Calls that may end a game

[PeteBooth]

Hi all:

Do not know how many of you are NBA fans but last nights game between the Spurs / Lakers is the premise for my post.

At the end of the game the Spurs Brent Barry attempted a 3 point shot. He at first faked the shot and got the Lakers Derek Fisher airborn but instead of following through with the shot Barry went to the side. There was definitely contact and most of the analysts agreed it was a Foul but not something that should be called to possibly end the game. (Barry would have had 3 free throws)

About 2-3 yrs ago there was a contoversial balk call to end a college world series game. It centered around F1 not coming to a stop/pause.

So my question?

As baseball officials will you overlook something (Excluded in this is balls / strikes) if it's a game ender as Joey Crawford did in last night NBA game.

here is an example:

R2 base hit to right field. 3rd base coach waves R2 home. F2 is just about to receive the ball (ie' the ball is right near home plate and F2 is ready to catch it on the bounce) and blocks the plate as R2 comes sliding in and F2 tags the runner for out number 3.

According to the new rules this is OBS, however, is it a BLATANT OBS in which to end the game on?

In a nutshell what's your philiosphy on a game ending call.

Pete Booth

[TwoBits]

Obstruction in the first inning should be called the same as obstruction in the last inning. Make the CORRECT call, and get ready for a coach to come unglued.

[Robert E. Harrison]

All of us have our own philosophy.
1. Get the call right no matter what.
2. Call the way the assigner/league/commission dictates.
3. Make the expected call in the expected situation.
4. Apply the spirit of the rule and know the letter of the rule.
5. Get even with that coach/batter/player because he just showed me up.
6. That team is too stupid to live much less benefit from my call.
7. This game is out of hand, lets get it over.

I am sure you can add more.

I try to get the call right most of the time but sometimes a few of the other reasons get in the way of my philosophy.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by Robert E. Harrison

6. That team is too stupid to live much less benefit from my call.

/thread

[canadaump6]

Call it as you see it. Who cares about the score or what inning it is? Adding the element of principle into your calls will make things too complicated, and increase the probability of blowing one.

[TussAgee11]

There are times you do not call what you saw. The truely great officials of any sport can do this.

I know that I have "seen" things that did not actually happen. I have "seen" things not happen that actually did happen. A great official can know what he saw and use that information to find out what actually happened. What actually happened may not be what you actually saw (most notably in basketball when a lot of calls are made without a steady base).

I'll give you an example. Had a call in a 15U game a couple months ago. I move to 1BLX for what I think will be a banger at the front edge of the plate. The throw came up the line, and I got caught out of position. The runner tried to avoid the catchers tag by running to the pitcher's mound side and stepping in to the plate. The catcher easily had the ball and was going to make an easy tag. As the runner passed the catcher, his hands came down (to where I could no longer see them) in a non-running motion. They came down quickly, right into the area the tag was going to be applied. 2 open hands. And then I saw the glove and the ball on the ground.

Now, did I see the INT? Nope. Did it happen. Yes. Did I call it. Yes. Very bold call, met with much aggravation from the offensive manager.

After talking with BU in the parking lot, he said it was obvious, and I got the call right.

Now, the opposite logic... had a play that I saw perfectly and passed on a call, because I had doubts whether it really happened. I'm PU, runner rounding 3rd. Coach puts up the stop sign, and reaches out and, from what I could tell, physically assisted the runner to stop and get back to 3rd. Now, that's what I saw. But I passed on the call. Why? Because a) I had this coach for many games and he's not an idiot b) There was no play anywhere on this runner and no reason for the coach to do this and most importantly c) I realized that what I saw might not have actually happened.

Asked BU about it in the parking lot, said that the coach absolutely did not touch that kid. He had the line of sight where he could "see through the play" where I was straight-lined. If I had called what I had saw I would have been dead wrong.

So, you can't always call what you see. And you can't ignore what you don't see. You have to use what you see to help you figure out what really happened. 90% of the information we gain comes through our eyes. The other 10% comes through our other senses (hearing definitely), our logic, our anticipation and readiness for a play, our understanding of call sustainability and the limitations of the position we were in to officiate that play, and a degree of common sense.

I might have just confused myself If this makes any sense please let me know so I can pat myself on the back.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

Joe DeRosa used to say at his camps "80% of all travels called aren't actually travels"

"60% of the time, it works every time."

[SanDiegoSteve]

If you can't spell Kobe's name right, perhaps you shouldn't mention him in your posts. Lakers rule. End of discussion.

[bigda65]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

If you can't spell Kobe's name right, perhaps you shouldn't mention him in your posts. Lakers rule. End of discussion.

SDS,

Sorry for the spelling error. I don't dislike him, think he is an awesome player.
I just think he gets calls that the average joe doesn't.
Jordan got calls too!

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Lakers rule......

And your Padres drool.....................


Tim.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Hi all:

Do not know how many of you are NBA fans but last nights game between the Spurs / Lakers is the premise for my post.

At the end of the game the Spurs Brent Barry attempted a 3 point shot. He at first faked the shot and got the Lakers Derek Fisher airborn but instead of following through with the shot Barry went to the side. There was definitely contact and most of the analysts agreed it was a Foul but not something that should be called to possibly end the game. (Barry would have had 3 free throws)

About 2-3 yrs ago there was a contoversial balk call to end a college world series game. It centered around F1 not coming to a stop/pause.

So my question?

As baseball officials will you overlook something (Excluded in this is balls / strikes) if it's a game ender as Joey Crawford did in last night NBA game.

here is an example:

R2 base hit to right field. 3rd base coach waves R2 home. F2 is just about to receive the ball (ie' the ball is right near home plate and F2 is ready to catch it on the bounce) and blocks the plate as R2 comes sliding in and F2 tags the runner for out number 3.

According to the new rules this is OBS, however, is it a BLATANT OBS in which to end the game on?

In a nutshell what's your philiosphy on a game ending call.

Pete Booth

Some sort of call ends EVERY game.
Watch what happens and apply the rules. Our job is not defined by the situation, it is defined by the rulebook.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Drew Barry was not fouled by Derek Fisher. In fact, if a foul did occur it should have been a foul by Drew Barry. Fisher left the floor and then Barry moved up and under Fisher.

MTD, Sr.

[bigda65]

Mark,

I agree with what you wrote to an extent, but I would bet my life, that if the roles were reversed and coby bryant was taking that shot, a foul would have been called.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bigda65

Mark,

I agree with what you wrote to an extent, but I would bet my life, that if the roles were reversed and coby bryant was taking that shot, a foul would have been called.

Bryant didn't go to the line once last night and scored 29 points.

I didn't think it was a foul at all. Sports writers and other assorted idiots are not trained basketball officials.

Verticality combined with the ball handler working through the contact. Nothing more. Even the Spurs didn't think it was a foul.

[bigda65]

Rich,

My point is this - In the NBA (Not Basketball ATALL)
Calls are based on the players not the play.