Controversial call at end of OHSAA State Final

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

Is it possible to perhaps include a cursory coverage of this item {viz. strategic fouls that could be called Intentionals} in the pregame with coaches and player reps just so to make sure all participants on same page? Or would we be over-stepping our authoritative bounds---not that they'll listen to a pregame anyway.

If I'm doing younger kids or subvarsity I may tell a coach to make sure his players "play the ball" or whatever, but never in "real" ball.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

Is it possible to perhaps include a cursory coverage of this item {viz. strategic fouls that could be called Intentionals} in the pregame with coaches and player reps just so to make sure all participants on same page? Or would we be over-stepping our authoritative bounds---not that they'll listen to a pregame anyway.

That is just setting you or your partners up for trouble as soon as they perceive that you're calling it even a little different than what they thought you described.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

Is it possible to perhaps include a cursory coverage of this item {viz. strategic fouls that could be called Intentionals} in the pregame with coaches and player reps just so to make sure all participants on same page? Or would we be over-stepping our authoritative bounds---not that they'll listen to a pregame anyway.

As Camron notes, you're setting yourself up for problems. Pregame is not the time for a discussion about rules or philosophy. Get in, get done, get them back to what they want to do.

If they're even partly paying attention, it's only partly, and they're only going to hear enough to confuse them about your intention.

Like a doctor: do no harm. This can only do harm.

[BigCat]

I'm with the others. I can think of a whole lot of reasons not to do it and not one good reason to do it. Coach be offended cause thinks he knows rule...coach just immediately gets bad impression about you--weird..nobody else says that...and on and on..

I heard from a ref who worked one of the other championship games and he said the guy they were trying to foul got bumped twice while standing there....said the first bump probably should have been called common before the 2nd/3rde happened.

I see both sides of the argument. On one hand, the winning team shouldn't leave a crappy FT shooter on the floor. On the other hand the foul, while perhaps intentional in nature was not your typical "take foul", which would involve wrapping up a player with arms while clearly trying to foul that specific player off the ball. The bumping is less clear....which is why we get paid for our judgement.

I'm not sure what the correct call is here, but if you call INT I think it has to be REALLY obvious that's what they are trying to do.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ODog

39-38 in the boys Division I final?!

Sounds like Ohio needs a shot clock.

Or a better basketball!!!

Peace

[deecee]

To the earlier reply about "explaining" to a coach about take-foul scenarios: This is not the time for a rules clinic. It's ok to explain a ruling after the fact but not before. It's also imperative when you know a team MAY be fouling to get the FIRST foul. Some coaches will be asses no matter the outcome.

I had a game where the coach pretty much told me what they were about to do. At the first sign of contact I blew my whistle which came just a fraction of a second before a second defender stole the ball (which if the coach didn't tell me what he was doing and the primary defender had been .5 seconds later it would have been a no call and steal). The coach "questioned" the call 30 feet away, and I responded with a T (not like he was a saint all game either). If he didn't tell me what he did I may not have T'd him for his behavior, but the fact that he did and then acted that way is the behavior that, I think, as officials we don't do a good enough job of addressing.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

I recall this was only a short-lived experiment (1 season, maybe) where it was official policy. Not saying it wasn't called that way in some areas, but I don't remember that it was ever the rule except for that single season.

It wasn't. It was one year and before that we had coaches and teams yelling "foul, foul, foul."

We would tell coaches to use some other word. Then that stupid policy went away and they went by what they did before. I never remember such a policy before that one year.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Or a better basketball!!!

Peace

How would a different basketball help solve the problem?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

How would a different basketball help solve the problem?

You need something better if that is the final score with the so-called best two teams.

Peace

Originally Posted by deecee

To the earlier reply about "explaining" to a coach about take-foul scenarios: This is not the time for a rules clinic. It's ok to explain a ruling after the fact but not before. It's also imperative when you know a team MAY be fouling to get the FIRST foul. Some coaches will be asses no matter the outcome.

I had a game where the coach pretty much told me what they were about to do. At the first sign of contact I blew my whistle which came just a fraction of a second before a second defender stole the ball (which if the coach didn't tell me what he was doing and the primary defender had been .5 seconds later it would have been a no call and steal). The coach "questioned" the call 30 feet away, and I responded with a T (not like he was a saint all game either). If he didn't tell me what he did I may not have T'd him for his behavior, but the fact that he did and then acted that way is the behavior that, I think, as officials we don't do a good enough job of addressing.

I had an intentional fouling situation this past weekend. 7th grade boys I think, a player (A1) ran over to me after a timeout and said "Mr. Ref we are going to try and foul B55 on the other team after we score". I replied "Ok, make sure he has the ball and you go for the ball". He said nothing, but ran to his place. Team A scored, Team B inbounded the ball and a guard dribbled up the floor. Sure enough, a Team A player (A3) was trying to hug B55 on his way up the floor. Neither my partner or I called it. Within a few seconds A2 fouled the Team B dribbler. I called it, we set up for FT's and I went directly to the coach. He was already looking expectantly at me and said "we can't foul #55?" I replied "You can, but it would considered an Intentional foul. He has to have the ball or be involved in play somehow, not just running up the court. High schools rules are different from NBA -- you can't Hack-a-Shaq here". The coach gave a dejected sigh but nodded. We kept playing and B55 got the ball through normal play and they fouled him. But Team A still lost.

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

It's 7th grade travel ball, I would have shouted at the coach to make an attempt "on the ball" and that we don't play using NBA rules. Then I would have ignored the contact unless it HAD to be called an INT, and during the FT's told him what you said. But I wouldn't have held the game up to go and talk to him before.

It's 7th grade ball. In varsity or higher, INT all the way.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

If I'm doing younger kids or subvarsity I may tell a coach to make sure his players "play the ball" or whatever, but never in "real" ball.

If it's clearly a foul situation for a team coming out of a timeout, I will sometimes just say out loud, "Be sure you're going for the ball." I don't consider this coaching the team, but rather a reminder to not put themselves, or me, in the position where we have to consider an intentional.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I had an intentional fouling situation this past weekend. 7th grade boys I think, a player (A1) ran over to me after a timeout and said "Mr. Ref we are going to try and foul B55 on the other team after we score". I replied "Ok, make sure he has the ball and you go for the ball". He said nothing, but ran to his place. Team A scored, Team B inbounded the ball and a guard dribbled up the floor. Sure enough, a Team A player (A3) was trying to hug B55 on his way up the floor. Neither my partner or I called it. Within a few seconds A2 fouled the Team B dribbler. I called it, we set up for FT's and I went directly to the coach. He was already looking expectantly at me and said "we can't foul #55?" I replied "You can, but it would considered an Intentional foul. He has to have the ball or be involved in play somehow, not just running up the court. High schools rules are different from NBA -- you can't Hack-a-Shaq here". The coach gave a dejected sigh but nodded. We kept playing and B55 got the ball through normal play and they fouled him. But Team A still lost.

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

I would have told the kid you just can't go grab him or shove him. Needs have ball..etc. something short and firm. If they still go run and foul him on other side of floor then I'd call the intentional. I wouldn't tell a coach before anything at that age. I'd expect the coach or players to know. If they don't already, calling it is the way to teach them. If it's 5th grade and under I'd do something different.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by deecee

To the earlier reply about "explaining" to a coach about take-foul scenarios: This is not the time for a rules clinic. It's ok to explain a ruling after the fact but not before. It's also imperative when you know a team MAY be fouling to get the FIRST foul. Some coaches will be asses no matter the outcome.

I had a game where the coach pretty much told me what they were about to do. At the first sign of contact I blew my whistle which came just a fraction of a second before a second defender stole the ball (which if the coach didn't tell me what he was doing and the primary defender had been .5 seconds later it would have been a no call and steal). The coach "questioned" the call 30 feet away, and I responded with a T (not like he was a saint all game either). If he didn't tell me what he did I may not have T'd him for his behavior, but the fact that he did and then acted that way is the behavior that, I think, as officials we don't do a good enough job of addressing.

This is exactly why such situations shouldn't be handled in the described manner.
Officials shouldn't alter what a foul is near the end of the game. Call the contact the same as you did earlier in the contest. There is a proper way to foul for a strategic purpose. If the team cannot do that, then officials shouldn't be rewarding their poor execution. More importantly to this story, slight contact which would not have been deemed a foul previously in the game should not be whistled at this point. To do so is unfair. The camp advice of "call the first foul" does not equate to whistle as soon as someone breathes on the opponent. See an actual foul before calling anything.