Creating a Pregame

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Also, two wrongs never make a right BUT if I call a charge and you have similar play call it a charge. Again, if i completely screwed up mine then you call what you see. but if mine is 50 50 and yours is also 50 50 lets have the same thing.

The problem with this line of thinking and when coaches clamor about inconsistency is that consistency is at the mercy of the judgment of the officials, which is not always going to be the same.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by SC Official

The problem with this line of thinking and when coaches clamor about inconsistency is that consistency is at the mercy of the judgment of the officials, which is not always going to be the same.

That is why we have a pregame. There are 50/50 calls. I want you to think about what has been called earlier. If you have a call that can go either way im going to take note of it. If i have a similar play--50/50, then im going to have the same call.

and this may not work at lower levels. judgment can vary widely from person to person at those levels. At the higher levels you will find that judgment of officials is similar.

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by BigCat

That is why we have a pregame. There are 50/50 calls. I want you to think about what has been called earlier. If you have a call that can go either way im going to take note of it. If i have a similar play--50/50, then im going to have the same call.

and this may not work at lower levels. judgment can vary widely from person to person at those levels. At the higher levels you will find that judgment of officials is similar.

While I understand the intent I have dropped this from my pregame. The primary reason is that I'm not going to be looking at your play close enough to know it if was "50/50" (I might not even look at it at all if I'm watching my PCA). I also really don't think there are 50/50 plays. It is either a foul or it isn't. A charge or a block.

I prefer to say that we should try to have consistent 2-3 minute spurts that match the game. For example, if the teams are playing good defense and are moving the ball well, we should have an especially patient whistle and not interrupt the natural flow of the game. In the next three minute spurt we may have to buckle down and take care of problem players and escalate our intensity and communication to keep the game in check.

We will always call fouls based on the rules and RSBQ but our officiating "style" should match the attitude and flow of the game. A crew is at its best when the three officials are officiating in the same, game-appropriate and time-appropriate style.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jpgc99

... we should try to have consistent 2-3 minute spurts that match the game. For example, if the teams are playing good defense and are moving the ball well, we should have an especially patient whistle ... In the next three minute spurt we may have to buckle down and take care of problem players and escalate our intensity and communication to keep the game in check ... match the attitude and flow of the game. A crew is at its best when the ... officials are officiating in the same, game-appropriate and time-appropriate style.

From my pregame: Be consistent with each other, and with what has already happened in the game. Let’s try to remember what we’ve called earlier in the game, and what we haven’t called.

Also, here in my little corner of Connecticut, we have an unofficial, unapproved, signal to communicate with each other that we need to tighten up the game little: extend fist with clockwise/counterclockwise motion, i.e., "let's tighten things up".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

... consistency is at the mercy of the judgment of the officials, which is not always going to be the same.

I found this (below) on my hard drive. I believe that it's several years old. Acknowledgments are included.

Consistency, Consistency, Consistency
Written by Tim Sloan, Bettendorf, Iowa
Released on MyReferee
Source: Arbiter
Copyright© Referee Enterprises, Inc.

In basketball, consistency is a term that few can define but almost everyone can recognize and appreciate in a crew. Provided that a referee doesn't make the game dangerous or take the competitiveness out of it, the good coaches and teams will adjust to what the zebras give them. In fact, you can often pick those coaches' voices out from the mob behind you. Instead of asking, "How could you call that a foul?" they're reminding you, "If you're going to call it at that end. ..."

Consistency for basketball officials really exists on four levels and it's important for their upward mobility to succeed on all four of them.

Self-consistency. Most have heard the debate about whether a foul in the first quarter should necessarily be a foul in the fourth quarter or vice versa. Generically, a foul is a foul. But if you divide them up as safety, advantage-disadvantage and game control fouls, there are many successful officials who preach flexibility on the latter. They feel that you can change the mood of a game for the worse by being too rigid or too loose at the wrong times. Maybe so, but you still have to maintain a level of predictability during a game. If you're like most, trying to deliberately change your standard for calling a foul during a game is like trying to write with your other hand. It's clumsy, frustrating and not very pretty. Changing your standard depends too much on your current mindset. So, it's reasonable to believe that self-consistency over the course of a game breaks down as a result of other factors. Some of the principal ones are fatigue, attitude toward the game and comfort.

Fatigue is an easy one. An official whose heart isn't getting enough blood to the legs isn't getting enough to the brain either. Attention to keys and concentration dwindle as the game wears on and so do the responses. There is no real substitute for being in condition to handle the game. Attitude toward the game changes when the official forgets what I consider to be the golden rule: "You're paid to be here so it doesn't matter what you think of the experience." Call the game and don't cheat them with "good enough." Comfort doesn't refer to the fit of your compression shorts. It means how you're reacting to your surroundings: Do you feel safe? Are people or surroundings distracting you? There are people who can sleep soundly in an orchestra pit and there are referees who can cheerfully blank out the most hostile of environments and keep on doing their jobs. They don't let the fear of a lynching change how they call a game. Learn to deal with stress or learn to manage the issues that threaten you. The great officials can do that.

The bottom line is that the participants need to be able to trust you if you want to keep getting called back. And having the physical and emotional tools to call it consistently is paramount.

Consistency within the crew. Mechanically, I think it's far easier for referees who have never met to work together in a three-person crew than two. That's because they can focus on a more confined area and have to rely less intuitively on their partners to watch their backs for them. There's less of a need for a "system." That goes for crews who have worked together for years, too. Unfortunately, the flip side of that "independence" is the same partners might have more trouble staying "in sync" with one another during a game. If they're paying less attention to what their comrades are doing, they're probably not calling exactly what the others are calling either. You want everyone calling it the same way.

Crewmembers have to establish a reputation for working to the same standard in the same situations throughout the game. Unless you can find identical triplets somewhere, it inevitably means that even the best officials have to exercise some give-and-take in their judgments to leverage their success as a crew.

Consistency from crew to crew. One of the most underestimated factors in a crew's potential for success this week is what the coaches had to put up with last week. If the officials come in and put on a completely different show than the last gang did, one crew's going to get it in the neck. Somebody in authority has to be communicating with crews and telling them how their products differ - good or bad. It's even more critical that those crews listen and adjust. A great way to get booted out of a conference is to shrug off how you differ from other crews and say, "Take it or leave it." They'll leave it.

Perhaps the right word isn't consistency but capability. In manufacturing, a consistent process is one that always gives the same result but that result isn't necessarily the one you want. A capable process is one that consistently gives the desired results. Assigners want officials who reward their confidence in them by turning in capable performances night after night.

Fortunately, capability is a quality you can develop if you're willing to work at it. And it certainly pays off when you do.