Disagreement with Crew Partner
 

Sitch:
A1 is smallish frame guard; B1 is a heavy set post player--prolly outweighs her by 50 pounds. First quarter action--A1 was dribbling down lane, B1 closes down in help-defense mode and established LGP, A1 drives with shoulder into B1 and A1 falls backwards [actually bounces off B1's torso] lands on her hinny while holding the ball. B1 was not displaced much at all. I am in the L position, and whistle with open-hand up, I did pause a half-a-beat to mentally digest the sitch before calling a travel on A1. Then, Partner comes running in with a whistle and calls a block on B1 (in a rather animated fashion).

Here is happened between us: we spoke off to the side [for what seemed like a long time but was prolly only 10 seconds or so] and I told partner that this was my PCA and I had a travel; he then said that “we have to call something because there's a body on the floor". He then added, "trust me, I've been officiating for 17 years and this is how it is handled in order to keep the drama down." I then told him that "I had the call in my primary and we are going with a travel." Admittedly, I believe he felt as though I was not respecting his “17 years of tenure” so to speak because he was 'short' with me the rest of the game and was not as chummy during intermission—or maybe he just continued to hold the belief that I made with wrong call. I bring this issue up to not necessarily debate the ‘correctness of the call’ but to illustrate how we as officials might become suspect to irrational decisions due to the influence of another official who may try to cite their ‘’years of service’’ as a means of justifying the correctness of their call versus relying on the directives from the Officials Manual.

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

Your partner is a chucklehead.

I've been there. TRUST me.

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

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.

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.

No, Kansas Ref wanted to correctly rule a travel on A1, the partner wanted to incorrectly penalize B1 with a foul.

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. :rolleyes:

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.

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.

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.

I had a partner a few years ago who simply refused to acknowledge any inbound spot I gave him. It culminated with me hitting my whistle on a call (once I had enough) and letting everyone in the place know where I wanted the throw-in.

I shouldn't have done that. It was a locker room conversation. I was wrong to do something that out in the open. I learned from it.

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.

It's actually one of my pregame points... "if a player goes to the floor, we need to know WHY. That doesn't mean we have to have a whistle, but we need to know why she ended up there"

That way if the coach questions it, we can confidently say "she tripped over her own feet" or whatever the case may be. In this case it would be "she ran into a defender who was in a legal position, and the defender did nothing wrong"

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.

Exactly!!!!

I do the same thing. :D

Peace

We don't know that without hearing from the other official....we only have one side of the story.

That would still be wrong. As bad as a partner's call might be and regardless of PCA's you still don't have the authority to overrule it.

I trust the OP's post, as there's no reason not to.

I agree with going with the incorrect blocking call. Sometimes our partner(s) make bad calls, but we can't overrule them (well... for the most part). The conversation should have gone like this...

Partner: I have a blocking foul.

You: Before my travel?

Partner: Yep.

You: Okay.

Then, when you get a chance, you can let your partner know why it was a bad call and why.

Except that the OP called a travel and THEN the partner ran in to "overrule" him.

That changes things, at least it does for me.

That partner's block doesn't overrule my "she had LGP".

I didn't read the OP well enough and went by later comments before posting. I see now that no block call was whistled. In that case, the travel was the only actual call, so that's what I'd go with.

Why isn't it a PC foul? The defender had LGP and the offensive player ran into her. It's not the defenders fault she didn't go down. The defender took the contact. :confused:

How was the defender disadvantaged?

The contact knocked her on her hinny, that was the travel call

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

"A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing normal defensive and offensive movements."

Hinder:
1. to cause delay, interruption, or difficulty in; hamper; impede:
"The storm hindered our progress."
2. to prevent from doing, acting, or happening; stop:

I don't see how the defender was hindered, so therefore I don't have a PC foul here.

Was the defender displaced? Was the defender put at any disadvantage by the contact? How is the ball handler fouling a defender when the defender is bigger and does not move?

Again, this is why 4-27 is in the rule book.

Peace

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.

A foul isn't just any contact. It requires some displacement or prevention from participating in normal offensive or defensive movements. The defender wasn't at all disadvantaged by this, in fact her presence did the job. It stopped a pg, and likely will make that pg think twice before running into the trees again.

Off-topic question, although it was brought up here, so...

I don't see the word "displace" (or a variation of it) in the definition of a foul. I was actually going to use it in my previous post, but didn't after not seeing the word.

Did I simply miss it somewhere?

The defender was there to take a charge. The offensive was running hard enough to bounce off the defensive player. That has to be a foul. If the defender was not LGP and the offensive player bounces off, I'm sure you would call a blocking foul. Reward the defender for her attaining LGP and taking the contact.

That isn't how I read the OP. I read it to be that the other official came in with a block just after the whistle for the travel. Unfortunately "she had LGP" isn't a call to be overruled.

The defender was there to play defense.

If I make calls like that in the real world, I'll be working levels where calls like this are routinely made...and they only hire 2 officials.

read 4-7-2a

Agreed. Hate that statement...better to say "if there's a body on the floor, we must know how they got there"

So you are penalizing her for being a bigger player and not flopping.

So what did the ball handler do to impede the progress of the opponent? Nothing, they bounced off of them and fell.

Again, you did not read 4-27.

Peace

4-7-2a explains a type of foul call, but does not define whether it is indeed a foul or not. I believe you want 4-19-1

Could we sell that travel call and if our partner runs in with a late foul say you were responsible for the defender and they had LGP and we are moving on?

This play is not incidental contact play. The defender beat her to the spot. so just because the ball handler wasn't strong enough to knock her down, it not a PC? but if she goes does it is?

Yes

Yes.

Yes!!! And displacement would be required. Knocking them down is not the standard.

Peace

There. I believe you've got it.

I think the problem is that people think that contact must be a foul -- that the foul is a reward somehow.

A foul is designed to penalize an unfair advantage. If you crash off me and fall to the floor, how am I placed at a disadvantage?

Exactly. The job of the defense is to stop the offense from scoring, period. If the offense initiates contact that gives them an advantage or displaces the defense, then they've created an advantage that is supposed to be corrected with a foul call.

If the offense initiates contact that only disadvantages the offense, the defense hasn't suffered any injustice that needs corrected.

Next up in the response, the argument that the foul count should some how be considered, and getting closer to the bonus should be used as a rationale for calling the foul.

No. We're rewarding her for doing her job of beating the offensive player to the spot to prevent a drive to the basket AND for causing the offensive player to travel.

I agree with this. Based on the play, the "foul" definitely came before the travel. Unless there is some local policy, Section 6 applies: "No official has the authority to set aside or question decisions made by the other official(s) within the limits of their respective outlined duties."

If your partner makes that call, you have to go with it as you have to go with it and assume that he saw something you didn't.

Um ... except it's in YOUR area, and you determined NO foul ... going with his call, outside his primary would be him setting aside the decision made by you.

I agree. A no-call is actually a decision that the play was legal.

The other night I made a bad call on a drive down the lane.

No jokes about me making a bad call... I know. ;)

Anyway, the dribbler drove from my PCA as the center, and into the lane to attempt a shot in front of the lead. I saw the defender swipe at the ball, and I called a foul. Bad call, as I didn't actually see the contact due to being straightlined. I reacted too quickly and made an assumption.

As soon as I made the call I looked at my partner after realizing I shouldn't have made the call, and he had a look on his face that told me the defender never made contact with the dribbler/shooter.

Now... the play happened in his PCA, and he knew that I had made a bad call. So, going by what you just said, should he have overruled my call?

Probably not unless it's a game-saver.

But you've just made my point, not disproved it.

In the OP, his partner (erroneously) rushed in to overrule him after he correctly ruled no-foul and then a travel. His partner should not have tried to overrule him.

I don't think I did prove your point. You agreed that just because it was in his PCA, and he didn't agree with my call, that he shouldn't overrule me unless it was a "game-saver". Yet you agree that in the OP he should have overruled his partners bad call.

BTW, I don't consider a no-call a call. There are plenty of times an official will pass on a call, only for a partner to take it.

I'm not saying his partner should have even tried to overrule him, but once he made it known that he had a foul before the travel (meaning it wasn't just brought up in a private conversation), then I'd go with it. And later on we'd have a chat about it.

Now we're just into semantics. If you want to say the (non)foul in the OP is a no-call, you can. But the call was made. It was traveling, which was caused by the contact, which was judged not to be a foul. In my opinion if the partner comes in after the fact (which is what I'm picturing here) saying blocking foul and it happened first, he is indeed trying to "set aside a decision made by the other official," which he cannot do. 2-6

My argument hinges on the "other" official making a call. If all he did is come in with information then I have no issues ignoring it. But if he blows his whistle, fist up for a foul, I'm not going to argue about who's PCA the play was in.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

The OP says there was a bounce, a fall, a travel call and then the other guy running in. If he would have run in and said, "no way, obvious no LGP...Everybody in gym knows it.." .maybe ok. If it's that obvious the official who called the travel may say, "you're right." The guy ran in though and didn't say those things. He said body on floor. Need to have foul. He should pound sand.

That isn't having a foul before the travel. Imo. And if anybody botched I'd say forcefully "it was my call and I made it." Blue ball etc

Sorry, but I'm not talking directly about the OP. I'm on my phone and don't want to go back and see how it started, but the conversation I've been taking part in here goes beyond that specific scenario and delves into similar situations.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Ok. Sorry. I took a shortcut and didn't read the middle pages...:confused:

No worries

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

We really don't know when the decisions were made. I often have partners beat me to the whistle on things. So, the timing of the whistle's may be a poor indicator. Maybe the L was watching the whole play before deciding and felt the bump that he was going to pass on initially caused the player to fall but his partner beat him to the whistle.

Either way, decisions as far as the rules go involve making calls, not making no call. If that were not the case, how would we ever reconcile two officials on a play where one makes a foul call and the other doesn't have a foul call. It would be an infinite loop of logic that just doesn't work. You would be forever stuck with one overruling the other's decision.

If I believe a player has LGP but my partner sees something that negates LGP that I didn't see and calls a block, the player likely didn't have LGP.

I agree, but if he runs in and tells me I'm calling a foul because we have a body on the floor as opposed to "that was a block..or I have a block" id send him away. I am trusting the OP's version of how it played out.

This ^^^ Exactly.

I think what's being missed is that the off-official did not rush in and say he had a block, or that the defender didn't have position. He came in an basically spewed forth words that are not found in the rulebook. "We have to have a foul, there's a body on the ground"... is not only untrue, it's NOT a reason to overturn the call.

It's like an official who rushes in to correct a 3 point basket to a 2 by stating that the shooter landed on the wrong side of the line. That's NOT the rule. And neither is his explanation of why to change the call in the OP.

Go read the OP again. He did come in with a block call initially. The stuff about why was the after conversation. He may have been wrong in why he called it, but don't change the situation. The OP first tried to trump his partner's block call by claiming PCA. Then the partner responded with the (bad) reason he had a block. The OP should have never said a word about it being is primary when his partner came up with the block. The only conversation should have been about which even happened first, but that was obvious.

Cameron, sure sounds like he called nothing until he decided he didn't like the L's travel.

His subsequent explanation tells me he was just making shit up, too.

If I'm the L, I'm not giving in to that nonsense.

I guess it depends on how long the implied time was. I agree he was probably wrong in his judgement and certainly it seems so with his reason (I'd be the first to call him on that) but I'm not convinced the OP was any more right in how he handled it.

I read it the way Rich did. I think we accept OP as true. If that is how it happened, I do like OPs handling much more than his partner's.

I know there are plenty of times where I've no-called what first appeared to be marginal or insignificant contact until I observed that it ultimately caused a travel or other disadvantage. I did this just 2-3 days ago. I caught heat from one coach for it but it was the right call.

The timing of his whistle, even if after the travel occurred, is not a problem for me. His judgement may well have been poor, or even completely wrong, but I don't think him making the call based on what he felt occurred was wrong since it clearly occurred first.

I do not like the OP telling his partner that it was his PCA as a way to justify his call was the correct call before the L said anything about it other than that he had a block before the travel and still insisted that his call, which clearly occurred second, was what they were going with. His action was worse than his partners IMO.

If I thought I had a good look, saw the bounce, called travel and then his arm went up and he runs to me I would not say it's my PCA.Id say "what the hell are you doing?" Again, if he says no LGP and he thought I was having a block. Ok. But what he said, which I accept as true was "we have a body on floor and need foul to prevent drama." When I hear that it says to me he knows it wasn't a foul but it looked bad so need a foul call to prevent being yelled at.

As between the two I pick the OP. Just what I'd do..