Pet peeves: Keep them in the game

[UNIgiantslayers]

Worked a single varsity jamboree game tonight. I've never worked with our R but during his pregame, he talked about how if a player gets 4th foul, we need to work to keep them in the game. This is one of my biggest pet peeves-- I HATE it. I just can't get behind the idea that it's my job to bend the rules for the players so that they can stay in the game. In my mind, the player and coach can see how we call it and should adjust. Which side of this do you fall on?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Worked a single varsity jamboree game tonight. I've never worked with our R but during his pregame, he talked about how if a player gets 4th foul, we need to work to keep them in the game. This is one of my biggest pet peeves-- I HATE it. I just can't get behind the idea that it's my job to bend the rules for the players so that they can stay in the game. In my mind, the player and coach can see how we call it and should adjust. Which side of this do you fall on?

Like it or not, a marginal call on a kid's first foul will be seen differently than the same call on his fifth foul.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

Like it or not, a marginal call on a kid's first foul will be seen differently than the same call on his fifth foul.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

The last three Summers I've trained with our two local NBA officials. They say you always need to know the impact of your whistle. You should never be surprised when a kid fouls out and you should never foull a kid out on marginal contact.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[SC Official]

I don't know how "literally" your partner meant what he said, but you don't want to give a player a cheap fifth foul. Whereas sometimes we make calls where there is doubt in our minds, for the fifth foul you want to make sure it's one that you really have no choice but to get. Is that bending the rules? Maybe. But it's a philosophy that's taught at higher-level camps. You have to know when a player has four fouls and know that a marginal fifth foul is, as Rich said, going to raise more scrutiny than a marginal first or second foul.

[crosscountry55]

This is an issue of how you frame the concept. I don’t like the way your R framed it. Frankly that mentality irks me, too.

The better way to frame it, IMHO, was taught to me by an NBA official: “Know the consequences of every call you make....before you make it.” This is sooooo much easier said then done (there’s a reason he’s in the NBA and I’m not). But it’s something I strive to. And not just when players are starting to foul out, but from the opening tip on (and to some extent based on observations I make during warm-ups).

I think taking this approach makes for a more pragmatic game calling strategy.

NOTE: Saw BNR’s post before I finished this. Looks like he said the same thing. Also looks like he talked to the same NBA official.

[BillyMac]

For what it's worth, like technical fouls, I have never lost sleep over personal fouls that I have called, but I have lost sleep over potential personal fouls that I have passed on.

When I observe contact, I decide if it leads to an advantage, or disadvantage, decide it its illegal contact, or incidental contact, and make my decision. I always try to be consistent with my partner, with what has already happened in the game, with what we’ve called earlier in the game, and what we haven’t called earlier in the game.

Consistency (to me) means that the time of the game (first period versus fourth period) doesn't usually effect my decisions, and consistency (to me) means that the number of fouls on star players versus journeyman players doesn't usually effect my decisions. The only time that I pay attention to foul numbers is to pay attention to the number of team fouls in each half, to insure that we don't make errors (maybe correctable errors) regarding bonus or double bonus free throws.

With rare exceptions for bang bang, surprise, train wrecks (shame on me for not seeing them coming), I try to never guess.

I'm not afraid to sound a slightly late whistle (sometimes my brain take a little time to process what just happened), but there is a subjective, undefined, time limit that may cause me not to sound my whistle in such circumstances, and these are the non-calls that I may later lose sleep over.

This philosophy has successfully worked for me for many years. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Let the stone throwing begin.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Worked a single varsity jamboree game tonight. I've never worked with our R but during his pregame, he talked about how if a player gets 4th foul, we need to work to keep them in the game. This is one of my biggest pet peeves-- I HATE it. I just can't get behind the idea that it's my job to bend the rules for the players so that they can stay in the game. In my mind, the player and coach can see how we call it and should adjust. Which side of this do you fall on?

I can do you one better. It is 1994 and I am officiating a loser's bracket game in the AAU Girls' 18U Nationals. A team from Nebraska was playing a team from a state I do not remember. The center from the Nebraska picked up her third foul by the middle of the first half and did not play the rest of the half. For those who have never officiated one of these AAU shindigs, there are at least two or three coaches from well over 200 college from across the country scouting players (and this goes for all age groups all the way down to the 10U age group).

My partner and I are walking off the court to the dressing room at half time when two coaches from a school in the Big-12 (who shall remain nameless) came up to us and asked us to goes easy on the center of the Nebraska team and let her play because they were scouting her and wanted to see her play more, .

MTD, Sr.

[FormerUmp]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I can do you one better. It is 1994 and I am officiating a loser's bracket game in the AAU Girls' 18U Nationals. A team from Nebraska was playing a team from a state I do not remember. The center from the Nebraska picked up her third foul by the middle of the first half and did not play the rest of the half. For those who have never officiated one of these AAU shindigs, there are at least two or three coaches from well over 200 college from across the country scouting players (and this goes for all age groups all the way down to the 10U age group).

My partner and I are walking off the court to the dressing room at half time when two coaches from a school in the Big-12 (who shall remain nameless) came up to us and asked us to goes easy on the center of the Nebraska team and let her play because they were scouting her and wanted to see her play more, .

MTD, Sr.

I wonder how many times they've tried that line.

[Multiple Sports]

Was working a guys pretty big event ( AAU ) on the East Coast. A D2 program had been all over this kid since he was a sophomore but he blew up in his junior year in high school. At that AAU game the D2 HC asked me to call 3 quick ones on the kid cause there were a bunch of small and mid major D1's starting to follow him....I thought it was pretty funny!!!!

[deecee]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Worked a single varsity jamboree game tonight. I've never worked with our R but during his pregame, he talked about how if a player gets 4th foul, we need to work to keep them in the game. This is one of my biggest pet peeves-- I HATE it. I just can't get behind the idea that it's my job to bend the rules for the players so that they can stay in the game. In my mind, the player and coach can see how we call it and should adjust. Which side of this do you fall on?

It's reality. You want to work big games and move up, the expectation is to know your situation and make them count. I disagree that you need to work to keep them in the game. But you need to work to make sure #5 is well earned.

[BigCat]

In reality, you shouldn't have any bull shit, dumb calls. On anybody. At any time..but really concentrate when somebody's got 4. And not just on the best player..
Have that mindset from the tip

[JRutledge]

I will go out of my way to keep anyone in the game. But the reality is that when you have big men or the best players in the game, the game goes smoother for a lot of reasons. I would rather keep those players in the game than get them out. And if I have a foul that is going to foul out a kid that is one of the better players, I want to feel confident it was a foul.

Peace

[RadioBlue]

I agree with you, JRut. And to take it a step further, if I've got a player who's been playing like a goon hockey enforcer, I won't think twice about giving that player their 5th. It's about making the game better, IMO.

[bainsey]

At least one of us falls on your side, UNI.

I had a partner about a decade ago who insisted on finding out who had four fouls. I thought it reeked of a lack of integrity. It's our job to call the fouls, not be concerned about how many they have. This partner acted more like he cared what others thought, rather than just doing his job.

[Raymond]

Boy some people will go to any lengths to try and make a point. A foul is a foul. But not every foul is clear-cut. When you have those gray area plays you need to use context clues in regards to what to rule.

Like it or not, being able to use systematic thinking in regards to the marginal contact and 50/50 plays is very big to supervisors. If you're one of those officials who is just steadfast in not using any type of thought process to play calling, don't ever complain when you see somebody advancing or getting better games and you don't understand why.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk