Disagreement with Crew Partner

[Rich]

Originally Posted by rlarry

My question would be if it was LGP, why wasn't it player control? Sounds like the defender did what she was supposed to do, you wanted to penalize her with a travel, your 17 year partner wanted to penalize her with a foul

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

He ruled it incidental contact and the offensive player subsequently traveled. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

[BigCat]

I'm glad you stuck with it. There are far too many people who penalize people for being big. When a smaller person runs into a much bigger/stronger person the smaller will bounce off. That's not a push on the big person…Doesn't look nice but it isn't a foul.

[packersowner]

In my small corner of the world, we pre-game these situations and its generally been the rule of the land, that if your partner comes running in, we go with whatever the partner has.

A couple of weeks ago, my partner had a jump ball, I came flying in because I had a travel first. Since we pre-game this, my partner went with my call. At halftime, we discussed and I was in the wrong based on the information my partner gave me. I apologized and we made a few jokes about it, went out and had a great 2nd half.

I like this approach, even though some may argue it, because it allowed us to move on mentally in both the 1st and 2nd halves. I would venture to guess you spent the next 15 minutes thinking about what happened.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by packersowner

In my small corner of the world, we pre-game these situations and its generally been the rule of the land, that if your partner comes running in, we go with whatever the partner has.

A couple of weeks ago, my partner had a jump ball, I came flying in because I had a travel first. Since we pre-game this, my partner went with my call. At halftime, we discussed and I was in the wrong based on the information my partner gave me. I apologized and we made a few jokes about it, went out and had a great 2nd half.

I like this approach, even though some may argue it, because it allowed us to move on mentally in both the 1st and 2nd halves. I would venture to guess you spent the next 15 minutes thinking about what happened.

If a partner comes running into me, I'm going with his call even if it's wrong...unless it's a crunch-time play.

Had a partner this season come in a tell me I got a OOB call wrong that happened right in front of me, so I changed my call. Later in the game, in the last 2 minutes of 1-2 point game, I'm Lead and ball goes out OOB on the opposite side of the lane after a missed free throw. Same partner is the Center on this play, I ask for help, and he says he didn't see it.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If a partner comes running into me, I'm going with his call even if it's wrong...unless it's a crunch-time play.

Had a partner this season come in a tell me I got a OOB call wrong that happened right in front of me, so I changed my call. Later in the game, in the last 2 minutes of 1-2 point game, I'm Lead and ball goes out OOB on the opposite side of the lane after a missed free throw. Same partner is the Center on this play, I ask for help, and he says he didn't see it.

I had something funny happen last night. I asked for help too quickly (and got nothing) and then, slowly, all 10 players started for the other end while my hand was still up.

Thankfully the visiting coach was reasonable and winning by 25. I was the new lead and as I went past him he was laughing and I told him his players gave it away. He knew.

What was less enjoyable was when a partner openly shrugged when I asked for help earlier this season and I had to go to the arrow.

[Camron Rust]

Ignoring for a moment his stated reason and whether he was actually correct in his judgement...

His call would normally have been the right call. It happened first. If he felt the player didn't have LGP, the player didn't have LGP. Perhaps he saw something you didn't. The fact that it was in your primary is irrelevant at this point (even if he shouldn't have been there). You can't overrule his call. He can't overrule yours either. However, your travel occurred after what he judged to be a foul.....thus the ball was dead by the time your travel occurred so it didn't happen.

Again, I'm not saying his call was right or advisable, but it was his call and it came first.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Ignoring for a moment his stated reason and whether he was actually correct in his judgement...

His call would normally have been the right call. It happened first. If he felt the player didn't have LGP, the player didn't have LGP. Perhaps he saw something you didn't. The fact that it was in your primary is irrelevant at this point (even if he shouldn't have been there). You can't overrule his call. He can't overrule yours either. However, your travel occurred after what he judged to be a foul.....thus the ball was dead by the time your travel occurred so it didn't happen.

Again, I'm not saying his call was right or advisable, but it was his call and it came first.

He called it for a reason other than actually observing that the defender didn't have LGP.

[VaTerp]

This is a prime example of why I HATE when people pre-game "if there's a body on the floor we MUST have a whistle." No, we don't. Rule 4-27-2 clearly states otherwise.

I'm glad the OP stuck with his call in this situation.

As for takeaways on disagreeing with partners, it happens. Do what you think is best for the game and move on. Some people can't. And that's their problem IMO. Not always something you can do about people who choose to be difficult other than refuse to let them bring you down with them.

[Adam]

I agree with the concept of going with partner's call, but that involves a level of trust in your partners. I would have done as the OP did in this case, because the partner wanted to change it to a completely incorrect call just to reduce drama. I'm willing to change OOB calls, or call a travel if my partner sees one before my PC call, or a number of other things.

I can't make myself do this one, though.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree with the concept of going with partner's call, but that involves a level of trust in your partners. I would have done as the OP did in this case, because the partner wanted to change it to a completely incorrect call just to reduce drama. I'm willing to change OOB calls, or call a travel if my partner sees one before my PC call, or a number of other things.

I can't make myself do this one, though.

I'm not sure you're making yourself do anything. The partner, called a foul that happened before the travel. Even assuming that the call was horrifically incorrect, what basis does one official have to reject that call?

(Granted that the partner did not make the correct explanation on why his call should take precedence.)

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I'm not sure you're making yourself do anything. The partner, called a foul that happened before the travel. Even assuming that the call was horrifically incorrect, what basis does one official have to reject that call?

(Granted that the partner did not make the correct explanation on why his call should take precedence.)

The basis that the contact happened in OP's area, and the logic for making the call from partner was completely faulty.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I'm not sure you're making yourself do anything. The partner, called a foul that happened before the travel. Even assuming that the call was horrifically incorrect, what basis does one official have to reject that call?

(Granted that the partner did not make the correct explanation on why his call should take precedence.)

I'm a pretty dominant personality on the court, have been on issues where I was both right and wrong since the first day. If partner calls the block and reports it, I probably put the ball in play and refer the coach to him when he asks what the girl did wrong. I'll tell him how stupid a call it was when we're in private.

If he comes in and talks to me, though, I highly doubt I'm backing down in the OP scenario. By talking to me, he's opening the door for me to override his personality. 17 years means nothing to me (I know too many officials in their 17th first season).

I know we don't overrule, I'm just explaining how it's likely to go down on a real court.