biggest point. If you are thinking a foul situation is about to happen, then you are much more likely to blow the whistle on debatable contact. Whereas if you anticipate the player making a good play, then what you call will be the more obvious illegal contact and you will get a reputation for only calling solid fouls. Coaches and players end up not questioning your decisions as much. How you are perceived has a huge impact on rising up the ladder.