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.

[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.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

drew barry wasn't even on the court, brent barry might've been fouled by fisher in my opinion

and neither was coby bryant whoever wrote that

I got the wrong Barry on the court. But I still stand by my observation, no matter which Barry had the ball and made that move. Even my younger son Andy, who isn't a basketball official like MTD, Jr., is called it the same way as I did as soon as he saw the play on SportsCenter this morning. Of course if it had been the 'old man' Rick Barr, he would still be crying in his beer about how he was fouled and it wasn't called.

MTD, Sr.

[bigda65]

Rich,

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

[TussAgee11]

I disagree totally. Players don't get calls in the NBA, officials judge the action and rule accordingly (unless you're Donaghy )

Basketball is a different story than baseball. Lots more gray area in basketball... subjective judgment.

If something were to happen like in the OP, I would probably ignore it. Why? Because in the 1st inning, I'm probably ignoring it too if I'm not above 80% sure of my call. I would run down the call through a checklist, and if it can't pass call sustainability, I'm not calling it. Will I be able to sustain that level of call throughout the game? This principle is used primarily in basketball, but at times, perhaps we can use the same philosophy.

Another way to think about it. Lets say that exact play happens 3 times in the game. I'm 60% OBS on each one. If I call OBS on every one, there is only a 21% chance I got them all right...

Plays like the one above, there is no call until proven otherwise. If I am sure I have an OBS in the bottom of the 7th, I'll take it, but if I'm not sure, I'll pass on it.

Just my .02.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

I disagree totally. Players don't get calls in the NBA, officials judge the action and rule accordingly (unless you're Donaghy )

Well, I gotta disagree completely with that. I've been officiating basketball for nigh on 50 years....and I don't have a clue as to what constitutes a "foul" in the NBE(the WWE with a ball). There just ain't no rhyme nor reason, or any consistency involved anymore either imo. You can apply that statement to violations like traveling and palming also.

The NBE is entertainment oriented, not sports oriented per se, and the league is called that way. Hell, the NBE still doesn't know what, if any, bad calls that Donaghy actually made. Their criteria, whatever the hell it is, showed Donaghy as being one of their better and more accurate play callers, even in games that he threw. That ought to tell you something right there. Note that I'm not knocking NBE officials either. They have to be the most scrutinized and over-trained officiating body in the world. Every single call is analyzed and graded, and Big Brother is watching every move. The problem lies with the direction that NBE officials are being given, again imo only. As I said, the NBE is entertainment oriented, and it wants its games officiated that way. If you want to critique the officials, you might just as well critique the guys officiating the Harlem Globetrotters' games also. In both sets of games, the officials are told how they have to call a game. Iow, if you want to watch the NBE and Trotter games for their entertainment value, fine. Just don't take either of them seriously.

The NBE in it's current reincarnation is simply unwatchable anymore, imo only. You've got a ton of players who can't shoot or pass worth a damn, but they can dunk and kick the sh!t out of their opponents(and trash-talk while doing so).

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bigda65

Rich,

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

I hate the NBA, but I hate this tiresome, unfounded nonsense even more. Back it up with facts. Hint: You can't.

[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.

[SanDiegoSteve]

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