Thanks :)

Can I ask what made you call the flopping T? Was it egregious or a player safety issue?

It was egregious. 5th or 6th grade YMCA (been a few years).

Player falls back without any contact (plenty of space between him and his opponent). I warn him, warn his coach, and we play on.

Shortly after that, he's preparing to defend the PG who is coming across the division line. Just as the PG gets within closely guarded distance, this kid falls backward and slides about six feet.

I really had no choice at that point.

Same here, Cameron. I see this several times a season and the ball almost always starts with at least a bit of a bounce. The one time I did see the ball bounce/roll from OOB across the line into the court I passed on it because the team that did it was down 30 with less than a minute to go and I admired the player's effort to continue to compete even though she and her team had zero chance to win.

yeah, I was being a bit technical with that. The 1" off the floor is what we'll normally see.

It's still a dumb way to do it.

This way of thinking is dead. Both the NFHS and NCAA killed it several years ago with directives to call throw-in violations even when there is no defensive pressure.

I said I'd call it. How is my way of thinking dead?

9.2.5 Situation A
Sorry to Adam. I did misunderstand his post. I should have quoted this one.

I appreciate it, thanks.

We live in a time when every call we make can be videotaped from a variety of angles and people, then be edited, zoomed, etc as they see fit. This doesn't mean we change the way the game is officiated, but it does mean at any give nmoment a coach, AD, assignor, evaluator etc. Can end up with a look at something you called/didn't call and you are going to need to justify your decision to someone.

Some people are more comfortable justifying or debating. Others want to be as by the book as possible. The when in Rome strategy is also a good one to employ here.

In terms of the OP. If everyone is focused on the end result of play and it might have touched the end line then I'll probably pass for game management reasons. If as the OP implied it spent 20-30 inches movnig out of bounds you have to get this because someone else is and you are going to have a hard time defending that you didn't see it.

In regards to the "rolling" strategy as a whole. We used it a few times back when 'ghettoblasters' were our sound system at games. We specifically rolled it because the coach wanted the defense to come forward to try to touch it as it advnaced beside you up the floor. This way as they reached for the ball the really atheletic skilled player beside it (not me) would try to time their pickup and shot to that reach to garner a foul call on a 3. If defense played it smart then they could pick it up and go with a flat footed defender immediately in front of them.

I think this is a rather ridiculous statement to make. An official, like me, who is unlikely to have a whistle on this play isnt going to have it for either team so its definitely not favoring one team over another.

One of the two main people who trained me, who assigns HS and some college ball, consistently said "don't make violations your best call." Not saying you are doing that at all here but his point was that while you should get all of the obvious violations, your focus should be on having high accuracy with fouls and judgement on contact situations.

For me, there is some advantage/disadvantage and game management consideration to some violations. I'm passing on some carrying violations, non-obvious travels that occur 60 plus feet away from the basket and with no defender present.

As Adam said, check your local listings. My current assigner for most of the HS games I work supports this "philosophy" and believes this is a common sense approach to officiating.

I realize that many will disagree.

Thanks. This refers to the defensive pressure consideration.

I'm inquiring about the language on the case play that the OP referenced about the throw-in bouncing out of bound first on a pass.

I wouldn't want to win a game thanks to a ticky-tack call like that (again... Not obvious). But maybe that's just me.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

When a team is getting beat badly their 10 second count is more like 12 seconds because my arm is moving slower then 1 second per swing. If someone has an iffy travel away from the benches and it doesnt get her past the defense I dont like to call that either. Just me but game management seems to be a big deal these days.

Local expectations will trump NFHS dictates every time.

This can be dangerous. I have seen games where the ref started being "nice" to the losing team, which assisted the team in successfully mounting a comeback.

Thanks VaTerp. I'm with you on the principle that it's important to get all of the obvious violations. I also want to make sure any violation I call is one I'm very sure of.

So it's an erring-on-the-side-of-slooooow, measured count to 10 on FTs (I've only called one of those, 9-10 years ago when I was in college reffing intramurals). But also, if it's more common violation like a travel or BC, I want to make sure I saw it.

It's a different philosophy than with fouls, particularly on clear PCs/blocks with significant contact. Hopefully I got a great look and know the call is right, but even if I'm not 100%, I'm blowing my whistle to call what I think is best based off what I saw.

The point is, advantage/disadvantage is inherently subjective, and it makes sense that fouls are where you want to focus like the big dog who trained you said.

And this is not really disagreeing with you, but I don't really see passing on a violation as part of game management, like I would on borderline fouls. I call any violation I'm sure I saw, no matter where it is or what the score is. I don't feel like it's in my power to ignore a rule violation. If I see a 3 second call (and I'm sure it's 3+ seconds), I call it (game flow can go both ways). Where trouble starts occurring is when my partner doesn't call it. I know consistency is critical, and it just drives me nuts because the easiest thing from a consistency perspective is to go by one set of policies/rules... the rulebook. But I get it 100% that local listings may vary and I should shut up about it because I am not a big dog. I just moved to a new state anyway, so maybe that philosophy is something I will have to unlearn.